Sulman

It's very possible that an F-15E could possibly have been shot down over a combat zone by friendly or enemy action. They're not invincible, and there is so much misinformation around this conflict that we may not know what actually happened for a while. Remember, the USN kept the Speicher shootdown details on the qt for a very long time, not forgetting the F-117 nonsense during Allied Force. Propoganda is a two way street. I'd been thankful there were not more casualties. There's a fair amount of lethal metal in Libya.

Landed totally flat, by appearances, no trail that can be seen - rather like those MiG-29 images from Allied Force in '99. I wonder if something hit it.

I've seen that occur when you are taken out by a missile and then crash.

True, but it is a limitation none the less, and an illustration of the IAF's caability to operate the type autonomously.

Sure. Accident report http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/CAIB_Vol1.html Crew Surviveability Report: http://history.nasa.gov/columbia/columbiacrewsurvival.pdf

Great links. I read both the accident report and the crew survivability report a while ago. Whilst covering an arguably tragic event, they are fascinating and incredibly educational. The accident report in particular is a fascinating exposition of NASA and the shuttle program thus far, and the technical efforts to understand what happened were amazing. The Crew Surviveability Report (perhaps a misnomer, after you read it...) is just mind-blowingly comprehensive, and yet in all the technical details I caught myself losing sight of the physics involved in the accident, because the numbers are repeated so frequently they start to lose their meaning, like repeating a word constantly. It was interesting to learn that the STS programme had a checklist for orbiter breakup, but only on the ascent (post-Challenger) where the forces and thermal environment are not lethal. You realise at the end of it all - and the reports are very careful to avoid directly mentioning the casualties themselves - that interesting as it is, there's realistically almost nothing that can be done. There's no practical protection measure for a human being exposed to mechanical forces and thermal events at hypersonic speeds.

The Jane's flying and fighting book has a whole section courtesy of a German MiG pilot. Moral of the story: BVR hopeless, BFM '29 undefeated.

DCS:BS is still the premier combat helo sim. I'll buy A-10 because I want to support ED, but once BS gets your heart, that's it. You'll never want to go back and see that world any higher than 100 metres, or faster than 250kph.. As has been said before, the Shark gives back what you put in. It's awesome.

Interestingly, a comment I remember from the 2008 SU-30MKI visit to the United States was that they had considerable risk-management for FOD for the Indian Aircraft, because they could not risk any engine maintenance; the Indo-Russian supply line for the AL31's simply wouldn't reach.

Much as I love Arma II, I have to confess I think Arma engaged me just that little bit more. Sahrani had some brilliantly realised locations. I hate the idea it is seen as the red-headed stepchild of the franchise, it is still excellent.

Been really enjoying myself. Put some screenies here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1105248&postcount=803

A couple from online, playing on the 104th Server: Urban shark sniffing around Krasnodar: Taking a break for a quick coffee after a successful mission east of Krasnodar:

Got this over the weekend. I think it's the best addon for FSX I've bought. It is enormous fun to fly a well-modelled fast jet in any environment you want. Something I love about FSX is that it does force you to reengage with the basics of flight. Flying aerobatic figures in the 'bug is superb fun, as is exploring the flight envelope, not to mention performing random intercepts on Airliners flying around the place, and forming up on them. Highly, highly recommended.

I think he's demonstrating the fact that not everybody gets our particular brand of humour.

It is, and yet isn't. I love the original Half Life (I really like the follow ups too) because the immersion was fantastic; Crysis is about halfway between a corridor shooter and OFP; it is a lot more open, and the suit gimmick actually a pretty neat gameplay tool. It is definitely a stab at something original. Worth a look.

Sad. One wonders if the relaxed stability and inherent trait of being able to command high pitch-rates at low speed & high alpha inspires overconfidence. Pilots of the MiG-29 and SU-27 have reported that it is a very easy aeroplane to control; of course this comes with it's own problems.

Agree. Although commonly simulated (and for obvious reason; it is ubiquitous, and multi-role) I'd like to see ED apply their modelling know-how to the F-16's systems & flight model. I think you would have an aircraft that - for sim enthusiasts - would be thrilling.

Hi all, I have experienced the occasional CTD in BS (and FC2) since patching, and have tried the following: 1) Switched off Microsoft Security Essentials realtime scan function (typically unintrusive, can usually be left running.) More on this below. 2) Reinstalled the latest Nvidia drivers using the 'clean reinstall' option. So far, so good. Played for around 3hrs last night with no problems. On point 1, I tried this because patch 1.0.0.2 (the file itself) for black shark was hanging windows explorer; it was neither possible to explore the executable properties, or run the executable. On a hunch I disabled realtime scanning (and tried a couple of different downloads of the patch just to make sure I did not have a corrupted version) and it worked immediately. Worth a try for those with this configuration.

Ahoy, old chap :)

I think when it comes to SA and actually flying and fighting, FC2 and DCS are not that different - although I do not own A-10 (will buy on release). Learning to actually fly the shark is the tricky bit - systems management really isn't difficult at all once you know the basics. I get the shark 'ready to go' on the landing pad after startup, and after that don't do much in the way of switchology at all, apart from datalink work (and even that is just dropping targets onto my own ABRIS screen). The odd forays I take into fighters and the Frogs confirm one thing: There is nothing 'easy' about FC2. Every platform requires a mega amount of effort and experience to fight in. F4 is the same - you can fly it just like a LO/FC2 jet if you want. Combat effectiveness and SA are more about understanding how the platform fits into the simulated environment.

IF it is a multirole fixed-wing a/c, that would be fantastic news. Also, I think it would sell like hot cakes - there is something for everyone, notwithstanding the fact this would be a 1st for ED. Not since Flanker 2.51 (and that was a gameplay compromise) has there been a true multirole capability in the sim. Speculatively, I'm wondering if it's the F-16, again for an ANG end user? James

Bucic - That's the first time I've read anyone defending Arma's character animation. Doesn't bother me, personally, but always felt BI pretty behind-the-times on that front.

I'm rather curious about the BS ones - the cockpit is slightly different; the countermeasure buttons are a different hue, and there is no bubble on the ADI; the standby ADI is missing it's horizon altogether. Also, the helicopter seems to have lower inertia than normal; it looks almost as if it is much lighter; I did wonder if the footage was run slightly faster? Very cool flying, though.

Crysis isn't my normal sort of game, but you know, it definitely had something about it. I think it is the most believable environment I've ever experienced on a desktop PC. You can almost feel the humidity. I will check out the second one, but I fear my PC will not be up to it..