Jay

Hey tflash - why do you think you're not good enough for multiplayer? The more folks on-line the better. We'll be glad to see you on-line. Trust me - it's great fun :thumbup: As for LO vs. FO discussion - It seems to me that some of you guys here are missing one fact - LO is here for three years already and FO isn't released yet - so there is (and maybe there won't be) nothing to compare IMO. When FO will be out it should be a good new sim. But it won't be LO sequel, it will be DIFFERENT sim. I really like Lock-on. I've been flying it for almost three years, from it's first release. I went throught all it's updates and I must say the older the better. Now there are no major problems that really annoy me. There are some things I'd like to be changed, but they are based on the game's engine, so I forgot it. I'm really looking forward to BS because I know what to expect. On the other hand I don't know exactly what to expect from FO. I don't expect that fantastic photorealistic world that we can enjoy with LO. But some other things should be better if FO uses newer graphic features (e.g. DX9 based). I also expect the FM to be more realistic (thx to the X-Plane-based engine). But many other questions remain not to be answered sooner than after it's release. Until then - LONG LIVE THE LOCK-ON :smilewink:

Agreed. Concerning video card I would prefer 7800GS for AGP. Now it comes out with the new G71 core which is well overclockable and it's the best nVidia choice for AGP slot. But if you can spend more for upgrade, there are brand new Intel's Core2 CPUs and PCI Express cards way better than AGP ones so it's all up to your budget. All in all Lomac needs large RAM, fast CPU and powerful graphics to run really smoothly on the highest settings...

Kenan ya ma man :lol: :thumbup: :D

Well folks, nothing compares to Pilsner Urquell :D

That's Russian ergonomics style ;)

You can try this link - http://www.slunecnice.cz/product/Able-MP3-OGG-to-WAV-converter/download.html

Yes, that would be nice. But the file would have been too big not to be wearing thin.

Wow man! This is amazing - I can't beleive you were able to fly it with such a terrible wing damage. It must have been pretty hard to control that bird :thumbup:

But Mizzy is partially right - it's gonna be BIG :thumbup:

Well, on AFM planes this is no problem but on non-AFM ones I experienced this only with A-10 - just fly low over enemy territory guarded by shilkas or MANPADS and your wing and other parts will just disappear ;)

Russian 33s don't carry that missile but export versions have this option.

You know - Slovak Air Force pilots still fly MiGs so SVK_Fox is very familiar with 29 - that's why he's so good ;) :pilotfly:

It's a bmp file so rename it guys before trying to open. Otherwise a good idea. ;)

Su-33, payload: 4x R73, 2x R27ET, 4x R27EM, 2x ECM. Well, I like landing on Kuznetsov, I like HMCS, and russian RWR is more usable than TEWS (IMO) so that's my first choice online. But I also like flying Su-25/T because of its AFM - all I need is better cover from my airmates because Su-25 is very vulnerable to air threats... :joystick:

This tool rocks! I mean we all needed some analysis tool like this and this is gonna help all of us to improve tactical skills which have been somewhat overlooked so far. Great job guys :thumbup:

Hitting Ctrl-T doesn't work on the Su-25T though, you have to reset trim settings manually here (maybe also on the Su-25 with AFM if you have FC installed). It's good to map trim functions onto your joystick.

This guy also did... http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item15769.html

It's possible to do it either way, but Pilotasso's version is better because missile will not bleed energy for turning onto target just after shot, so it should fly a bit longer if needed.

OK GG, you're right, but the distance estimation is much more complicated - that was the point. And when it comes to ARMs, the symbol appears very close to the center so it's hard to tell when to perform defensive maneuver. Next time I'll use more exact phrases. :smilewink:

Hi Angelll, i like MIGs/Sus because of their "analog" RWR (called Beryoza or what) because it gives you very precise information about distance of your enemy/his active missiles. This is great while avoiding them, because you know exactly when to perform an orthogonal roll (well explained in Ironhand's tutorials). With TEWS (used on F-15) this is more complicated, because you know only one thing - an active missile is in the air. Nothing more... Try this site http://flankertraining.com/lomac/A2A.html - you'll find something interesting for you (hopefully) :pilotfly:

Raptorman at the Frugal's world wrote (published 3/10/2005): A-Pole: Distance from launching aircraft to target when a missile begins active guidance. F-Pole: Distance from launching aircraft to target when a missile endgames/impacts. E-Pole: Distance from a threat aircraft that evasive manoeuvres can be expected to kinematically defeat any missile the bandit is launching or could have launched. So this is it :joystick:

I agree Suntrace1, that would be nice. And this is also the only editor related issue I'm angry about. It's really annoying. Maybe ED will update this feature in the future patch release... But what Ruggbutt said is true - actual version of the editor is way better than the original one. It's very powerful when used properly. And sim isn't an arcade game, it's very complex thing, so it's hard to make everything comfortable for everyone. :joystick:

Maybe it's somewhat related to the editor settings - I mean when you build a mission and don't mark any specific target to destroy (e.g. air units during CAP mission), maybe your wingman will respond less "proactive" than if the targeting point is accurately set (e.g. specific ground unit). But it's only my guess and I can be wrong - I didn't test this scenario in the editor.

Generally speaking the "IR shielding system" as you call it guys is a cooler (radiator like) of the exhaust fumes to lower its IR signature. It is a passive system that works all the time when attached to exhausts. It's being used for both transport and attack copters. Active systems (according to their effectivity) are flare dispensers, then more effective IR jammers and (in near future) directional laser shield (it's rumoured that Airforce One uses it).

I don't think they will announce this officially before Conroe comes out. They'll wait and see what Conroe is all about, and then prepare the best marketing strategy for this new technology. We'll have to wait and hope...