dynamocl

Circular Area of Probability? I am soley a ground pounder, and I would very much enjoy watching where the bombs land in relation to the aim point, and then having to "aim off" to get bombs on target due to wind shear etc. I assume this is what you speak of?

Good to know, was getting a little bored just using the 20Ds. When I get back up and running, I will pay your sig link a quick visit. I just did a quick search, people were trying to get a new paint job for the old weapons (post 1.2). Did 1.2 sort this out, or is it worth looking for custom paint jobs for the weapons?

CBU97s have special magical hockey puck devices in them, they can target heat sources on the way down - good for anti tank, a bit over kill for soft targets. Yes, I am the same player you flew with a while back. The reason I am not flying (and getting very irritated about it) is that my graphics card has broke, so I have sent it back to repair (only 6 months old, it has 3 year warranty). Currently on week 5 with no graphics card (hence no flying). They estimate it could take 8 weeks to reapair!!!!! As you can imagine, its frustrating not being able to get in the air. (I am using a crappy ancient MX4000 card I borrowed from work and get 1fps in lockon) (actually I hope they can't repair it, so I get my money back, the 6800GS is not as flash as it was when I got it last year).

You use CBU-97s online???? I thought 504 didnt advocate the use of LOPE or its likes? :) OMG ROXOR WTF... are you sure you are delivering the units correctly? DO you see the correct explosion types on impact, flying too low for release? CBUs worked ok on mine.

A fresnel lens could help increase viewable size (and helps with eye strain/depth of field). Currently considering having a play with one: http://www.rickleephoto.com/rlcoll.htm http://www.3dlens.com/shop/largefresnellens.php Good idea for increasing the preceived size of monitor and also for seemlessly joining togehter two of more monitors for a video wall.. An interesting project. Has anyone tried this?

Konkussion you have got the wrong end of the stick completely. Crusty is asking for a seperate piece of software to be made by ED. This software is a simple GUI which runs an online server "ON HIS HARDWARE", and allows people to connect to him. He can then use the software to run missions and run his room. At the moment when people create servers, they have to use the current game interface and normally create a dummy pilot who sits there doing nothing. He isnt asking ED to run a server at their offices for us to use (at their expense), he is asking for them to release a server software for us to run on OUR servers. Your responses sounded like you didn't understand this, sorry if you do. It would be nice to get the server software, but at the time being, I would like ED to concentrate on other features (spoken as a selfish online player who uses other's servers and doesn't contribute server time himself) .

Been doing a bit of web research (I know, everyone is an expert!!) on the visual acuity and representation on screen. I too was at an airfield today, stood near the threshold watching a Pitts Special takeoff. It was a little more than 2 minutes before the aircraft disapeared out of sight, and less time than this before I could say it was a Pitts. (and I have 20/20). Visual Resolution of the eye and other conditions have a major impact: http://www.adacel.com/press/whitepapers/TowerSimulationWhitePaper.pdf Check out the link for some decent information. Generally what they say is that on current Hi Res monitors 1600x1200, these give us a representation of what someone with 6/20 vision would see. Assuming the aircraft are modelled at 1:1 size. For "real" representation, we will need a lot better monitors/graphics cards. However saying that, I am happy with labels off (completely, no dots, no ' no |). But after all, its what people are happy with.

Very much likely a cut and shut job in a video editing tool, not real time FAC action. But, we can dream.

You can also connect directly to servers using their IP address. This is what I do, there is a post somewhere in the forum with a list of dedicated servers. This cuts out the hyperlobby side. Just jump in, talk to the people in the server (some won't like it, some will), the best way to learn is to participate. Just dont go around shooting every thing you see, thats where the IFF comes in.

:) Never said it was fake, infact I think there are US pilots daft enough to try a stunt like that. After all it must get boring in those long hauls, and showing off is a boost to their egos. EscCtrl understood. Big planes can pull off some almost unimaginable stunts, just take a look at some of the flight testing in the jumbos.

That video was from the TBS software, not lockon. Although similar, the same, they arn't. TBS also has FAC human controlled, doubt BS will have that. So just because you saw a video of it, dont expect anything. (Even though I would very much like the Gr7 to be EDs next project over anything else).

Every one states that the russian fighter flying low level over a runway at an airshow was fake, but a B52 flying below deck level is obviously beleiveable. Any one else here neutral (i.e. not US or nor Eastern Block) find all the double standards in the forum hillarious?

Wouldn't fancy my chances much though in a turning fight flying an E3D. That radome must act like a very effective airbrake.

Depends what countries are allowed to fly with them (i.e. the UK does not have the F15).

Actually I was hoping to sample the local atmosphere of Germany, I too was a little suprised/upset, it was just like walking around a typical UK RAF base. Although I do imagine other places are not like this, this seems the norm, I am not really an expert on UK forces stations abroad. We still have a presence, but not nearly as much as it was 10 years ago. The bases were used as a stop over for casualties during the recent wars, but I can't really see why they couldnt make the last leg home. There must be a very good reason.... one hopes.

That is very common really, and not just related to US sites. I was visiting RAF Laarbruch (Germany) back in 95ish. One minute I was on a coach half asleep driving through Belgium and Germany with the typical contintal villages. The next minute we drive through a rather impresses gate barrier... the next thing, I was sure we had warped back to the UK. The buildings, the signs the shops the people even the layout... all British. So don't just blame the spams, when we can, we do the same. It is just what people are comfortable with, it you are being stationed overseas for a long time, some people like things to be how they are used to. I certainly felt "at home", strangely so. (although I was there for only 10 days).

But that is what the Beta versions are for, people can test their software on it before release. You surely don't expect every software company to wait until Vista hits the shelf (gone retail) before they start compatability testing and modifications?

I beleive the gun being slaved to the helmet can be seen in the TBS video 1, at around 3 mins 22 seconds. The helmet "crosshair" has another cursor lagging behind it when the pilot moves his head, one assumes this is the cannon miving into position following the helmet?

If you go for socker 939 now, you may be limiting your future upgrade options, because, as stated above AMD have moved production to the new AM2 socket (and this apparently is appreciated by MS becuase it will work very well with Vista apparently). 939 chips are still being produced, but soon won't be (I think they are stockpiling at the moment). So if you wait, or go for an AM2 motherboard, you are likely to find a better CPU in the future that is compatable (instead of replacing the majority of the components). Remember lockon is CPU limited (i.e. the graphics card is not the bottle neck, its the CPU), so SLI(ing) 2 cards may be overkill.

Flight simulator 2004. You can at least get a sence of how helicopters (sort of) behave in controlled flight.

We will need something to replace the Harriers, we have the carriers (for VSTOL) and I can't see us scrapping the fleet air arm. JSF is the only current alternative on the horizon.

The US on landing apply full power before touchdown so that if they dont capture the wire they can takeoff again. Do the Russians have a similar procedure? Or did the snapped wire damage the aircraft and it couldnt take off again? Just wondering why the pilot couldnt just do a "touch and go" in a snapped cable situation.

I knew it could move Weta, and I have seen those. But as I said, clearly not any where near as much degree of freedom as an AH1 for example. I dont think helmet control would work due to the limited movement of the gun. I assume it works like the gun pods in the 25T, just with a little lateral control also.

The only problem I have, is seeing what problem you speak of. What do you think is wrong? I cant see any problem with those shots.

the scene out of top gun where "hte bird" signal was used comes to mind. However unfortunatly it sounds like they got too close. I bet it is fun doing that sort of stuff, after all 95% of military flying is boredom, 5% sheer terror. I guess these guys were up for a firendly dog fight, no matter how upset it made the parent nations.