markriley

Roger that Kuky, Thanks for the info.

My FPS counter just started doing this also ( with the negative and eveything) and I know I havent changed any hardware lately. The only software changes Ive made to lockon weren't around when this thread was active. the FPS counter was fine a week or so ago and now its all out of wack. Any updates on this issue?

oh crap, i didnt know there was a demo out. going to dl now.

Ok thanks for the info.

My system specs (which I guess I should put in my sig) are: FX-60 dual core at 2.7ghz, 2Gigs OCZ PC4000 DDR1 RAM 3,3,3,7 HIS x850xt Platinum AGP Graphics card, X-52 flight stick set, Samsung 21.5 inch lcd 1680x1050 Oh and what about "wait for vertical refresh" option? I have the following choices in ati settings: Always off, Off unlesss Application specifies on unless Application specifies Always on

When running a resolution of 1680x1050, should I need to use any AA and AF or will I just be slowing things down at that point? If I should use AA and AF...how much? Thanks

Alright then. I wont waste the $150 on it. Thanks for the replies guys.

I guess I was thinking that by plugging in a card that would relieve the CPU of some of the Physx caculations, the CPU would have a little more processing power available for the rest of lockon. I guess I dont really understand how the Physx card works. It seems like you would get some improvement just as you do when adding more/faster ram or faster cpu. Supposedly the card wont help unless the game is made for it, but has anybody actually used one with lockon to see if there is a difference? Thanks

I understand that these Physx cards weren't in mind when Lomac was developed but has anyone tried it to see if the card will relieve the cpu/graphics card of any work and increase FPS or game play in lomac?

Sounds awesome to me. There is always going to be "another mod just around the corner" so you could release you mod pack as is; as long as the upcomming mods mentioned above dont involve new MEINIT files.

That makes me really happy. I really didnt want to have to pick one or the other. You both do such good work. Thanks

now I understand. Thanks for the info. looks like its going to be a tough choice in the end. Wonder how well these mods will work with BS when it comes out.

Grandsurf, you said in post 167 (I think): New Pics of some reworked Textures :). Trees are from rockwelder . So at that point the mods were compatible right? Is it heading towards the two mods not being compatible at this stage or is it just some parts of each mod are able to work together? BTW, keep up the awesome work.

Awesome work. I also agree for a joint project. It will be to hard to choose one over the other if they arent compatible. Thanks for your hard work for the community on this.

looks great. good job man. very clean and neat. What are the system specs on that rig? and how does lock-on do maxed out?

awesome work man, looking forward to seeing it on my system when you get it done. Thank God for the modders who keep this sim alive.

being sick of these missle threads doesnt solve the problem. If ED could have fixed it they would have. Its not going to happen. These type threads are years old with no real resolution. Remember, its just a game.

Dude, this is 2001-2002 Flanker (Russian) code tweaked for each different missile. ED has Black Shark on the plate and if the AA missles dont work right in a AA combat sim you just add a really kickass helocopter and no-one will care about the missles. Its less coding/resources to add a chopper or a really accurate Su-25t flight model than to fix the basics you see.

They dont have the resources available or they would have. This source code is a tweak of the Flanker sim series right? Any real changes that would fix things will require extinsive re-coding right? If the source was so valuable then why did Ubi drop ED? All Im saying is this, if ED has done all it can afford to do, they might consider supporting those who have supported them by releasing the aging source code to a handfull of die-hards who might could make the Game more Sim-like.

So Ubisoft dumps ED and then ED doesnt have the funds/backing to fix the current problems with the sim untill they can make some more income from Black Shark. Is that what has happened? Lomac is overall the best sim graphicly (imo) out there, until fighter ops is finished. Im not really looking forward to spending another $30 for black shark to get some of the current issues fixed. That for me will be over $100 bucks spent on lockon (not including hardware) and I would expect some reprograming/codeing/tweaking or whatever is required to make the sim worth that price tag. If ED cant afford to pay the programers then they could relase the code (or whatever its called) so the community can come up with fixes to the sim. That doesnt seem unreasonable to me. What would ED have to loose there, lockon isnt flying off the shelves really. Not trying to piss off anybody or stir the stick, just pointing out what I understand of the situation and wondering if my perspective is anywhere near accurate. If not, please explain. Thanks

If this is the data that ED testers team is going to stick with then so be it. Since there is no way to prove any data past the A model of the 120 (without getting people in trouble and giving away US intel) then I guess that is what lock on is doomed to have to live with. Do the best you can to make the sim the best it can be for all involved. Thanks for the opportunity and the place for me to express my views on the subject.

True. So if lomac uses the C version, then it would be grossly undermodeled in the sim. I would expect the range figures that are available on the web, being listed as "aproximate because of variying reports" would be the middle ground and not either end of the spectrum. So 65m for a 120C is most likely middle of the road data. Even if that is max range, ED should still be considering changing the sim to model the 120c at least 40m with good pk at mid alt around 35m. That would be more like a simulation of the real world, and trust me 35m is a low figure. Where are the real F-15 pilots to give us some feed back on this, with accurate data? My brother has been loading 15s and 16s for the past 12 years and now 22s. Of course people here wont take my word on any data he has to offer since the true figures will never be even concidered here. So lets get some eagledrivers on here and get some acceptable info.

So you are saying that the 120A is what lockon models and not the B or C model?

When you launch the R27ET in lock on, do you wait for 10km? So IRL that missle sucks (range) according to your russian pilot but it works well beyond that in lockon dosnt it. We dont have that overperformance problem with the US missles in lock on.

Lockons F-15 model is nearly at stall at 45000 feet and Im not talking about missle range before it drops out of the sky and you know it, Im talking about the usefull (killing) range of the missle in sim compared to IRL. There is obviously a problem with the 120 in FC as compared to 1.02 or this thread would have been dead a long time ago. For the AIM-7s made since 1987, the range on the 7F, & 7M/P is 70km. Again effective range somewhere around 45-50km (25-30 miles). The sim doesnt simulate that very well either, but this thread is about the 120. http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-7.html Scroll down for chart. and if you click on the AMRAAM 120 link in the first sentence you will find (scroll down to bottom) the spec chart for the different versions.