markriley

And I would rather fly the F-18 or F-16 sometimes because of the dual-role A2A/A2G ability (like the Flanker). As for figures, if you believe the data is grossly inaccurate then you should be prepared to support you claim with the wide range of other info at your disposal.... otherwise we will have to go with what I was able to find.... give or take what, say 10 miles for arguements sake? That still leaves the 120 (and the aim-7) in lockon lacking a lot. You never said how the russian missles own up to specs in lockon. Are they close or do they suck also?

Dude, i never said that the 29, 27, and 33 aren't bad-ass air superiority jets. If those jets and thier weapons perform like you expect them to in the sim and you are happy with that, then why shouldn't I expect the same from my preferred "flyable" A2A jet and its weapons? One day when I have the desire and time to learn those jets, I will expect them to perform as they should for this level of a sim.

Note: Data given by several sources show slight variations. Figures given below may therefore be inaccurate! Especially the range figures are rough estimates only. and Wikipedia is my fav source of there or there abouts estimate info. So where is your better data? Did ED just pick the lowest figures they could find for the 120 instead of the majority of reports? or maybe even an average somewhere between lowest and higest figures? No, the 120 doesnt perform (distance wise) even as listed in game data.

R-77, 27EM/ET/ER, R-33 Do these russian missles have thier ranges represented accurately in Lockon? I dont fly the russian planes so I cant say. Specifically the R-77 because it is active and not SAR (to compare it with the 120 being active). Does the R-77 have good p/k over 15-18 miles or is the same as the 120. They are both supposed to be at aprox 50km (the 120 50-70km). And Damn at the 70km 27ET IR guided. The US has two BVR options in lockon and they should perform (within reason) as rated to be considered a combat sim. So can ED fix the situation with the 120 or is the official answer going to be something like: "Certainly the game's 'C' under-performs that, yes - it's a factor of things though, not just missile kinematics." Whatever the factor of things is needs to be fixed to really title this as LOM Air Combat. Air to Ground is great. Love the Sim as a whole, just want my 15 to be what its supposed to be, an air superority fighter.

and again the same chart on the right side of the screen with all the specs on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM

http://www.answers.com/topic/aim-120-amraam and scroll down to chart on this link http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html

I dont see anything here about droping things from space. Data for AIM-120A/B/C: AIM-120A/B AIM-120C-5 Length 3.66 m (12 ft) Wingspan 53.3 cm (21 in) 44.7 cm (17.6 in) Finspan 63.5 cm (25 in) 44.7 cm (17.6 in) Diameter 17.8 cm (7 in) Weight 157 kg (345 lb) Speed Mach 4 Range 50-70 km (30-45 miles) > 105 km (65 miles) Propulsion Hercules/Aerojet solid-fueled rocket Warhead 23 kg (50 lb) WDU-33/B blast-fragmentation 18 kg (40 lb) WDU-41/B blast-fragmentation Speed Mach 4 Range AIM-120A/B: 75 km (45 mi) AIM-120C-5: 105 km (65 mi) AIM-120D: >180km (112 mi

"Im not anti-AMRAAM, I just don't buy into the problems being just about one missile." The Aim-7 suffers the same type issues as far as range goes. and thats really all the US side has to work with. Im sure the other missles in the sim need work as well, but problems should be fixed in the order of the most screwd up fixed first and so on.

Well if the sim really is to be modeling the 120C version and not the A/B, then we really do have a problem with range. The 120C has a range of aprox 60 miles (104km). Hell i would be happy to get the range that the A/B are supposed to be able to go in the sim. Jammers/ ecm/ radar etc are all great to have working the best a sim can replicate, but the common denominator for those things is the missile itself; it needs to be modeled right before the other things come into play.

I agree with you there, but what good is the best radar in the world without the missle to go with it. If the missles in-Sim performace is degraded then the radar just lets you see how far away your enemy is launching at you while you still are waiting to get below 15 miles. will check back tonight, back to work for me now.

Why would you say "This in and of itself isn't a huge issue right now, " about a missle in a Sim to be about half of the effective active range, on a thread about the missles shortcomings?

GGTharos wrote: "Also, the AMRAAM's active range against an aircraft is about twice what it is in LO. " My point exactly. These type basic flaws should be addressed/fixed without some sort of major debate or a thread with this many pages/posts to get it done. The A2A combat is what the sim is about. If the only US ture flyable A2A jet is crippled from the start, whats the point of calling it a sim, its just a game then. Damn pretty as it is, still just a game. I can understand if the russian-made sim is a little bias toward the russian side but come on now. Lets play fair please.

Range My initial concern with the 120 and the aim7 is range. Sure it needs to be effective once it nears the target, but it has to be able to reach out as far as it is supposed to be able to for starters. here are the ranges IRL compared to the sim: 120 A&B 30-45 miles (50-70 km), sim limits to 30 miles (50km) Aim-7, 44 miles (70km) , sim limits to 28 miles (45km) ---way off here-- The 120b was available in 1994 and the 120c in 1996, so depending on the time period that lock-on covers, the available missles for russian and US jets should match up to equal time period limits. So is lockon showing max range or effictive missle range? I watched a training video for lockon demonstraiting TWS multiple target kills. The targets were all locked and then the voice over says "now we will wait a bit longer till range is about 8 miles for good PK" Paraphrase there, but you get the piont. Needless to say the targets were transports, if they were fighters, the 15 wouldnt be in the sky at 8 miles from the enemy. The ranges on the russian missles far exceed the range of the US missles in lockon. While this may be the case IRL for some missles, the range for the US missles has been cut short and needs to be fixed. Sorry if this has been brought out in depth durring this thread, but I only read about the first 10 pages and the last 2-3 pages before I got in bed last night.

Thanks for the suggestions. I used to use firefox a year or so ago. Forgot about it after I installed my new hard drive. version 2 looks even better.

Resized back to 1024x1024 For whatever reason, I had trouble getting lockon to use the widescreen versions on my 1680x1050 screen. (see posts 24,25,33-35) So after some good help from you guys, I was able to re-size the images back to square 1024x1024 and then lockon stretches them correctly. Here is a link to where I uploaded them to: http://media8.filewind.com/g.php?filepath=10919 I also included SuperKungFu's readme and screenshot since its his work. Thanks all Note: my browser settings (i guess) gives me a "g.htm" file from that filewind site when I try to download Zaelu's load screens from post 41. Same thing when I try to download the ones I just uploaded. I also tried "right click save as" and get the same result. Any Ideas on whats up with that? Update: I got the links to work if I copied and pasted into internet explorer. MSN browser would not open it right.

just wanted to lower the size or upload/download purpouses not sure what the limit is on upload size to these fourms I will try the DTX1 this evening thanks

I wouldnt mind posting the ones I made (3) ( AI, F-15, A-10) but can someone first tell me how to make the file size smaller. They are 2048 x2048 and come out about 5mb each. I could make 1024x1024 but still have aprox half that file size. What compression settings/program is used to get them down to under 1MB? I would do all the screens if I can get them to a smaller size. Then zip them up and post them here. Thanks.

found a fix well, turns out that my wife has photoshop on her pc. I downloaded a .dds plugin for it and used it to edit the size to 2048x2048 (thinking of high res, not sure if its better than 1024x1024 but only wanted to do it once). now lomac pulls up the screens and stretches them to wide 1:6 like it should. Not sure how it works but glad it does. Might should go with 1024x1024 for the sake of file size if you make a new up load. the three i made were 5 mb each and 6.5 mb together in a zip file. May have done something wrong in resizing/saving but it does work now. Hope this info helps others. Thanks for you help, Mark

I am having the same issue as EscCtrl in post #19. Im using the 1:6 version. I have game resloution set to 1680x1050 in the graphics file and in the game options. Not sure why lockon doesnt stretch them out. I see where OldFramkHog suggested changing the res to 1024x1024 in post#25, but i dont know how to do that without resaving the image, and I dont have photoshop to re-save as .dds. Is there a way to change the res to 1024x1024 without resaving?

.dds format What program do you use to resize the images and then save them as .dds format for use in the sim? Thanks

You havent missed much. They answer a question or two you forgot you had from 3 months ago and they add 4 more questions for you to forget before they answer those. Nothing has happened that would cause you to be more or less "lost" than if you had seen the past couple of shows. Shame about those F-22s. I guess the higher the high-tech gets, the less it takes to screw it up. They got two more sqadrons heading to Alaska over the next year. I could really enjoy being near EOR for a day watching F-15E, and F-22s fly around the place.

looks neat, wonder if that is what actual game play looks like or if that is just a movie with better effects than game play.

ICE, I was wondering if you have a collection of skins for the new F-15 model that are available for download somewhere. I noticed some new skins came with walmis install package; Were those your skins Ice? Is the gold colored heat shield on the bottom of the 15 something that you havent released yet? Thanks

Yes i agree. Most of the posts on this thread are pointing out what the new model is lacking, and i know that is needed for refining purposes, but I know most of us are very happy with the new model and we should make sure to give thanks for the awesome job done up to this point. Its beautiful work in progress Walmis and I know everyone here realizes that, even if they forget to mention it when they post. keep up the good work and we will keep enjoying it.

oh well, it was worth a shot on the AVG. And I like both canopies but lean toward the clear. and as others say, a little less glossy. Just dont want it to end up invisible though.