Woodstock

It´s because alcohol is so expensive in Sweden that you have to shift priorities and find alternative money saving procedures to be able to afford your afterwork-beer. Sorry for OT! Cheers:icon_jook

I wouldn´t mind if some JF-18 features were copied into LO...

S! *sob* It´s only a few months ago that I talked to Viggen pilots on the radio during exercise ELITE2005. I always liked the shape of the Viggen. The design was 25 years ahead of it´s time.

Olgerd wrote: Thanks Olgerd for your reply. It is not that much a new flyable like an F-18 I am talking about. I can live with the existing inventory. I am much more talking about upgrading and enhancing what is already there. Deeper and better systems simulation of Su-27/33/25(T), Mig, F-15C and A-10, that´s what I am talking about. I quote myself from a different thread:

Hi Olgerd! I see the difference and I see your point. I think the issue is purely philosophical: You say, you cannot do something because you do not have enough information about a system or a weapon to simulate it near 100% real. That´s why you do not simulate it at all. I say, you are game developers and not government contractors tasked to build a Sim for RussianAirforce pilots to train systems and procedures. In my opinion, you have the right to take the available information and fill the gaps with your imagination. I would love to see you just use pictures of an aircraft cockpit and go through every switch trying to understand what it does. If you have info about it - great, if not, try to logically imagine. A starter switch spools up an engine, a fuel pump switch builds up fuel pressure, a fuel cutoff switch ignites an engine when opened at the right time during spool. It also shuts off the engine after the flight. I absolutely wouldn´t mind if the hydraulic pressure value was wrong, if the engine EGT/TIT peaks during startup was right, if Sochi-Adler had the correct ILS frequency to dial into NAV1 or if the real INS had 10 or 12 waypoint storages, as long as I had those systems AT ALL to PLAY with. You know from time to time I play a little F4AF, I admit it... (Yes, come on, everyone throw their cups at me, I can hear you booooing...;)) And I love all those switches, functions, systems etc. because they show me the knowledge, training and workload capabilities it really takes to be a fighter pilot. I still don´t care if Falcon modells any system correctly. I will never get to fly a real viper unless Independence Day arrives and alcoholized Vietnam vets are out of stock..., so why bother? But I enjoy beeing challenged with all those systems in a complex environment. And when I return to LockOn because of all the better and good things it has and because it´s where my heart and squadmates are, I am still a little down because I think: if this (LO) is how it is to operate (not fight) a fighter jet, then my mom could be a jet pilot... This is the point where I think you are philosophically wrong because LockOn would be so much deeper, more immersive and more FUN if you would dare modelling something that is only correct to the known point. At least there would be SOMETHING instead of NOTHING. Who would blame you for not knowing classified information? God, I wish you guys would dare being imperfect! I hope nobody regards me as notoriously critical. My complaints are an expression of my utmost dedication to the genre for 13 years now and of my suffering from the desolate state in which it currently is. Cheers!:icon_jook

Are you trying to scare us with something we have been asking for for some time...?;) Well, you see that doesn´t make us shiver... - only drool.:D And we have a new community rumour: "ED´s Oleg promised AFM and 30-step startup sequence for all flyables!" Yeeeeeehaaah!

Happy Birthday, LOMAC! My toast goes: To the future! S!

Of course, the 8 months are as hypothetical as every other number in my post. But follow-up-question: Wouldn´t $250.000.- be enough to hire some help to speed things up? And furthermore: How many talented people are out there that would work for free in their spare time to make something like a LO addon happen? What would be possible if ED found a way to successfully incorporate and manage some unused talent available in the community? I´m not advertising myself here, I have nothing to offer except a private pilots license and in-depth ATC knowledge, both not fundamental to LockOn.:cool: But I know programming-, scripting- and modelling-specialists that would not even ask for a free game copy in exchange for their work...

Yes, I am. Please contact Chrissi. He will review and decide what we will host, but generally speaking we are intersted in any military aviation footage.

I´d like to add a few hypothetical numbers to the speculations::rolleyes: Let´s say the worldwide LockOn community has maybe 5000 diehard flightsim fans that would be willing to pay even $100.- or more for a good follow-up or serious addon. What if each of them split those $100.- into a $50.- donation to ED right now and into a $50.- retail price upon release. That would be a $250.000.- fund available for ED right now. I wonder what they could make out of it in, let´s say, 8 months from now? ...dreaming of "LockOn1.5: How It Should Be" featuring AFM, 6DOF view, advanced damage model and clickable pit for all aircraft, working radio- and inertial-navigation and more detailed aircraft systems. And if there´s money left I don´t object to a Hornet or an Apache...:D

We at JaBoG32 are proud to have a high capacity, highspeed-download FTP-server where we host a variety of stuff for the community, including large videos. Go to http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/index.php?section=downloads&PHPSESSID=3048d90f67bcec582e9e212f1cadc6bd&lang=en If you want us to host anything, please contact chrissi@virtual-jabog32.de for upload instructions. OT: Until today, we had 1635 downloads of the 1.11 patch from our server. Thanks to all players that keep the genre alive and thanks to ED for using us as their official mirror!

Depending on where you live I can also recommend SimWare as an alternative to NaturalPoint. They sit in Belgium and ship the CD within only few days all over Europe. http://www.simw.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_products_list&mid=1&smid=155

They are not going to tell you. Or anyone else...:(

Yes, mate, respect exactly this. The content of this quote is thoroughly and logically explained in the sentences that follow it, no need to repeat that again. By the way, I was talking to Olgerd and I´m shure he is able to speak for himself even without you jumping at me. As for AFM, you are mixing up two things: - AFM for existing aircraft which, as I said, should be less a research than a programming issue... - new aircraft that you don´t have the aerodynamic data for. Are you telling me and everyone here that the F-15 and A-10 are featured in LockOn because they were the western aircraft with the most information available about? You´ve got to be kidding! I´m shure you can easily come up with as much aerodynamic data about the Viper and Hornet as you could for Eagle and Hog. So it can´t be that what stops you from making a flight model for them equal to the existing standard flight models. And to convert a standard flight model into an AFM, well, we had that already... Finally, it is absolutely your good right to disagree with me in every respect. This is a discussion forum and no pot-smoking-hand-holding-globe-spanning-peace-love-unity-event. I am criticizing argumentations I consider somewhat foul and I am giving my opinion on certain topics. You can react to that as you wish. As long as you keep it civilized, we can keep our respects for each other.

Come on, Tharos, stop being rhetorical and insulting!:icon_roll You know very well that I don´t want to go back to Fleet Defender. I want to go forward and I want improvement and so I wonder why we are stepping backwards in some respects. How can it be that the best sim on the market is not better in every important aspect than a ten-year-old one? And for AFM, you know very well that not one bit of other new aerodynamic data than the already known is needed. All you have to do is to process the known flight envelope through the advanced aerodynamic engine, thus adding 6DOF, rudder in turns, turbulence reaction and true instead of scripted landings to all aircraft, and BAMM! - better game. I acknowledge that ED has neither enough money, time, personell and resources to do all they wish to do or even all the community wishes them to do. I do not blame them for making executive decisions that I consider unlucky. I do not expect them to do what I suggest. But I do expect you and everyone at ED to respect my opinion as a customer and to appreciate my spending my time to give you my thoughts and feedback!:icon_evil

@ Olgerd: 1st: Thankx for doing anything at all to support the genre. 2nd: The argument not to model an aircraft because you don´t know everything about it is lame and does not count. According to this argumentation ED could have never released any Su-27 or LO simulation because there was always new information to be discovered and incorporated into patches or new versions. You still don´t know all details about the Su´s and the Mig but you still model them. I appreciate that you raise the quality standards for yourself but do not hide cowardly behind them. Step forward and admit: "This is the best we could do. It´s not perfect, but it´s the best we could do. And we did it." Everyone will respect you for trying and further information, hints and input will flow that you can incorporate in patches. Why should anyone share his knowledge with you when you announce not to use it and not to try right from the start? I am very shure that there is absolutely enough information on the internet, in older games and in the forums of the reallife and simpilots communities to model any western 1960s-1980s combat aircraft to a level of detail that makes everybody happy. And those who are still not happy will tell you why and share their information and you can further improve your product. Please keep at least trying and everything will keep getting better and better! An F-16 or F-18 in LockOn with 80% correct flight model, 60% correct avionics and only 50% correct radar and weapon systems would still be more fun to fly than the actual F-15 and A-10 because of the new and wider range of capabilities and possibilities Viper and Hornet offer. Those aircraft would enhance LockOn as a whole and attract new users.

I don´t know the total number, but I personally know at least 33 of that species... ...here´s where they linger and wait to throw their eurones and dollares at anyone with a good sim: http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/index.php?section=piloten&lang=en :icon_excl

q.e.d. Cheers, Kusch!

The point is not comparing old to new sims. The point that absolutely drives me nuts is that good, immersive features that were there once and that made a sim good, are left out again in the next generation. Everybody tries to re-invent the wheel without sticking to things that worked before. There is no real evolution, just different approaches with new highlights.:( If we compared LockOn to Microproses Fleet Defender (and F-15E SE III), which we don´t...;) ...I would immediately recall the following features where the oldies beat LockOn: - working MasterArm switch - (partly) clickable cockpit - formation lights with multiple dim stages - two human players as front- and backseater in one aircraft (F-15E SE III, e.g via PCtoPC, zero-modem-cable) What I´m trying to say is that it´s the small things that count. The small details that are just "right". Let me give you one example: I do a lot of instruction at vJaBoG32 and from time to time a recruit asks: "Why do I have to switch on nav lights during ramp start, I know from FS2004 that those are for night/bad weather only?" And I have to reply "It´s because there are no beacon light, anticollision lights or formation lights to do their jobs in LO so we use navlights for compensation." And I innerly curse and swear about LO because those little features were there before, some of them more than a decade ago. They were right and now they are gone. I regularly sob everytime I visit the LO options menu and see things like "Altimeter Pressure Increase/Decrease" sitting there and doing... - nothing!:icon_frow ;) I don´t need no fancy helicopter, I don´t need another F-16. What I really would love to see is credible improvement and overhaul of what is already there, paying attention to details that greatly enhance immersion. Here´s my wishlist: - clickable cockpit for all existing aircraft - in-depth system simulation: (fuel, engines, electricity, hydraulic, lighting, communication) - navigation systems (TACAN receivers, functional HSI, INS/IRS with Lat/Long) - a LockOn world that supports radio navigation (TACAN stations or whatever the russian counterpart is, ILS frequencies) - 6DOF head (view) movement in all aircraft - AFM for all aircraft I am willing to pay > €100.- for an addon delivering just the abovementioned items. And I would be willing to pay even more for a LockOn 2.0 with reworked code, same graphics quality but better performance, dedicated server software, multiclient-multicrew-cockpits, advanced damage models for all and a few gimmicks more. Still no need for chopper or Viper... ...If you really need to add more flyables, then make it contemporary allweather fighter-bombers with ground radar and SEAD capabilities. Something like Tornado vs. Su-24 Fencer comes to mind...:D My two cents. S! @ll

I love this rumour spreading!:D "Pst, have you heard? Some ED official promised an F-18! Cool!" :icon_roll As for all the things that "can´t" be done like multicrew-cockpits, etc. We´ve seen great sims modelling twoseaters with the possibility of switching seats in flight to access all instruments and multiplayer two-client capability! All of them were great and some did it already ten:icon_excl years ago: Microprose F-15 Strike Eagle III Microprose Fleet Defender Digital Integration Tornado Digital Integration Apache Longbow Digital Integration Hind Jane´s Longbow 1 + 2 Jane´s F-15 ...do I need to continue? Our beloved genre is dying since 5 years, would somebody please bring back the virtues that already brought success to vintage games!?!

Thanks and thumbs up to all participants and crew members! Your flexibility and professional attitude made coordinating this event a great pleasure and wonderful experience! Sorry to those spectators that had to be kicked from the server to open up slots for display pilots. Thanx for your understanding! I´m looking forward to see some great videos beeing made out of the track and voice material we collected. Hope the community´s video geniuses jump onto this one! Pity that for technical reasons there were less than 40 people at one time able to share this experience live. We depend upon videos to spread the action and the great atmosphere throughout the community. S! @ll! Woody