xaoslaad

I just ordered mine today. I had to dig, but yes, once they're ready to ship (or a few days before) they'll send you an invoice at which time you pay. I'm a little discouraged to hear you say it's been two weeks waiting, but what can you do. I kinda expected there was going to be a wait and since I was almost wanting to pay up I started the waiting game today. Page 8: http://mfg.simundza.com/Downloads/MFG%20Newsletter%20March%202015%20general.pdf He also gives some input on whether to use your bank or paypal for currency conversion.

I agree. I'll probably update some of the Russian aircraft , particularly the MiG-29's and Su-27, and definitely the choppers. I don't know why, but when setting up the mission the choppers were racing, and I was just too darn close to slow them down in a smooth manner. I also don't trim much, a fault in my flying style (used to be not at all for entire missions if you can believe it), but I am learning to do this more often. I get what people are saying about tracks going bad after updates, but I practice landings with various aircraft a lot. I think landing is a tough thing for a lot of people to do, whether with, one, some, or all aircraft, and I like to be able to get aircraft down on the ground, so redoing them isn't a total nightmare for me or anything. I'll consider doing them as videos instead though.

Corbett1403, the tracks are in game trk files. Good idea and suggestion on grabbing a checklist app or something for each aircraft though. That would be a great list if I could find one for each aircraft.

Right, ok. I didnt say I was teaching everyone how to land every aircraft in every westher condition with every loadout. Empty aircraft on a simple visual approach. Maybe go read a manual if you want advanced topics. If on the other hand you are having trouble getting a MiG-21 or Fw.109 on the ground maybe take a look at a track for a demonstration. It's already 20+ tracks. Every permutation under the sun would be about 20,000. I love people like you who come at any decent act by anyone in this community with silly comments. Not for you, ok then. Walk away.

What do you think the bottleneck is? I am running 4k (8.3MP) with two 970's and I can see upwards of 122 frames and down into the 20's depending on what's going on. But that can be attributed both to graphics (bringing up the mav cam, tgp, and mirrors in the A-10C is good for a graphics hit) where I see scenery processing go through the roof, and CPU (throw a ton of SAMS all over the map and I can see micro stutter madness as my CPU tops out) maxing out. It seems odd that you think both are underutilized and yet your performance is still bad. Something bottlenecked.

I'm not sure if anyone has done anything like this, but hopefully it can help some people if not. I know there are often questions about how do I land X, Y, or Z aircraft. Youtube videos are good and all, but often people want to see where is the throttle set, what are the flaps set too, are the air brakes extended, what did gauge X say, etc. So I've gone and created a short track for each aircraft that demonstrates getting it down on the ground in one piece. I hardly claim that each of these landings is perfect as there are occasional small bounces, lofting down the runway a bit too long after flaring, etc. What is common about them all though is that the aircraft was not damaged while landing, so it should be a decent starting point for people to look around and watch, or even take control and duplicate, and improve upon what is being done to get the thing on the ground. Honestly I mostly just try to watch speed, approach, and the VVI/VSI to set the aircraft down as gentle as possible without forcing it. Controls used were: Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, TIR 5, Saitek combat pro pedals. I do not have curves set for any aircraft. If any of these look blatantly bad to someone I'm open to constructive criticism on how to improve them. :) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0vm64JM4bFZVDVEZDRoWmdTVDA/view?usp=sharing

Asus PB287Q 28" 3840x2160

The stream was very impressive. Obviously there are stability issues that need tending to, but if those can be fixed so that theyre rare I'd love to see an Alpha/Open Beta released as is. Same with NTTR after that. If it can get to where it's mostly stable release it in Alpha and take our money. I appreciate that you want new explosion effects and other improvements, but if we can have race courses over vegas and the colorado river, the single executable, improved performance and effects as they are, even if at first only over the existing map it would be a great first step. Overall, aside from stability it looked to be at least alpha quality if not beyond. Even the stability is what I'd expect stepping into an Alpha. Alpha == there be dragons. Anyway, nothing but positive things to say coming away from the stream.

Stormovik was among the first

The GAR-8 a.k.a. AIM-9B was a notoriously bad missile. It was prone to outright failure, being fooled by the sun, ground reflections and so forth. I think I was telling people you'd have to fly around 5 missions to hope for one hit when firing both missiles each mission if it were realistic. Google is your friend. That said, it can be done. I don't have much luck with them but my buddy smoked a MiG-15Bis first shot the first time we went up. And I have managed hit rarely as well.

a quick lunchtime look at tacview says I went from 14.5G's to -5.2G's in a split second, followed by a maintained -1G (not 1G as I previously thought). so ya, I think that blackout is legit.

As far as I could tell there was no significant spin. I can reproduce it later and look in tac view. I dont know how many G's initiated the black out, but knocking off ASC in super sonic flight probably isn't the smartest thing to do...

Well, we were doing OK after even just a short time. We figured out how not to get into those inverted departures and just don't push the nose down like that. However, neither one of us is experienced with the aircraft and we started messing around trying to do Cobra's and what not. At our skill level with the aircraft it's not surprising we ended up splattered. My only confusion was how at 1G we were still blacked out, but if we flat knocked ourselves out doing extremely hard maneuvers I guess it is what it is.

Is the unrecoverable blackout in the Su-27 somehow realistic? My friend and I were messing around trying to see where some of the limits with this thing are and one thing we noticed is that if you go into an inverted departure you black out and don't recover. You just fall to the ground and die. The part that seems off is that you're doing 1, maybe 1.1 G lofting out of the sky, at least according to the external view, and you never recover from the blackout. You can't control anything and you eventually hit the ground without a hope. If you're dead because you scrambled your brain shouldn't it go to external view like any other aircraft? If you blacked out, shouldn't you recover after some time at 1G?

I've broken both hinges on my pro clip; I just super glued the second one yesterday. It's now one solid piece basically. I've been fortunate not to have to screw with the wires, but really it is a total piece of junk. One day the actual clip will probably break and I'll have to do something else to Frankenstein it. But given that I'm convinced a second purchase will result in a second broken pro clip I will not be buying one unless there is absolutely nothing left to salvage.

Looks great. I can't wait for this module. Should be an interesting chopper to fly.

Depends. It has to be an F-14B Upgrade and have the semi permanent LANTIRN pod attached. There were F-14A Upgrades with the pod attached as well as I understand it, so ground attack doesn't necessarily have to be limited to the F-14B. There were only 80 some odd B's so having 157 bombcats implies some must have been A's. Even if you counted all the D's (which aren't involved in these numbers.) you'd still have to drag in A's to account for the number. "The A/B initial upgrade, includes structural modifications to extend the F-14's fatigue life to 7,500 hours, improved defensive capabilities and cockpit displays, and incorporation of digital architecture and mission computers to speed data processing time and add software capacity. Block I adds a LANTIRN Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) pod with a built-in laser to designate targets and allow F-14s to independently drop laser guided bombs (LGBs), a modified cockpit for night attack operations (night vision devices and compatible lighting), and enhanced defensive countermeasures. The A/B upgrade had to be incorporated into 157 F-14 aircraft before the Block I upgrade could be added. " I believe there were F-14A/B/D bombcats and non-bombcat F-14A's and Bs. And: "The pod also featured an internal computer with ballistics data for the various precision munitions carried by the F-14. Data is fed to the pod by the Tomcat’s AWG-9 (F-14A and F-14B) and AN/APG-71 (F-14D) radar, but the LTS in turn only sends video and guidance symbology to the crew's cockpit displays. This means that few wiring and software changes had to be made to the Tomcat in order for it to operate the LTS. All pod controls are in the RIO’s cockpit, but the bomb release button is situated with the pilot. The LTS had a price tag of around 3 million US Dollars each and due to these high costs, only 75 were bought for fleet use. Typically, an F-14 squadron brought 6 to 8 pods with them on deployment, which would be permanently fitted to the non-TARPS jets."

Found this quote: A feature on the F-14A, which has, since been phased out of the B and D models is a pair of triangular vanes, which retracted into the leading edge of the wing gloves. These vanes deployed automatically at Mach 1.4, providing extra lift to the nose of the aircraft, unloading the tailplanes to some degree. As a result, they assisted the F-14 in pulling up to 7.5 g at Mach 2. The vanes were rendered inoperative if the angle of the wings were less than 35 degrees. Below that sweep angle, the effect of the vanes on the tailplanes led to pitch instability at the speeds associated with that angle of wing. With the B and D models these vanes were eliminated from the design in order to provide additional space for avionics in the wing-glove area.

There were somewhere around 712 F-14's in total. 86 were B's. About 55 were F-14D's whether D or D®. Just looking at the math it's easy to see the A was the most pervasive model in the fleet. There were only 3 deployable squadrons of F-14D's, and due to the limited number of aircraft they actually rolled one back to B's. Looking at the D's I'm guessing somewhere in the 3-5 range. All others would have been A's.... Besides you can't be Tom Cruise in a B and kill Goose. "As the F-14D was produced in such limited numbers, new builds only numbering 37 while 18 F-14A's were converted to F-14D's (known as F-14D®), there have been problems keeping the three deployable squadrons, the RAG and the various test units (VX-9, PMTC) up to strength. Thus in mid 1996 it was decided that VF-11 would convert back to the F-14B and shift to join VF-143 as part of CVW-7. VF-11 has now completed this process and is active at NAS Oceana with F-14B's (in the process becoming the only F-14 squadron to have operated all 3 variants of the Tomcat), its first cruise as part of CVW-7 is scheduled for 1998, assuming present plans remain unchanged."

I've used mine on the ports of my Z77 MPOWER motherboard (http://us.msi.com/product/mb/Z77_MPOWER.html#hero-overview) and plugged into a USB 3 hub plugged into one of the USB 3 ports and never had a problem. The only way in which I may be weird is I do not have TARGET installed. No crashes, no problems though. On Windows 8.1 64-bit.

Awesome! Thank you for the news. Can't wait for the update to hit us!

So you have a 4k 58" TV. I have a 4k 28" monitor. You don't think that maybe there might be a difference in what each of us can see? And I am not saying no one plays with a TV, but do you honestly think that is the more common scenario? I could probably bring my PC downstairs hook it up to the larger lower res TV and see lots of things I can't normally see on my monitor as well. It's like your answer to visibility problems is 'buy a 4k TV and attach it to your PC'. That is not reasonable for most people for both cash and space considerations.

A 4k at reasonable sizes for a desk solves nothing. If anything, it's worse. And labels, especially the blue ones, when there are no text accompanied, are probably closer to reality as even they are very hard to see. The red ones are a little more glaring to my eye, so not quite as good/bad.

I gues those perfect clear conditions with no weather werent good enough.

Its an an-26b, not a fighter in those screenshot. Something that many people here who claim to be pilots, air controllers, and whatever say should be visible at 10 miles.