ericinexile

It would be nice to get some MP feedback from our Russian friends.

For several months I've taken a break from LOMAC to enjoy the simplicity of IL2. The most striking difference between the two is the amazing stability of other planes during online play. Other planes taxi and fly with hardly a hint of erratic movement at all...even with dozens of players at play. I returned to LOMAC and was amazed at all the wacky behavior of other planes. Hopefully Black Shark will resolve this because I'm really not looking forward to Helicopters hovering inverted or beeming themselves thousands of yards in an instant. Smokin' Hole

Runs pretty fast on my MAC (...no kidding) Smokin' Hole

That's just it. It is impossible to experience the accelerations of a barrel-roll in a simulator. Just because an jet is in vertical flight doesn't necessarily mean the pilot is experiencing anything close the accelerations of a simulator pointed at the sky, if such a thing were even possible. But let's say that the sim is pointed straight up not to simulate vertical flight but to simulate a 1-G acceleration Takeoff in burner. Well that's cool, but in order to get into and out of vertical the sim will introduce very unrealistic and barf-inducing pitching movements. The real thing--ie, a real jet or helo-- is now and always will be the only way to get the full experience. Any attempt to cover more than just the most basic accelerations with a full-motion sim would introduce far more unrealistic sensations than what you experience now at your desk. Real is a good joystick that is so tightly sprung, it must be bolted to the desk. That's all I want. Smokin' Hole

The pitching and rolling of a full-motion simulator are mainly intended to simulate the lateral and longitudinal accelerations the pilot would be experiencing in real flight. I use full motion simulators all the time and, from the viewing platform, you never see a sim roll. Never. You see them pitch a lot to simulate acceleration and deceleration for takeoff and rollout. You see yaw to simulate engine failures. I think any open box, cheap (less than $5mil) motion simulator would be nothing more than a barf-wagon and a complete waste of cash.

Well here's the way it works: Spoilers will deploy whether armed or not, but if not armed then some wheel spin must occur (also will deploy with thrustreversers). Brakes are everything in this equation but even they don't matter if the wheel is not spinning (hydroplaning). Thrust reversers on a HB turbofan are not very effective, but are an aid nonetheless, and I am sure they were used here. Pilots are taught to land firmly in the touchdown zone at Vref in these conditions. If that is done then hydroplaning will not be an issue. Accidents occur when pilots land long, land fast, or decide to go-around after touchdown. Smokin' Hole

I just don't get how someone can watch that and state how stupid someone was. None of us know what sort of communication was taking place when the incident occurred. Most likely, no one was stupid. Someone either missed a call or made a bad assumption that the call was made. It wasn't stupidity...it was understandable human error that resulted in some pretty entertaining video. Smokin' Hole

I heard this directly from the Devs! They will implement ALM (Advanced Locomotive Modeling) in Black Shark. First, all trains will adhere to current timetables which will be downloaded each time a player logs on to a MP mission. Also, trains will arrive and depart with some "variance" to the timetables, as is the fashion in both Georgia and the Crimea. Second, train systems and locomotive physics will be accurately modeled right down to each brake, piston, valve or battery as the case may be. There will even be a little engineer who will flip you a sign of affection from a single finger if lucky enough to survive your attack. Enjoy! Smokin' Hole

Of course the B1 pilot "could" be responsible. We have no idea what communications were taking place at the time. It is common for Tower or Ground to request a plane to remain at idle power while another taxis in close proximity. I don't think the Viper would have continued taxiing unless he felt comfortable that the bomber was going to remain at idle. In a large, powerful aircraft there are two ways to get the airplane moving 1) minimal breakaway power and patiently wait for the plane to start moving or 2) apply a large amount of thrust to get the plane immediately underway. I don't mean to imply that the bomber guy was at fault but none of us know enough to make a judgment--other than to say it is just one of those things and fortunately no one was hurt. Heck the camera man didn't even place any importance on the event and instead stayed focused on the bomber on its take-off roll. Smokin' Hole

A friend and former A-10 pilot gave me a long-since-declasified report that described at length what happens to a shell when it strikes a tank with one sheep secured inside. (You read that right...a sheep). In addition to the poor lamb-chop the tank was fitted with multiple sensors and cameras. Four rounds were fired from the test gun fixed at a distance that I no longer recall. The rounds were fired at whatever rate is used by the Hog. The first round did not penetrate. The three that followed did. In the milisecond that transpired from the first round pentrating and the last round exiting a lifetime (for the sheep) of things happend: First the pressure inside the tank increased as did the temperature--not a little but to a point where the hair of that little lamb would have melted off in less than the blink of his big, round, not-yet-registering-and-never-will eyes. Then, once the third round made it's exit, the pressure and temperature decreased to a point where the lamb chops would soon freeze and be ready for market. The lamb, by the way, was secured in a position so that it would not be in the path of the rounds. When the test was complete the tank obviously had two holes and although I no longer remember their diameter I do remember being surprised that neither was very large. However, there was NO evidence of the lamb having ever been present in the tank other than a little blood and wool around the exit hole. So for all the tank drivers out there you can take some comfort in knowing that the end will be very quick. Smokin' Hole

When a player logs on to a Multiplayer Server, he never knows how much time is left before the server will recycle. (Mods, if I am wrong then please save me the embarrasment and delete this thread :)). There is a nice little clock on the Editor but it only displays either my system time or the mission launch time. Why not allow that little clock to display current "game" time? Thanks, Smokin' Hole

Every Multi-engine airplane with non-centerline thrust will have a speed (Vmc) below which directional control will be lost when flying with one engine inoperative and the other at 100%. For some airplanes, this speed is at or below stall. For most, the speed is higher.

Warning: Serious thread drift ahead. I found the thermals to be way to scarce. But then again, we seem to have much more hot air here in the states than have you guys on the rational side of the pond. Give it a few years. Your thermals will improve dramatically! Kidding aside you are right it is way to easy to stay in thermals but even if it is a little on the fantasy side, it sure is a hell of alot more relaxing then getting smacked in the face with one of Pilotasso's 120s! As for the FM in FSX, they are reasonably good (at least for fixed-wing models). I've flown most of the models IRL except the Extra, Bell, Beaver, CRJ, and DG and have been flying the 737-800 for 9 years now. All are very close or at least close enough not to complain. Smokin' Hole Smokin' Hole

Thanks! :thumbup: Reps inbound to you both.

Speaking of Radar, I've a question about the realism of the Russian designs. The concept of searching blips on the HUD is ok. But it just strikes me as odd that the HDD display is just empty space other than TWS and Datalink data. The real thing must allow a pilot to get attitude information from the HUD while searching with the HDD. Otherwise, in weather or at night, a pilot is placed in the disorienting position of flying heads-down and searching heads-up. Not an easy thing to do. Smokin' Hole

Boeing and Airbus stuff. As you said very expensive. Given a choice I think I'd prefer what I am used to: A combination of round dials and LCD DUs. But that's because I'm "old" and just fly crates from A to B. If I were really shooting at things and getting shot at I would want whatever instrumentation that gives me the big picture quickly with a minimum amount of fumbling around under stress. As long as the end-user (the pilot) has a say in how the F-35 is to be instrumented then whatever they use will be fine--even if it is a big, heavy, goofy helmet.

One really doesn't "FLY" this thing as it is--at least no more than one "FLYS" an elevator to the 14th Floor. I read in Aviation "Leak" a few years back about the flight control logic for the VTOL version while in VTOL Mode: The "throttle" is a vertical rate control--neutral is 0 VS, and forward and aft give pre-determined climb and descent rates. Same logic for the stick--to the stops in any direction gives a maximum lateral rate. Let go of the stick and the neutral position will command the aircraft to stop and hover. Any monkey that can fit in the helmet can do it. Smokin' Hole

One really doesn't "FLY" this thing as it is--at least no more than one "FLYS" and elevator to the 14th Floor. I read in Aviation "Leak" a few years back about the flight control logic for the VTOL version while in VTOL Mode: The "throttle" is a vertical rate control--neutral is 0 VS, and forward and aft give pre-determined climb and descent rates. Same logic for the stick--to the stops in any direction gives a maximum lateral rate. Let go of the stick and the neutral position will command the aircraft to stop and hover. Any monkey that can fit in the helmet can do it. Smokin' Hole

My observation has been exactly the opposite. I've found from 14 years of flying both that LCD displays are far more reliable and readable than CRT displays. I do agree that a single display is inadequate. Smokin' Hole

I had fun with that one too. I was pretty proud when I finally knocked the thing out at 4min 37sec...that is until I saw the note that said 2:20 is max to "make the team"! They must be some of the best pilots on the planet. As a glider guy did u try flying the DG yet?

How dare you try to steer this thread back on topic! :) But seriously. If you allow ext views on anything other than one's OWN plane then CAS/SEAD flights are rendered pointless. A CAP flight only needs to search externals until he sees an easy target, then head towards that lat/long. Smokin' Hole

Easy Rug! It's just an opinion, man. This is just a game and hardly worth this level of emotion by otherwise reasonable adults. You are an adult, aren't you? True, I know nothing about how ECM works in the real world other than that it is far more sophisticated than that modeled in the GAME. I don't strobe because I find it irritating when others do it, not because it limits my ability to lock but because it's a nuisance to deal with on my HUD or HDD. We are playing a GAME, guys. It's a great GAME but just a GAME nonetheless. It has many limitations which hinder it's applicablilty in real life. Most days that I go to work I fly with guys who either currently or once flew U.S. fighters. Never have I once mentioned LOMAC or F4 or asked about any of the technology or tactics used in their military lives. It would be silly to do so because I'm playing a GAME and my querries would seem helplessly childish. If we want to make the GAME real then we should all get together and pre-brief the mission for four hours, fly for 15 minutes, then debrief, then play golf. Smokin' Hole

Very nice work! Smokin' Hole

Anyone know where I can get a good lift-line mod without using loman? I'd prefer the nice mini-hud but that would seem to be verboten online. Thanks, Smokin' Hole

Which is why I think ECM strobing is a legitimate counter. Smokin' Hole