Rotorhead

It's not out yet. :P

Well, hope is always second last to die (right before Chuck Norris), but I'm not holding my breath either. Although I won't complain if they have few little surprises for us in store for Christmas. Like, something very big and noisy with two afterburning engines. :) And yes, having a real pilot inside the team is very nice thing. That's why I love ED - they're taking their time, but they also take care to make their product top class. Although it seems that together with 6DOF cockpit and AFM, little (or bigger) delay is a vital part of that famous "DCS standard". :P

Nice update! I'm sure this new F-15 AFM will be lots of fun! :) What I'm concerned about though, is complete lack of any info on Su-27. Both were planned to come out by the end of this year. For F-15, chances are somewhere near zero now I guess, and as for the Flanker... Well, nobody knows, but this silence doesn't sound good to me, not in the least.

I like this changelog. :) After a period of silence, and some rather unpleasant news (no EDGE this year, and no MiG either), something positive at last. Thanks ED, and let there be as few bugs as possible. :)

I'm not going to search for the post right now, but yes, it was said so. That's why I bought FC3, after all. Cannot say I wasn't expecting that. :) I meant if there wasn't any official statement that I missed. Seems like not.

Yes, that's what I remember as well. However, haven't heard of Flanker for quite a time! It's just me missing the updates or there are really no news about it? I'm just asking, because I'd want to know in which phase of development it currently is. And don't you even dare to say Soon or When it is done! ;)

Yes, I know it wouldn't, and not only in the U.S. I just don't fully get the logic behind it. Deliberately using a car against somebody equals using a lethal weapon, which is right. And you cannot fire several shots into bunch of random people and then apologize that you haven't aimed for anyone. Yet you can drive car like an idiot in a crowded street, and get away just with speeding ticket if you're lucky. And therefore, we don't need to worry about our lives in the least... And, more to it, about the lives of others who have nothing to do with us. No offense, but value of your arguments seem about the same to me... At least you're sure about that... Yeah, that's the spirit!!! Unless you are the poor bastard who gets in the way. Then please live your life on some remote island or so, so nobody else gets hurt, and nobody will have to worry when one of your suicide attempts finally succeeds. Some people just don't need to do such things, and yet they can live a life as much as fulfilled as yours, if not more. If you need to flirt with death to feel purposeful, it's fine. I'm not judging anyone. You know the risks and you make your decisions. But as long as other people can get involved in your game against their will, it's no longer about enjoyment, it's about responsibility. EDIT: Oh, and maybe some of those innocent bystanders just tried to live their lives, when suddenly someone whose life wasn't exciting enough dashed in and ended theirs. Well, at least something I can agree upon.

That. If somebody is stupid enough to kill himself for his pure idiocy, honestly, I don't give two s**ts. Just don't want me to be sorry for him. But, the sad part is, such a moron possesses huge risk not only to his life (which he probably doesn't care about anyways), but also to the lives of his passengers (as in this case), or even worse, anybody who happens to be on or near the road at the same time. The question is, if somebody deliberately acts in a way he knows is very likely to cause death to others, how come it's not a murder attempt?

Yep, but when you are so severely mentally impaired that you can't even walk without possessing significant risk to the others, you will probably be held in asylum 24/7. If you want driving license, on the other hand, all you have to do is to pass the test, and you can buy the most powerful car right away. Nobody will ever ask if you're actually responsible enough to handle a scooter. Road transportation is probably the most dangerous way of travel ever, yet it is easiest to get license for it. Absurd? I think so.

So it was said aloud now, no Nevada this year. I wonder why I wasn't even surprised. Before everybody charges at me with stakes and torches, I want to say I really appreciate what ED and 3rd party guys are doing, I fully support their work and I am happy about the smallest update or progress. But I have to say, the whole DCS seems like a factory for broken promises at times. And again, before first stone comes flying at me, I took a bit of artistic license for the word "promise". Sadly, DCS modules are like state railways - they never arrive on schedule. UH-1, MiG-21, EDGE... I don't doubt this all will become true one day and it will be great (or, in case of UH-1, it already is), but when somebody tells you that "module X will hopefully be out before Y", you can pretty much bet it won't, which is shame IMO. Ah, I guess I must be positive. At least this is a great opportunity to train my patience. And in the meantime, I can listen to some music. Like "The day that never comes" from Metallica. Err, on the other hand, rather some other song... :P

What Suchacz said. Real people were and still are killing and hurting each other there, and what's even worse, they're up against their own. I can see nothing in that video except of violence, hate and religious fanaticism, none of which is admirable nor funny. What will be next, weight loss diet commercial featuring real footage from Dachau? Sorry, either am I losing my sense of humor, or some other people just lack their taste. EDIT: Funny how movies nowadays feature disclaimers like "No jellyfish were harmed in the making of this film blah blah blah" , yet somebody comes with something like this and doesn't even blush...

IIRC both Ka-50 and A-10C were developed for military customers and later ED got permission to sell them as entertainment products, with certain limitations of course. So technically, it is entirely possible to happen again, but of course it only depends on the decision of the said company. And yeah, then there are military secrets and stuff. So while I'd gladly pay considerable amount of money for it, I'm not holding my breath for DCS:Ka-52... :(

What did she? Look for better bakery then: It's not exactly Flanker but I think it will do the trick. If you ask nicely they can do other types as well. ;)

:megalol::megalol: I have absolutely no idea what you mean. *cough* Engine smoke? *cough cough* :) Happy Birthday Wags! Have a good one!:holiday:

That's actually very good idea! Huey and bambi bucket, hell yeah! :punk: But for now, I will settle with collidable ones I guess... Oh, and those screenies look neat... :)

Yep, this is a shortcoming of "my" solution. But imagine what would happen with weapon vs. tree collisions on. Take your Stinger guy for example. In real life, he'd probably hide in the forest near it's edge, so he can clearly see outside, but all those trees give him perfect cover. And he can launch his Stinger through the gaps between trees without any problems. Now imagine the same scenario in DCS. It's impossible to have detailed hitboxes for every individual tree (with trunk, branches, etc.), there will most likely be one large hitbox for the entire forest. Now if the guy in the forest fires at you, his missile will hit the outer hitbox boundary, and will explode in his face. So no good either. Maybe it should be possible for weapons to not collide with forest when exiting it, but only when entering it? I dunno, if somebody finds a way around it, I will be only happy. But for now, I'd settle with being hit through the forest at those rare and unlikely occasions, rather than being hit through them constantly as it happens now.

Again, if the AI cannot detect you through the trees, they will not fire at all. And human players will have hard time hitting something they can't see. Problem with weapon collisions is that trees aren't 100% bulletproof. If you fire into a forest, part of the bullets will be stopped, part deflected, and part will continue in target's general direction, depending on how dense the forest is. Even missiles won't explode after slightest contact. Modelling this into a sim would be very difficult, unless is there some penetration system involved. Therefore I suggested to omit weapon collisions for now. Of course it will be better to have it, but until somebody comes with elegant way how to do it, I think everything is better than trees we have now.

Okay, I will try to answer this again, this time without mentioning other sim titles, so my post will hopefully stay here for a bit longer... ;) So, what we need is something I call selective collision detection. So for example, both an airplane and a tank can collide with a house, and their AI will therefore try to avoid it. A tree, on the other hand, collides only with air units. So planes and helos will try to stay away from trees (and will be damaged / destroyed if they fail to do so), while tanks will just ignore those and will move right trough without taking damage. Also, both buildings and trees must block LOS for both air and ground units. Tree vs. weapons collision aren't necessary IMO, because both players an AI won't engage through forest if they can't see. And even if they do, their chances of hitting something are pretty low. It's certainly not impossible to achieve, but I agree that it would require quite a big changes in DCS core engine.

Please don't take this as any kind of rebellion against forum rules or something, but since tree collisions surely will - or will not - be part of Nevada terrain, I can't see how this can be off topic. Just sayin'. Still more on topic than those circular saws, methinks. :P

That's exactly what THEY want you to believe! :alien: Yeah, when you start learning and get at least little insight on how things really work, you'll find out that plain reality is often more fascinating than those sci-fi fantasies, and that world is much more beautiful and miraculous place than all those supernatural theories can ever offer.

As already said, it doesn't seem there were ever tree collisions in DCS. However, only fact remains, that we now have 3 helicopters, 4 CAS planes, and even a ground forces simulator, and yet we can't use such a important tactical aspect like forest that can actually both protect or kill us. Having a otherwise high-end helo sim with trees made out of thin air seems hardly acceptable to me.

Yep. So because people who claimed Earth is round were once ridiculed and then turned out to be right, it's only logical that people claiming that little green men are all around, running conspiracies with evil government agencies, who are now ridiculed, MUST turn out to be true sooner or later. Makes sense, your logic is bulletproof. If you know a way how to make a spacecraft (or any other physical object) to NOT be affected by Newtonian physics, I'd really like to see it. Now do you actually have a basic knowledge of orbital mechanics, right?

Yeah. We should have tree collisions... No, we NEED tree collisions! :thumbup:

That. Don't blame me, but I'm already allergic of people using this phrase. Thanks to UFO'ers, conspirationists, cultists and other superstitious people, "open minded" has become one of the most over-used, meaningless and washed-out words ever. "Open minded" has become just other way of saying "I believe everything I hear without even thinking about it." Or how my ex-coworker used to say, when I questioned his pseudo-science claims "You can believe it if you want, it's just up to you how far want you to go." What kind of BS is that? I want to go only as far as it makes sense, not an inch further! Needless to say those "open minded" people are in fact very close-minded. Really open-minded person examines the claim first, and decides whether to accept it or not second. I should also mention that the most rapid development of space technologies happened during the Cold War. After it ended, both sides lost their reason and will to compete each other, and therefore to come up with new, groundbreaking technologies. Also, general public lost interest in space flight, then you have budget cuts, etc. etc. BTW, those super secrets UFO things in that video remind me human sperm cells under microscope. Does it say something about my personality? :D

Around 5 FPS hit compared to 13.9 stable during Mi-8 free flight mission. Definitely a no-go for me.