AJ.eightFive

Do we have a definitive number for the R-27ET gimbal limits? I don't have access to all the fancy reference material you gentlemen do but online sources seem to point to 55 degrees. Is this correct?

I'm familiar with F-pole but... A-pole? Do tell...

Whew, just shy of 300 posts later! So how does this translate to Lock On as far as means of employing R-the 27-T/ET? I assume the current model is incorrect based on Pilotasso's first post but I'm a Group A guy so I don't really know very much about the Russian WCS ;).

Another good point. This whole thing reminds me of the "bunny-hopping" debate that crops up in pretty much every tactical FPS forum. Like someone said earlier, such tactics might be physically possible, but in a realistic context are completely obsurd. I think this definitely applies here.

Wow, I can't believe I just read all 29 pages of this "discussion". First a few of observations based on what I have seen in these and other flight sim forums (but particularly IL-2 and Lock On where multiple coalitions are represented by the flyables). In such discussions it seems fairly easy to divide participants in the online flight simming arena into 3 distinct groups. Group A pilots fly certain aircraft out of principle, perhaps because it is their favourite aircraft or because they are fiercely patriotic and can't stand flying for the "bad guys". For the most part they don't mind taking heavy losses so long as the experience is realistic. at least in their eyes. I add this caveat because such pilots are often drawn into heated debate about aircraft/weapon performance based on their (usally patriotically biased) ideas about historical mission success, kill ratios etc. Group B pilots typically choose an aicraft based on its combat capability and how much of an advantage it will give them over others. They aren't concerned about nationalistic loyalties or skillful employment of real world tactics; just the potential to reach the top of the kill boards. They are quite satisfied with taking any handouts a game provides in terms of exploitable inconsistencies in realism and will put up a fierce fight when any discussion arises which sheds light on the area needing to be corrected. Group C pilots will fly any aircraft, often because their skill far exceeds any advantage inconsistencies in the game can provide. They tend to accept the game for what it is, but still participate in debate for the sake of improving realism and gameplay. Fortunately, these are usually the ones that appear to be selected for Beta testing spots where (hopefully!) suggestions are more likely to be heard. I will not take the risk of publicly assigning anyone here to any of those categories ;). Anyway, I don't have much to offer as far as fact or opinion on the R-27T/ET. I will say that the case against maddogged kill success rate is more convincing. I imagine the ideal conditions required for such a kill would not be as easy to come by in real life as in Lock On. Such wishful expenditure of munitions would surely be frowned upon and very rarely (if ever) employed. Edit: Chalk up another one for Canada :icon_supe.

Turkish bases?

QFT

I would easily forgive ED for taking a few guesses for the sake of having some NATO carrier ops. It's not like the aircraft they do have data on are perfect anyway (see. F-15C Avionics Wishlist ;)). I wonder, why is that technical information on the still active F-15C (and similarly the F-16, modelled in such detail in F4) is declassified whereas information on the F-18A,B,C,D,E isn't?

Here are some, they are about 20 USD each however.

Just out of curiosity, what are the exact documents required? I imagine it would be something like a POH, with performance numbers, envelopes etc. I don't have a spare $20 to find out what these are, but maybe someone else is familiar with these documents and can explain what they are for. http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F18.html Here are the one's available for the F-15A,B,C,D,E http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F15.html

Speaking of lights, a working KC-10 PDI in multiplayer would be nice :D.

nice one nscode :D:D:D

The CD checks have never appeared for me since installing. StarForce still checks the CD's of my other SF enabled games but not FC. Anyway, I'm not complaining, it's nice to be able to play without the CD. I have the web version by the way, maybe that's the difference?

While I'm all for the idea of an SDK, I wouldn't want addons to be completely unregulated as in FS2004. Some sort of quality control would be desirable, and only officially approved mods would be used globally, possibly released through official patches. The expandability of FS2004 is great but it takes a lot of wading through low quality releases to find what you want, at least in the freeware category. What I really want is a working F-15 HSI, TWS PDT elevation centering and a non-suicidal KC-10 with working online boom (it just seems so simple!?), then I'll be satisfied. Really ;). Excellent vid GA!

I'd prefer to see some motion blur before grass.

Wow, that one man development team sure puts MS to shame.

Neat, are there any more videos of FS:X available? That's the first I've seen.

Please send the skin my way too if it's not too much trouble. AJ.eightFive@gmail.com Edit: Thanks Mizzy, Cosmonaut!

44th Sunset Touchdown: 1 - 44th_Cranium 2 - 44th_eightFive-

The Birds of Prey pack doesn't seem to change much, it would be nice to have a bit of texture on the tank as in that image. Let me know if you find out where to get this skin.

Wow, very nice. Right now I'm using D-Scythe's "F-15C Compass Ghost/Mod Grey paint scheme with weathering" but the tanks still look ugly as sin. I'd love to get my hands on those tank textures too! Edit: Just realized I was using an older version of D-Scythe's textures, the latest "Birds of Prey" pack appears to have new tank textures.

Neat stuff, if this works out I might have to try my hand at it as well!

hmm, would a plain old table saw do or would you need special blades? I'm not really a handy-person but I can follow directions ;).

Found the original post... http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=37;t=006889#000000 May I ask where you got the materials?

What did yourself and Colt do to make the improvement? I'm not seeing it :( sorry.