Focha

Sometimes it's not the hardware that needs to be simulated but it's the procedures. I may give you an example. While studding for Instrument Rating I need to train the procedures, I don't need a lot of hardware for that, just a simple joystick and FSX/9 or Xplane can do it. It's a nice photograph, welcome to the future. Regards.

That would be good to add. A briefing and debriefing page for multiplayer flights. Regards.

Nice teaser mate! There are a few things that I liked very, very much! The smoke effects are awesome, the new clouds are brilliant, the terrain looks a lot more "curve" without edges, the sun effect is great. Very promising! Thank you a lot for the teasing. Can't wait. Best regards and again thank you for your work. :thumbup:

Ah ah! But... The question remains... When is it ready? :megalol: :music_whistling:

Simple question, will A-10C have VOR/TACAN, DME, ILS? Best regards.

Yeah... I think you are right. But I guess that up/down animations should be quick enough to implement. Well it's only a small detail. Regards.

Nice, I almost fell for it. :thumbup:

I have a question! A really silly and stupid one. By far the most hilarious one on a sim like this. Now... Here it goes. In FC2/BS we have the pilots model head animated so when you turn your head in the sim, outside the head turns, but this is only true in the lateral plane, so, is the head movements/body, implemented in all planes in A-10C? Forgive me the stupid question, but it would be cool in the ramp to see the pilots head/body, moving while some perform procedures. :D :doh:

Try a little more searching for "Track IR" or "FreeTrack". :thumbup: Basically is a hardware/software device that allows your head to be tracked and converted into head movement in game. Best regards.

I hope the next will be A-10C. lol :P

I found it. Thanks anyway. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=43547 Regards. EDIT: Nop... I think it's not this one. :(

Where one can see the differences from the previous sound engine to the new one? Is there any significant changes? I can live without the radio broadcast, I only used it once just to hear what it was about. Best regards.

I questioned the same thing here; http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=52975 Regards.

Any news?

I thought this was the story with the F-15E in the Gulf War when they picked up the helicopter in ground with the ATA RADAR then cued the targeting pod with ATA RADAR, they got the helis visually in the pod and lase it, they released the bomb after it the heli started moving at 800'-1000' and with the target still painted they hit the target with a LGB (GBU-10). According to the pilots they got contact about fifty miles away on the RADAR. About the AWACS on that mission, quoting one of the pilots accordingly with the book "Strike Eagles - Flying the F-15E in the Gulf War"; "I called AWACS and I reconfirmed with them that we have the helicopter. Actually, what we have on RADAR contact is their rotor spinning." Just my 0.02 euros on this. Regards.

I take it! :P AH-64A all the way!

The FC1 loader was in my opinion much better than FC2 one. I wish ED could make a really good briefing menu, in which developers could post photos, notes, maps, all the kind of data, and we could choose load out, etc. It's already time to have a dedicate briefing menu instead of the simple one we have know that it's not useful at all. This is just my opinion feel free to complete or disagree. Regards.

We, as a simulator community, shouldn't be only dependent on what ED makes for military guys. Rather, I would like to be able to get what they do to military guys but also what they can do for us. Why can't ED have one team for military only and other for civilian affairs? A good time to expand the company. :P Anyway, Apache would be great or a multi-role jet. Preferably two seats. Regards. EDIT: If you guys go for the F18C go for the F18F too. :P Isn't it gorgeous?

Well if ED doesn't know what to do next after A-10C I can tell them. Hughes Helicopter, McDonnell Douglas, Boeing Defense AH-64A. Why? Because it will be a challenge. Are you guys up to it? I really hope you are because that would be really innovative. Specially the ability to have two crewman working together in multiplayer. Who says AH-64A can also say Mi-24, AH-1, Mi-28, etc. Or maybe a two seat multi-role fighter. Just my thoughts. Regards. EDIT: M31 I think you are overreacting a bit, don't you think? If ED guys already know what's the problem and if they are solving what is your point? Being off topic and tell those things over an over again? If there are bugs, if dual throttle is not recognized, if differencial braking is not working, they already know it and probably are working on it or not. Either way it's they choice and there is not point in saying some of the things you just said. One thing is constructive criticism another is saying something that doesn't help at all. Just my thoughts about yours. Regards.

Thanks for the help but still it's difficult. In FC we had some kind of black dots but in FC2 there is none. Regards.

True. Normally the Vy is equal to best endurance speed and the speed for maximum range is obtain by drawing a tangent to the graphic from the origin. Regards.

I also recommend you to read a bit more of power curves (required power vs. available power) to understand theoretically more about what AlphaOneSix described. Basically the maximum rate of climb is found where the difference between available power and required power is greater. When power available is insufficient to hover, best angle of climb speed can be found by drawing the tangent to the power required curve. This basically means that for the same required power if you lower the available power (variables; temperature, altitude) the best angle of climb speed will increase. That's the only time I heard about Vx for helicopters, when you don't have enough available power to hover. Best regards.

I think it is good as it is. Both will not overload the map by any means, the scale is big enough. Regards.

We are talking about a 1:500000 scale VFR map and not a 1:25000 military topographical map. It's really different. In the 25k you would easily put the houses there in the 500k it's really different stuff. The scale being 1:500000 means that 1 cm in the map are 500000 cm in reality meaning that 1 cm is 5 km. It's really hard to make a 1:25000 map, that would be huge stuff. And for VFR navigational purpose I think 1:500000 fits perfectly. In real life what I use for flying (although not NOE but ~1500 AGL) VFR navigations is the 1:500000 map. I only use 1:25000 topo map for landing where there aren't any VFR approach charts. It's pretty impossible/hard to make VFR navigations with a 1:25000 even with a 1:50000 is hard. I think 500k it's the best for both rotary and fixed wing. Regards.

Don't forget that RoF does not have the complexity that BS has regarding FM, systems, etc. That plays a great deal regarding performance. That's why you can have beautiful graphics on RoF. I'm not saying that RoF doesn't have a great simulation, it has, but does not have a HUD, ABRIS, etc, etc. Regards.