borchi_2b

sorry. ok, so well then i am surprised that i do not get any speed out of the russian birds at full burner and unloading the wings. hmm, strange, then i guess the twr of the su27 is not 1:1.47 ? i tested it with minimum fuel, and guess what, there is not verticaql accaleration possible, so kind of strange isn´t it? with the f15c it is possible, so, just a little expelation to that would be great the f15 has a max twr with the ´220 of 1:1,68 lets assume the ´200 has a little bit les, but still it accelerates during climb, like it does in fc2.o but trya that with the russian birds, LOL, there is no way they can be right, sorry, but i am not convinced at all. we did our testings in our squad. by the way, how to read out ingame data with lua? like yoda mentioned? is there anybody who could explain it?

F15 combat flaps bug hi defs i figured something real strange. when you are in a turnfight, at the edge of any battle, then there is a bug in the f15c in fc2.o. when you activate the flaps, the eagle increases speed instead of loosing speed. this is by far not possible at any circumstances of aerodynamics. i pulled the stick at the same level all the time. extended flaps during my 90° turns and gained speed from 200knt nearly up to 300knt. when i pull in the flaps, i loose speed again and end up at 200knt. here needs to mentioned that the stick is pulled all time the same level. you can test it if you want. but this is defenatly abug in this game, which must be fixed. when i pull the stick all the way to the back, i even turn tighter with flaps, then any real a10c can ever do. this is in some way a nice bug, but not realitic at all. please take that topic into any account when you think about fixing anything for fc2.o. this is something that needs to be fixed for sure. the thrust to weight ratio of the new engines is good, and also is modelled right so far. what i am surprised is, that the trust to weight ratio of the russian birds is not modelled correct in my opinion. but i think there need to be made test by your testerteam. or we make some tracks we can show what we mean we do not care cheers borchi_2b

no problem, i guess we all have enough tackviews to prove this here. the only thing is, the tackviews to not show the hit bandits which are still active in the air. maybe the defs might take a look into the sessions flown on the 104th server or might start a big ame soon, for many players and check that during the mission what happens. cheers

well there is no chance that in RL you would fire back after a hit. most of the missiles are way to strong in fragmentation and would sevearly damage the plane. alot of systems would be gone and a burning plane is not able to fire missiles at that stage anymore. to many systems are gone. you can concider lucky if you have the ability to eject. the r27er for example has an extanding rod blast, which means it cuts anything in half what is in its way. there is no possibility of doing anyhting afterwords, besides ejecting, cause your plane is cut into pieces. it is way more effective then normal fragmentation what the aim120 or the r77 use. but in fc2.0 you need at least 2 missiles for asave kill, which disturbes me alot. but when it is not changed, well then i have to life with it. it would defenatly be something for a fc2.1 :-)

LOL, a one man militäry, haha, that one is great

got you on that. but i talked about chases higher, like 7000m or more. bandits cannot eccalerte that fast there, compared to airspeed and pressure, so there is a good chance that the missile makes its hit anyway, plus burners :-) bright shiny targetspots for ir seakers :-) but when we have like 20 diffence, right, it is shown in the weaponcpu cause the cpu knows the data of the missileparameters exactly. i assume the weapon cpu simulated in fc2.0 is abaout correct, cause when i work with the r27er, then it shows the dorrect ranges. tested that allready to to some tacticimprovement, and the ranges are needed fo certain manuevers, but thats not my point acctualy. the weapons cpu shows certain ranges for ther27et, but even when you fire them at a ballistic, they are not correct, i falls shoret of the range shown by the cpu. tested it, and well when you look at the flight time in comparison, then it is way less then 25% the flighttime of the r27er, for example. you can do some math to it too, and not just range should be about 25% less, also flighttime, do to the fact, that it is basically the same missile, and has same burntimes and makes the same distance during the burntime. also has about the same speed. r27er after brunout has a speed at about 4230km/h at an agnles of 42ooo and the r27et has 4190km/h. at these speeds the diffrence of 40km/h makes no real diffrence, never the less it slowes down like there would be a parachute on its tail. this is something i do not understand, and it cannot be explained with physics or math, cause the aerodynamics are the same, beside the round shaped head, which makes maybe about 5 - 10% in reality. 25% is maybe a bit to much. never the less, it would be cool to have Ed test the missiles again and maybe get this straightend out. cheers by the way, the aim7m is not that slow like it is shown in fc2.0 :-)

gg, thats true, it is a great weapon for a running target, if there would not be the problem, that it slows down way faster then the r27er, which in my opinion is not realistic. the max range of the r27er in the hud in accordance to the vectors of the target are correct, also closure is taken into account. but with the r27et, well totally diffrent storie. i get a max range ona running target, for example with a groundspeed of 1400, myself is travelling the same speed or greater to get closer, but the weapon cpu, which takes all that into account also air pressure, gives me a range of 11km - 12km for example. but i still have to get to 8km, to have the missile reach the target in the end with a very low closurespeed. so there is something that does not match. but the guys from the 51st didtestings too, and mentioned it too. so it is not just me who discovered that problem. greets

my fingers are crossed breakshot. more realisticweapoons for the russian side would be one nice thing to have

well i have to check my skill, harsh, but believe me, my skills are not bad. i fly sarh, and i am one of 2 sarh pilots in our squad. the funny thing is we are bvoth the highscorer in our squad. so it is not the skills, but you have to get into the position to make a kill, and thats by far way harder then turn and burn. plus, the aim120 and the r27er have the same ranges now, which means, turn and burn is no option for sarh. prior there was some more range, even before fc2.0 the r27er flew about 2min, now 1,5 min, then it blows up. numbersd and facts are recorded now, partially, but some time short there will be a list of changes in weapons ballistics. i am not sure if i should make it official, i guess i will write to some guy from ED and ask there gentil why this is the way it is, and why it was changed. who would be the best person to write too?

i do not want r77 on the flanker-c cause there are not such missles carried by this version. and the su35 will not make it into this sim, cause ED will not get the data from the russians, plus i am not even sure if the game engine would be able to calculate phase array radars so it is sure that there will be no r77 on su27, thats true, but some stuff is still hanging in the air here one question though to the f15c in lomac. is there a datalink between f15c and aim120? at least it seems to be that way

i will but there is some bad feeling behind it, cause we see what we see, and facts are facts

Quote: it was stated that the ballistics of the russian missiles were not touched right! why for gods sake was the flgithtime andthe speed of the r27er touched then? It wasn't. It has the same parameters it had in FC1. not ture, sorry, i will prove it to you!!!!!

no datalink there!!!!!!, otherwise the missile would behaveway diffrent and i could switch targets easily, which i cannot at all.

lets see, it should be somewhere in the postings about fc2.0, i hope i will find it, after so many posts. but i remember that i have read something like that. but if they have been touched, why not the r27et? the legs are still way to short. shorter then the weapon cpu tells me. why? when i look at the weapon cpu from the su27 and look at the range of the r27er, which has been tweaked in range and ballistic time = ballistic range, then the range shown is correct, but not when i look at the r27et!!!!, just my 2cent that there is something going the wrong direction. if this is going to happen to the DCS modules, well then ok, no more ED for me. sorry, but only because the is nothing out there equal in grafics, it does not mean ED can do what ever they want to do! i am no sure what policy it is right now, but it is notthe policy they said they are aming for when we talk about DCS for example. does Ed really think people are stupied and will not realise that all was done in favour for a whining f15c community, who think they have the best plane in the world, fly high fire far and think that this is BVR combat, like in real life. sorry, but the guys who whined about the eagle are quiet now, causethey gotwhat they wanted too. but whats about them? these guys, i just had such discussion in our virtual squad, they allways thought that the eagle was to weak when we talked about the weapons. lol, i flew the eagle myself in lomac, andf sorry, it never was a weak plane at all, but now, with this capability of the f.... up aim120c-5, what is it, unbeatable? my 2 cent say yes, thats the way it is. but when they get new missiles, where are the new missiles for the mig29s, the r77m? or R27EP for the su27 ? do not say, ohh they are not existing at that point of time. lol the aim120c-5 has antered service in 2000. after the kosovo conflict. so what was there on the russian side 10 years ago. ahh, i got it, stone, which are supposed to be thrown into the jetintakes of nato planes, doneby some super ninja kung fu cobras, to evade maybe some radardetection and some active laserbeams from starwars, so maybe you get a kill. gg said in the conversation that people should get used to he russian tactics when fc2.0 is out. lol, how should we be able too? how? just tell me how should we be able to use russian tactics, when the weapons do not match real tactics at all? there is somesuper cool russian tactic, but it could not be flown in fc1.12 do to the problem, that the chaffs were way to strong on sarh. no it cannotbe flown either, cause the r27er is cut in range, or at least in travletime which equals range. LOL, this is so hilarious i nearly need to throw up, cause i have to laugh to much. and then, in the end, after9 month, the baby is done, but nothing, really nothing is there in advantage to the russia side anymore. all was taken away. the r27et, that it is weaker, ok, i can bare with, i prefer r27er killsstill way more, cause r27et kill were cheap in the end and boring, so we pushed the limits further and further out, till we reached ranges up to 53km head on and made kills. but now, the r27er, which wealways wanted to be tracking better and maybe even score a hit with that missile, beein tweaked down, to the same range the active aim120c has, lol, there is no way to explain it, but i am really frustrated by ED, cause there is really nothing, nothing at all to the russian side in advantage they could use, compared to the f15 club. aim120c range = r27er range, this is one of the biggest jokes i have every heared in the last few month since 01.01.2010 began!!!!!! i really would like to know the sources from ED, the real sources, where they get thier infos from!

ps. do not ban me for saying the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

not only the su27 needs corrections. the r27er needs some too. there was a state from GGtharos that the ballistics of the weapons have not bean touched. LOL, very very big LOL. sorry, but now further down the testing phase, i really get the impression that Ed wants to make a foul of us costumers. you guys might ban me for that, but for me it gets more and more obvious that all was done in favour for the eagle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it was stated that the ballistics of the russian missiles were not touched right! why for gods sake was the flgithtime andthe speed of the r27er touched then? to match the aim120c-5 ? and beeing able to maybe be smart and fire at greater ranges then even the aim120c-5? is that the f.... uped reason. sorry for the next, but i am really pissed off. just some smart advise for ED. get a complete new testerteam, cause these guys probably know nothing then complaining and messing up a game, or a semi sim. if you really want to make it serious, you might want to get a hold on people who have the knowledge and the smart brains of modern warfare and a2a warfare. i could tell you some names of real guys who know what they talk about, cause theare in the bussiness of this sim, way more deep then any other guy in this forum i know!!! sorry, but ED do you really think to make a fool of us? ranges of the r27er are the same and the missile was tweaked to be that way! in fc1.12 i had even longer legs, do to the fact that my missile fley 2min 3 sec to reach the same speed it reaches now in about 1min 10sec. then there is the r27et, no tweak there besides, itdoes not even see anything on 10km when it is even launched head on and aimed right. sorry, but there needs to be a patch fc2.1, thats for sure. the russian guys never complained about anything in specific, only the eagle guys did all the time, like wohaha, my missiles are to weak, bla bla bla. the missile do even track targets like before, same unrealistic way, even when there is no datalink radar causethe guy was blown to peaces. these f.... up missile come down like an eagle and although they are ballistic without guidence, they track me 15km ahead, 5000m belowthem, which summs up to an angle , damn greater then 25° of azimuth, which would be the most an aim120 can do, do to the fact, that the radar cannot scan further in azimuth, limited by tech. it is so hilerious to see what was done and what was not done. to be honest. now i will teach my dog to push buttons on command. i stear the plane, move the coursor, but then the next 4 steps will do my dog. and giess what. the way this semi sim is presented, my dog will even make kills with the new f15c aim120c-5 combination. nothing to it. you do not need to be a good pilot at all to make kills with such an disadvantage on the red side. guys, please wake up. there is more you guys have to do on that fc2.0. any words to that? if you guys want, i can post everything here in a seperate threat. all the outcome from the tests and also the testresults from fc1.12. so everybody can compare what happend to us who are bored of the whining f15c community in the lomac world!!! my mind is set up the way. every burning f15 is a good one, although i need at least 2 missile hits, untill itis not able to fight anymore. one of the most powerfull missiles, with continuous rod is not able to kill a plane with one hit, lol, but aim120c with normal fragmentation are :-), sorry, guys, but this is some bullshit, lol, i have never ever heard of such stupied stuff. fool others or fix this, but do something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! otherwise i see for the future, les russian planes flying around then there are allready. nearly all guys fly f15 out there. did you notice that? why didn´´t you call the fc2.0 F15C ? there is the F in the beginning and the C in the end! arrrgggg, i am really upset, for what i see there in the bare numbers of the tests. cheers

hi guys, does anybody know how many client slots are there for allthe different bases in fc2.0? any word from ED? or any other person? greets borchi_2b

hi community, i have to vital questions i need help with. first is it possible to move the f4 viewpoint, like it was possible before with this little tool locfg? is this tool still working for fc2.0? then futher, is there any way in recordinga track in mulitplayer? ai is not good enough for some shots we are planing, so we have to do it with humans. anyhelp is welcome here thanks borchi_2b

ok, well might try that some time later. if it works this way well maybe i will do some more stuff with the eagle :-) have to see

well butit would be there constantly i think. youcannot make 2 visibility argumetations, so this means, it would be there all the time during night or, is it possible to make 2 visibility argumentations? i think not

well this happend because of the texture i had to manipulte. there is no wasy i think in moving the light itself i think it is hardcoded in the engine, unfortunatly

they are

thanks man :-) we were watching the videos, but we do not speak russian, we are learning. thanks alot, this means we also have an iff symbol in our hudsybologie, not just on the mfd, cool

при захвате цели опознанной как свой , на илс индицируется признак захвата дружественной цели и отоутствует команда пуск разрешен остальная индикация остается прежней hi folks, can anybody translate that into english, cause the translater wepagesdo not find many of these words. i guess there is alot of technical stuff in it. i already tried to convert the letters, but even when i got it, there most maschiens struggled cheers

:-)