Jump to content

aaron886

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3948

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Posts posted by aaron886

    Dynamic Campaign Discussion Thread

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    I don't know, I think you're really underestimating the impact a well-coordinated air force can have especially on modern operations.

     

    First, you mentioned 'simulator-level kill-counts'. To that I say: 492nd Fighter Squadron, Operation Odyssey Dawn: 477 munitions employed, 407 targets destroyed :)

     

    I think drawing parallels to WW2 is less than fair for a few reasons - the first being the overall lack of effectiveness air combat generally had due to technology limitations and lack of intelligence. You would send two dozen bombers to hit a tank tread factory, they'd drop 100 bombs and blow up everything but the factory, then they'd go back and try it again.

     

    If an F-16 pilot flies in and employs a HARM against an SA-11 radar site, he's punched a huge hole through their air defenses with the destruction of a single target.

     

    Consider the employment of A-10s in Afghanistan. Given the specific mission "take this town" or "defend this base", having an F-15E or A-10 in the area will MASSIVELY swing odds in your favor. In a dynamic campaign, it could singlehandedly affect what ground you've managed to hold.

     

    WW2 was a different animal and comparing it simply isn't fair - in WW2, military forces were considered extremely expendable. Planes were rolling out of factories on a daily basis, and the ease of manufacturing things due to the complete lack of technology they incorporated meant you could retool just about any metal foundry into something to make tanks since all you needed was enough steel and a diesel engine. To compare to modern-world, the Air Force never even had enough TPods in its inventory to outfit all the F-15Es - they still don't, as a matter of fact, in order to get a TPod on every aircraft we have to mix LANTIRNs and Snipers.

     

    I doubt anything like that would be possible these days. It takes months for St. Louis to roll out a new F-15 and while I have no doubt that they could get a frame thrown together even at multiple factories consider the avionics that have to be put into each one, most of which were made by companies that went under decades ago. You'd then have to flight test each one, a process that would take even longer, since pilots are a lot more valuable than they were back then.

     

    So yeah, bombing tanks in WW2 didn't really matter, because for every tank you bombed, three more rolled out of the factory - but that isn't true anymore. No military today has force levels even approaching what any single country had in WW2 in terms of number of tanks, planes, etc. and I don't think it would ever be economically feasible to build up to such a level. You could loose a hundred aircraft in a day and it was considered too bad. You can park your aircraft inside a hardened concrete structure. In WW2 it would take hundreds of bombs to land enough to collapse it on the aircraft. In the real world, a single F-15E carrying small diameter bombs can destroy twenty in a single sortie. In WW2 you'd see fifty thousand infantry on each side in a single battle, now we use that same number to hold an entire country.

     

     

    So yeah, stop comparing WW2 to modern day operations.

     

     

    tl;dr - "smart weapons."

    New MiG-29A/C/UB models

    in 3D Modeling for DCS World

    Posted

    Sorry, i want to wrote su-33 earlier.

    Info: In this state of model (with two engines, and almost finished outer body) staying from 147K poliygons.

     

    Not bad at all! It's the small bits where all the high poly counts come into play, but fully worth the resources with good LODs, IMO. Although I will probably be among those who may experience performance issues with this model, I would much prefer that you use whatever reasonable amount of polygons you can. The quality of this model will last well into the future, IMO... so damn the torpedoes and count on better hardware! :D

    The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

    in Military and Aviation

    Posted · Edited by aaron886

    It is rather obvious that the "LERXlerons" are very active at slow speeds.

     

    My assumption is that one of their primary functions is airflow control for the inlets. If anything, you might call them inboard leading edge flaps, because there's no doubt that they are a lift device, not a primary flight control. :) Any capability to make differential movements is probably very limited, if it exists.

     

    I'm interested to see what kind of PAK-FA multimedia will come out of MAKS this year. I was hoping it would fly some sort of demo, but I've not heard anything to that effect yet...

    New MiG-29A/C/UB models

    in 3D Modeling for DCS World

    Posted

    i don't understand how can you hit the 300k with a model even as detailed as this one when i jump to, let's say 100k polys and iit cannot be made better.

     

    Here's my possibly unnecessary 2c... Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's not possible. He's clearly a better modeler than you are, so now is a great time to stop applying your limitations to his modeling. Let him do his thing... it's his model, and he's clearly the expert here. :noexpression:

    • Like 2

    ED SIMS SCREENSHOT AND VIDEO THREAD!!!! (NO USER MODS OR COMMENT)

    in Screenshots and Videos

    Posted

    Actually it's supposed to be a... directory / single announcement topic. Not for discussions.

     

    There are example posts in the topic :P

     

    As for the discusing mods - one starts a topic dedicated to his mod and goes on about it as he pleases. Very simple. IMO there's nothing bad in posting few "mod shots" here as long as it doesn't become too persistent.

     

    Exactly how I meant it. Didn't think he was expecting discussion as it has been released in the past. I would consider screenshots that Grandsurf is posting to be correct usage of this thread. No big deal either way... back to screenshots!

     

    screenshot_514.jpg

    screenshot_516.jpg

    The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

    in Military and Aviation

    Posted

    It's indeed quiet surprising the solution of fuel pressure controlled actuators in the hottest section of the engine but this is how they've made it.

     

    Not really... jet fuel isn't that unstable. By nature of a hydraulic system, it's (probably) constantly cycling through the hot section and back to cooler areas. Fuel is a great coolant. (Similar use in the SR-71, if I remember right.)

    LOFC2 Framerates

    in Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 1 & 2

    Posted · Edited by aaron886

    Yeah unfortunately, FC2 still only uses 2 of your cores, and only 1 to run the sim and visuals. I would think you should be having better luck than that though, with graphics turned down!

     

    You might try updating your graphics drivers? I'm at somewhat of a loss here...

     

     

    If you'd like, you can ship me your computer, and I'll send you mine. :D I get 30-40 FPS in most situations with medium graphics. (I wouldn't mind having an i7...)

    The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

    in Military and Aviation

    Posted

    I assume - looking the pics - the TVC is hydrolics controled. Poor guy if he looses hydraulics then.

     

    Seriously? It's not like he's uniquely screwed if he loses hydraulic power. Any modern jet fighter is similarly screwed if it loses hydraulic power.

     

    To anyone doubting if the petals are hydraulically actuated... of course they are. What other alternative is there? 50 hamster wheels? :doh:

×
×
  • Create New...