aaron886

At first, I was like "blah, what's this, a video announcement?" but then I saw it's Beach with a whole website for flight sim AAR?! Excellent!

Maybe not the result you were looking for. ;) Some good discussion, at least.

Saitek has terrible consistency. I got a set of Combat Pedals just before the holidays, and the right toebrake went out in less than a month of normal use. Got an RMA though.

Perhaps I should have said Harrier GR.3, then. They operated both shipboard and ashore.

Sea Harrier in the Falklands proved it was not a gimmick, I think. The problem is developing one aircraft for every service branch.

Fair enough. I don't think supressing negative feedback will help, but if this isn't an acceptable place for feedback, I won't continue.

10 bucks, no co-op, 3 activations, not dynamic... I'm sure someone worked hard on it, but no thanks.

Wouldn't we all. ;) It's probably an error with the argument number or lua definition file.

Because this is a simulation. A good racing simulator these days models the exact damage you described. If you wanted to question the viability of his concern, best to do it directly, not by dismissing it.

Everything you've written has been opposed at some point in this thread. A high-cost program like this is an unfortunate expenditure and what you get with multi-service demands, but that's the price of keeping an edge. If you consider inflation and the mass of aircraft this jet is designed to replace, it's not that shocking. The CAS argument is more complex than you make it. The F-35 would be able to provide support where the A-10 could not. The reality is that survival of the A-10 is questionable in a battlefield filled with modern air defenses. Even if the 30mm gun provides very direct and predictable fire, small PGMs can suffice in most situations, and they'll have to do because we can't keep the A-10 around indefinitely. I think everyone agrees that it will leave a hole in the US inventory. Small, inexpensive CAS platforms might one day fill that void, but the A-10 is a purpose-built Cold War aircraft that we cannot expect to use forever. In the end, as an American, I want a military that is capable of defending against and striking modern threats, not one that happens to be great for CAS in a medieval desert country. (Caliphate?) PS. Please capitalize, your post is hard to read.

If more people understood this, I seriously think internet discussions of LO would be more productive. ;)

Thanks very much for the answer! Does that mean the maximum view height will be the same as previous versions? Here's some requests while I have your attention... Ability to change threat bubble opacity for very cluttered missions Ability to set label opacity "falloff" for very cluttered missions. I don't know if it's possible, but it would also be nice to be able to group ground unit labels into battalions/divisions to reduce clutter. Automatic stepping to next spawning aircraft with same username (In case I die during repeated dogfights, or use a merged track, for example) To win developer of the year, add TrackIR support in the cockpit view! ;) It's a great app, Vyrtuoz! Really one of the best ever made for flight sims. I'd be happy to purchase a key even if I got no additional features.

Just purchased Home version, because I can't for the life of me figure out what "Strategic View" is. I hope I won't be disappointed when 21 days of Strategic View runs out. Anyone know exactly what that means?

I don't think there's any compelling evidence that the F-35 has a fuel temp management problem. News outlets are retracting that PR statement and replacing it with a more speculative suggestion.

It's nothing secret. Go look at the flight model standards first, but I think you've already done that. The actual creation of the flight model does not follow any specific method, but to reach PFM standards the author is going to need highly accurate data and performance figures to verify it. It can be done a few different ways, but the measure of performance/handling quality is the results rather than the method.

http://fsfx.oldprop.com/en/precipitFX/ This looks amazing. I hope one day ED's simulator will have 3rd party artists like this working on it.

Haha. Oh Baby a Triple!

Fascinating. I see that black screen and assume it will be very dim and desaturated.

One more display today. The show kicks off tomorrow at 2 PM GMT, 8 AM CST in the US.

It's that time of year again! This is VFAT weekend, and there are displays flying right now. Here's the stream: http://www.livestream.com/virtualairshows and here's the schedule: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-dnkl4sD9IAIy4C3IvEmRbJiry-9NZvk3I5I7UQsYKE/edit#gid=0 Enjoy!

The cockpit shot fooled me, Corleone. Nice!

To clarify the previous post, the Captain/Pilot Flying is holding the thrust levers prior to takeoff. On takeoff he'll "stand up" the thrust levers or place them in an approximate position near takeoff thrust. He'll then command the First Officer/Pilot Not Flying to set thrust to that aircraft's rated takeoff thrust. (MCT is the usual term.) This keeps his head up/on the runway rather than fiddling with thrust levers and engine gauges.

Nice work sir Pat!

No. That's not how this works.

Nice job, Sniper! I see you get that bug with the stick movement, too. I don't know why that happens...:unsure: