bumfire

Looks like the new head they put onto the well has stopped the flow of oil, tis looking good.

Its always been like that, its the way the game is rendered and the FOV. Been like that since day one when the original lockon came out, everyone suffers from it and I doubt that there is a fix coming anytime soon.

Tornado Pilot, I dont know about anyone else, but I love the ejection sequence, am kinda dirty that way. but seriously, I have loads of cool ejection shots form lockon, whne I know I am gunna crash I simply pause and slow the rate down to 0.2 and then push ctrl+Y twice and unpause and then start taking screenies. here is one for your pleasure. ;)

No, If I remember, it was something that nasa used for either the space shuttle or some other type of rocket, possibly the apollo rockets ? Also the KA50 seat leaves the helo unlike in the video, slightly similar but not the same. Dont think they use them now though, as the tv show that I saw had the astronauts either in a cage connected to a zip line that took the people away from the shuttle if they were lucky enough to spot trouble before take off, they would leave shuttle and enter a basket thats connected to the tower and zip line to safety or they had a hand line that lowered them to the ground, the hand lines were plugged into somewhere on the shuttle so that they could slowly descend the outside of the shuttle. TBH, I think it was useless, as if their ever was a problem, chances are that it would blow up before they could do anything. Kinda like the the useless safety rocket on top of the apollo rockets, the one meant to drag the capsule to safety in the event of trouble/rocket blew up, they said it was useless because if they noticed trouble, the rocket would blow up in 1 or 2 seconds, but in order for the safety system to work, it needed about 4 seconds for the eject system radio signals to effect the ejection, by that time the rocket and its occupants would of been destroyed.

I am in the process, nearly 50% done already of uploading an Old Skool Panavia Tornado Documentary, really great documentary if you ask me, I finally got around to decoding the DVD earlier today. It should be completed in about an hour. So anyone who wants to see it, give me a pm and I will link you to the server. Its an avi, but I am not sure if you will need xvid/divx to watch it, normally people will have one or the other installed. Also, it may need a touch of De-interlacing, but other than that its a great Doco. this is it http://www.amazon.co.uk/Modern-Combat-Aircraft-Tornado-VHS/dp/B00004CL65

The KA50 ejection seat, although its classed as zero zero, in reality you have to be above 100 feet or 100 metres, i cant recall which, in order for it to be a successful ejection, now that doesnt mean 100feet/metres if your upside down, or the same but vertical and heading for the deck at 300kph. Just that it has a 100 feet or metre safe limit.

Not just the Encyclopedia needs to explain the contents a little more fully, the sim needs to name some weapons properly, as in my game, the 50 cal strap on browning for the Kiowa Helo, it names it as a Brauning, obviously a german spelling for the weapon, but I am using the english version :)

I cant believe that this has been picked up by all the major news outlets in the UK, seriously, it astounds me that this is actually getting air time as news. Sashimi FTW

Cheers EtherealN ;) I was just curious why all different sizes, as the forum I admin on had a similar problem a while back, and it was due to upgrading to a new version of VB, messed up all the user accounts and a whole pile of other things and to this day we are still re-configuring accounts that have slight problems that get brought to our attention. Its no biggie though, as I said, I was more curious than anything ;)

EvilBivol, How come everyone has different sizes ? we range from 20kb to 100kb to a 1000kb Is it meant to be like that, or is it a case of something wrong somewhere in the forum software ? or has the scripting gone awry somewhere along the line and not updated all the user accounts when the forum got updated ? or is it just a case of, testers get the larger size, the rest get 100kb and the admin hasnt bothered to update his own account and is stuck at 20kb :) Just to add, I see no problem with any of the sig's, I am just curious about the different sizes thats all.

Upon inspection of the user cp, its 100kb as Alicatt mentioned. So in retrospect, testers get room for a larger sig, question answered, now that wasnt such a big deal now was it ?

Dude, it was only a question, no need to go all 'fruity' on me. The reason I asked in the first place was because I was trying to put a sig on another website about 1-2 weeks ago which had larger than 20kb limit and, i knew by the looks of feurfalkes sig that it was way over 20kb. I havent even looked at the user cp/sig page for size limits, I just took it as said by you that 20kb was infact the limit. Hence me asking the question if the larger size was allowed for mod's/testers. ;)

Upon inspection of Feurfalkes sig, it looks as though his sig goes above the specs outlined in your post. It says that his sig picture is 500px X 100px X 48.68kb (49,852bytes) larger than 20kb. So firefox says, is that only for moderators/ed testers or is it allowed for everyone ?

Sure, what I do so I dont have to push Ctrl+E+E+E three times when I want to eject is, I quickly stand up and kick my chair away from me and turn around and run and throw myself out/threw the window. Anyway, to answer your question, why dont you change the eject sequence in the game key binds page to say just a single obscure key, say something from the numpad ? I have eject to work with one button press using my joystick, so it is possible, but I am not sure if its possible from within the game key bind section ? but I would delete the default keybind for eject and then map a new sequence for it and see if that works. If not you will maybe need to use some software to do it for you that is compatible with your lever.

I think Prophet is correct, if I recall correctly, It has a doppler under the tail boom and a A-036A Radio Altimeter also, and one of them is pointing ever so slightly forward. Which one I do not recall, but one of them is.

That ^ and also one of the biggest reasons helicopters are grounded, because of bad weather. Most helos dont have radar to see with in bad weather and the ones that dont have it need to see where they are flying, if the weather is too bad to do so, then they are grounded, or if it happens when they are in flight then they go around or over or under the bad weather if possible, if its not possible to do so then they have to land. If its just patchy cloud, then they fly through it but will be aware of any height restrictions and, also they will be aware of traffic in the area via ATC, so long as they follow ATC's instructions they will be ok to fly through cloud. Grounding happens to military pilots as well as civvies, even if their is a war on. But ingame, you just need to make sure that before you enter cloud that your buddy if he is human isnt right next to you, have some seperation and if he is AI, he should be ok aslogn as you dont do stupid moves which can upset his programming and make him turn you into a supa magnet that magically attracts his helo towards yours. Also the direction of flight/flight path, before you fly that section find the highest point and mark it on your abris, something like the letters 35min (3500m minimum ) or something to that affect will do, so that you will know the minimum height that you want to be at and also will know when you are flying over the highest point of your waypoint. You can also do the same when making a mission in the mission editor, if you know that clouds and fog will be used in the mission, then on all of your waypoints, find the highest point on each and then remain above them for each particular waypoint, so if waypoint 2 - 3 has a single peak of 1500metres in the middle of it and directly inline with your flight path, then in the ME, set your height for say 2000 for that waypoint and if you use autopilot, it will keep you above that single peak and out of trouble.

The only thing that I found sli did for lockon a few years ago was sli AA, that was the only option that was any good, it gave you more AA without a fps hit, the other sli modes did basically nothing, from my experience.

Unless your American :music_whistling:

Could be a heat problem, especially sicne it happens 10-30 minutes into a game.

This is gunna end well. I think MAV seeker sucks also, I can never lock onto them incoming Strela's with my mav seeker, they are too fast for me to catch them on the TV, so annoying.... :p

The new x52 software recognises right alt now. The old sst software and drivers didnt.

You have the correct keys for firing them, space or Ralt+space, so they should fire if you hold the button down for a few seconds. I can only assume that you are not within firing parameters ??? Once you push enter to stabalise the seeker, and then actually bring the crosshairs onto a target, only once the pointing cross on the TVM flashes will the missile be able to fire. This is copied from the manual. Once you have the pipper near a target, press the [Enter] key to stabilize the seeker on that terrain point. This will ground stabilize the seeker. You can then use the slew keys to place the HUD reticule / TVM targeting cross on the target. If in range, the seeker will "snap to" to the target and lock it. It will then track and maintain lock as long as it can. When the pointing cross on the TVM flashes, it indicates that you have a valid lock and can fire the missile. That being said, when I first installed FC2, my weapons would not fire at all, at first I thought I was doing osmethign wrong which I wasnt, I knew that the vihkr launching had changed for the 25t in fc2, but I was doign it correct but still they wouldnt fire. I reinstalled and it has worked smoothly ever since.

Either that or break into a US airbase and steal there NVG glasses instead, just remember to put spare batteries in your pocket :)

Just did more testing/playing, for once the re-arm added fuel tanks onto the wings, yay. I was surprised, but its just my luck, I make a post moaning about it and lo and behold the next time I fly the tanks get added during a re-arm :music_whistling: That being said, they still dont fill up with fuel. This is what happened. I was taking out a convoy, a line of about 8 sniper bmp2's at the end of the convoy opened up on me and killed one of my engines, I was fully loaded with 2 fuel tanks, 2 58s, vikhrs, phanta pod and some 13s plus ecm pods on each wing. I was losing height so I had to ditch the fuel tanks and the s13s, with those gone I started to get some decent height. I landed at sochi with about 1800KG of fuel left, I re-armed and for the first time since I have had fc2 installed, I got new tanks, it auto brought my fuel status upto 3500 something KG. I then proceed to fill the main tanks as I was thinking that the 3500KG was the remainder of my internal tank ( roughly half empty ) plus the 2 external tanks, but upon trying to fill up my main internal tank I still only manage to get a maximum of 3700KG of fuel for both external and internal. So, even though the fuel tanks respawned for once, the fuel situation regarding them+internal tank is being confused somewhere and basically doesnt work as it should. I started the mission with 5100KG, 2x external & 1x internal, but re-arm/re-fuel cant give me more than 3700KG of fuel regardless if I get new external tanks or not. I can understand what ED are trying to do here with lockon FC 2 and the DCS series, but some of these bugs are really annoying and so prominent that it begs the question what are the testers doing ? having a fun time playing the game and not really testing ? or is the testing procedures not as strict as they should be ?. I wont speculate asto why these obvious bugs get through, it might be due to something else entirely. I ask because, if I can find bugs, and I take 6 - 12 month breathers away from flying at a time, and for me to find a bug, it really does have to be right in front of my face, that doesnt say much about the testing procedures and or testing team, because I dont get too deep into this sim, I basically just skim the surface, so if these bugs are on the surface and easy for me to spot and I am dumb, then they really should of been found much much earlier and, before ED put their name to a product and started selling it to the public. Its just a pity that judging by the previous history from Lockon FC DCSBS, that A10C will still be broke 2 years down the line. Its a pity, but ED have a reputation for releasing really buggy software, its a fact, I still buy their software regardless as I like what they make even though it is buggy, also I am a glutten for punishment, but it doesnt put me off of buying there stuff, I just wish a little more time went into actually trying to polish the game to make it as obvious bug free as possible. I know some people wont like what I just wrote, I am not cracking up with ED, I am just stating the obvious, I enjoy there sims very much and have helped ED along with a good few hundred spondoolicks from the stuff that I bought from them, but what puts me off is the incessant bugs, the backdoor fixes that users need to do in some cases, the tweaking of files just to get the game to run semi decently etc etc. It doesnt HAVE to be like this all the time does it ?

I have tried this a few times and each time I am left with the same conclusion and, that is that once the 25T ( I have only checked this on the 25T, it may affect other AC also ? ) uses up its external fuel tanks, they cannot be refilled again or replaced unless you crash/die/eject and recover. I start a mission with 2 external tanks on the 25T, I have 5010KG of fuel altogether, which includes 100% internal and the 2 external tanks. I take off and go and kill some stuff, the good part :) , I then land and park up and re-arm with the default loadout ( same as I started the mission with ) and then I refuel, I still have the external tanks attached as I did not jettison them in flight. If you jettison them in flight, when you re-arm they do NOT get replaced, why is this ? Anyway back to the main question, I ask the ground crew to refuel me to 100% AKA the maximum fuel option listed, but I only ever get something like 3600KG of fuel, which is roughly the maximum internal tank limit, but the external tanks dont get touched. I try asking for more juice, but the only thing it does is either start pumping and stop within about 3 seconds, thats if I pick the 100% option, as my internal tank is already full at that time, or if I pick options 75% and under it starts to remove fuel, which is fair enough. I cannot get the external tanks to be refuelled no matter what refuelling option I pick or even if I Re-Arm with the default loadout. Why isnt my External tanks being filled up OR replaced with new full ones when asking to get refuelled or re-armed ? I did look to see if this was a known problem or was the way it is meant to be, but i see posts by moderators saying that the external fuel tanks should be filled up or get replaced with full ones when re-arming, but in both cases neither of those options works for me in the 25T, as I mentioned above, I only fly the 25T thus I have only tested in the 25T, so maybe this affects or doesnt the other aircraft in LOFC2. Anyone got any ideas or info about how I can get those tanks filled without having to resort to ejecting and respawning. Cheers.