EtherealN

To be fair, Brazil was part of the Allied forces in World War 2, sending division-strength forces to fight in the Mediterranean and Italy. (The declaration of war was issued against Germany and Italy on 1942.) If you mean Sweden, then sure, but in our case the key players in the design were cost, serviceability, and dispersion - it was made to be cheap to operate, easy to service in remote location, and be able to operate in a dispersed fashion on the road-base network. (Air bases in sweden are only peacetime storage of combat aircraft. Whenever there would be suspicion that a war might be imminent, all the planes would get hidden all over the country.) The drawbacks were that under the cold war specification of mainly dealing with territorial defense for sweden, range wasn't a high priority, but the E/F programme (the "Gripen NG") is actually looking at that as one of the specific things it is looking to improve (same way the C/D programmed looked at aerial refueling and full NATO compatibility as a practical pre-requisite to being exportable).

Did someone mention EDI?

Shift.

There was a sale over the christmas holidays, so you just barely missed a 60% off sale, unfortunately. It has not been decided when the next sale is to occur, as far as I am aware.

That's different. That is the forum itself telling you, on your browser, that you are able to use a different (and more mobile-oriented) browsing application if you so choose.

Related point: I don't remember the details (as far as they were made public) of the Superhornet offer, but recall that the Gripen offer includes that most of the planes will actually be built in Brazil, by Brazilian companies, with partnership in development of the variant and tech transfer. Basically, Brazil which already has a pretty big aviation industry is now getting an extra help into future capaiblities in developing fighter jets themselves rather than buying; IE, first step towards being a contender towards being a future superpower...

How so? Don't make the mistake of judging combat aircraft solely on a 1v1 or 4v4 combat matchup. There's a lot more that goes into it - not the least of which is how much it costs to keep the planes in the air. For example, in the case of the Gripen, it's a lot easier to deploy Gripens to for example remote amazon locations if you at some point want to since it requires less advanced maintenance - made to be serviced by only one trained personnel plus 4 conscripts - and doesn't need long runways. That could be a selling point depending on doctrine and terrain. Further, "buddy-launching" A2A missiles has been successfully tested on the Gripen, allowing silent launch of AMRAAM (now) and Meteor (in the future) by a Gripen without use of radar - feeding off of datalinked info from either other Gripens or from AEWC/AWACS. ...and, interestingly, Brazil already operates Erieye-equipped aircraft for that role, made by Saab Microwave Systems and being the same system Sweden uses for that role (but Sweden uses a different host aircraft). Basically, yes, if you have the money for it, the Super hornet is probably a better choice. But not everyone is swimming in the kind of cash the USAF has to spend, and there's a lot of things that can make something else a better choice.

A-Darter, being developed by Denel (South Africa) and Mectron (Brazil).

I think I recall a pricetag around like 10-30k dollars for the US F-15C ones, but now that you mention it - this might have been an early 80's pricetag which, adjusted for inflation, would become a good bit bigger. Though, I would also be prepared to guess that the phoon might have been given tanks with fancy materiels and paintcoats meant to reduce RCS etcetera, which would probably not be true (at least not to the same extent) of older jets like F-15C or Su-27. EDIT: oh, and: ...especially since they can be refilled from the tanker. :P

We're talking different things here though. No one has said they would drop them "for fun". But they certainly wouldn't hesitate to drop them immediately if they have any reason to, and their CO's wouldn't come running about the bill afterwards.

Rafale was also, apparently, even more expensive than both Gripen and F/A-18E/F to operate. (Though I'm unsure of the price source's provenance, was one of the articles I read around when the decision was made public, but I don't remember which one so I can't check it. What I remember off of the top of my head was $4000/hour on Gripen, $14000/hour on SuperHornet and $18000/hour on the Rafale, but that might be wrong - as I said, off of my memory.) The operating cost difference being radical (if the numbers were correct) between the Gripen and the Hornet/Rafale, and while it does of course pay for this in slightly lower performance in some areas, ease of maintenance and low costs in operation are no small thing; lower operating costs if nothing else gives the politician a chance to say that they were being financially prudent - or offer the option of getting more planes than would otherwise be acquired (apparently the Brazilian air force is trying to push this up to 100+ Gripens in the future, though those are the kind of unconfirmed stuff journalists can only source to "sources familiar with the matter" etc). It would also be interesting to know exactly what changed in the deal offered by SAAB. Gripen was originally ruled out, but SAAB made a new offer a while back to "get back in the race". And what we're seeing now is large parts of the production in Brazil, Brazilian co-development of the Radar systems, and SAAB making a big deal of how Brazil will be a key player in developing the NG. (Or perhaps it was just changes in offsets that made the difference, who knows.) Another synergy, btw: Brazil and South Africa are developing an A2A missile together, and South Africa of course already operates the (C/D) Gripen.

Checked it out a bit closer: Tapatalk reads the forum, and if your account is set to make your mail adress available, Tapatalk can see it, and Tapatalk itself can then send invitations.

Do you have "Everyone" set on Contact info in your account Profile Privacy settings? Also note that you can be sent mail through anyone that knows your name and has a google account, via their G+ integration (all Google accounts are now automatically G+ accounts). In this case, you can disable it in your Gmail settings.

Only if you make the server be made aware of and clear your local commands. Are you sure you want to give random game servers that kind of access to your computer? :P What you could do I guess is make a server option where screenshotting is disabled, and have the client read this option and disable screenshots locally from that. Except, then people will take screenshots with any of a million other means; remember, Print Screen itself is ACTUALLY an Operating System function. ...so now you're asking for the game server to be given access to the deep innards of your Operating System. Yeah... Not going to happen. ;) And as Frostie says: it isn't actually common for this to cause issues with this. What used to happen was that people didn't know for sure, so they'd blame any random lag that comes from completely mundane reasons on people trying to "cheat". Now, with that message popping up, they can't make that claim if/when they otherwise would since they would have been told if there was screenshot spam going on.

SSD longevity, aside from things like controller failure (which never was the problem anyhow), is pretty much a complete non-issue. An example of this: techreport has been running an endurance test similar to those done by several other sites, since something like september. At this point, all drives have written the equivalent of doing 100GB+ per day of writes for 10+ years... And they've all got lots of spares to go. Indeed, if I remember right from when I read the last update, only the 840 even has lost sectors (but those are still within the margins given by the overprovisioning, so there's no lost data; the affected sectors were just read over to some of the overprovisioned sectors)... Basically, the days when you had to worry are long over. You can use todays SSD's just the same as you previously used HDD's and you'll consider the SSD slow and obsolete way before it actually breaks down. (Aside from the normal issues that might arise from standard industrial production, but they are even less of an issue than with HDD's since there are no moving parts.) EDIT: And to compare with that - my Samsung 830 has, after some 15 months of use, done a total of 5.41 TB of writes. That's with using it as the primary download location, swapfile in place, all games and programs right there, etcetera etcetera. The computer is typically always on (I don't turn it off when I go to bed, etc) It uses the same type of NAND as does the discs that, in the aforementioned test, doesn't even start to reallocate after 500TB. At this speed, I would be likely to use it for some 100 years to reach a place where I should start to worry. I think something other than write endurance will make me switch drives before then - and even if not, I'll probably die before this drive gets to the 500TB mark... :P

No, because the problem isn't server-side. The screenshotting causes issues on the client that is taking the screenshots which, since that client is where simulation of his aircraft happens, causes issues when it gets momentarily confused when it doesn't "sync" correctly with the server anymore. This causes warping, which then causes missiles to get "lost". You would have to do this client-side, for all clients. You cannot ask a server for permission to take a screenshot on your computer. ;)

An F-15C costs about 15 to 30k dollars an hour just to operate (couldn't find a solid figure). An AMRAAM costs a fair stretch over a million dollars. Sidewinders some 700k dollars. Heck, even an M61 ammo load is over 3k dollars... Something as simple as a tank with a pressure bladder to accept air pressure from the engines is very very cheap when put in comparison to everything else an air force spends money on. (The actual technology is fairly simple and analogous to things that are standard equipment in many industrial applications.) I wouldn't think they'd drop them if they didn't actually have reason to do so - but that would probably more be a matter of not wanting to destroy people's houses, cars or even kill them than the cost of the thing; and if deployed forward of course the issue of having to fly in new ones.

Funnily enough, at least the blurry visuals you should be able to mod in through use of external ENB filters and using export.lua to get your location/mission data. :P

For a 7th gen, wouldn't that be pretty much the same thing? :P But no, it would be the _pilot_ in the casse of a 6th gen fighter. By the time we get the 7th gen, Skynet will already have won and wars will take place exclusively inside smart matter. :D

7th gen fighter:

You are aware of the fact that Brazil has one of the world's largest aircraft industries and will be building most of these planes themselves, right? And that the NG (even when it comes to swedish service) is planned to use european, not american, missiles? ;) But even better... Brazil makes it's own missiles. Most likely their Gripens will use Piranha and Darter for short-range (since they make them themselves), and for long-range they have both US and European options, and could probably also make them use the Israeli missiles they already keep in stock. Similarly, the radar system will actually be part-Brazilian as well (part swedish, part brazil, not american). Your argument would apply well to the A/B version of Gripen, and less so on C/D (since weaponry options then move away from being US-centric and instead focuses on european), not at all on an E/F where Brazil themselves will be fully tooled up to build the whole thing themselves.

Vann, you're missing something important: you are comparing with the C/D Gripen, which is actually not what Brazil is purchasing. They will be getting the Gripen NG (E/F), and as a development partner they get to be in on deciding exactly which specs it is going to get. The highlights are, however, longer range ("excess of 4000km ferry range"), stronger engine (20% up compared to the previous), supercruise in excess of M1.2 with A2A payload, AESA radar co-developed with Brazil. And just like the previous C/D version it is actually NOT locked to US missiles. Gripen already integrated IRIS-T and MICA and will operate the Meteor. It is also considerably cheaper to operate than the 35S, 18E/F or Rafale. Before you make allegations of corruption and/or ignorance, make sure you have checked your own facts first. Taking performance numbers for the Gripen C/D from Wikipedia and applying them in a comparison for Gripen NG is just not quite right. ;) Carlo Kopp is a whole different subject though. Check around a bit and you'll find a lot of debate about him and his website. Let's just say he isn't exactly considered an authority. :P

F/A-18C gives everything the Falcon has - plus carrier ops? :) EDIT: And Boberro, I should ban you for that avatar... :D

This will hopefully be handled shortly. In the meantime, note that you can download modules through the website as well: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/modules/ We are sorry for the inconvenience.

But I don't see how that is a notion AGAINST nVidia? They've got it NOW. You can get that feature NOW. Rather than later. And they made that happen. Whereas AMD were like "oh, but we've got it too... err... on laptops... but we'll keep quiet about that little tidbit until nVidia people call us out on it". :P