Sov13t

Not a real launch, nor a real aircraft. Animation. Edit: Here is the original:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1604411&postcount=301 ;)

From what I heard it was considered for FC3 release.

Total Combat Strike? На World of Tanks замахнулись? ну... ну...

Bring on AIM-9X! and helmet! MURICA!

holy $ it's crammed in there... wow.

I would pay for a 3D model, and already did with the 3GO conversion for DCSW. Given today's day and age, where multiplayer aspect of the game is far more attractive than doing things solo. External models of the aircraft we fly and interact with on regular basis in the game need to be of a certain level of quality - otherwise, at least for me, it lowers immersion and overall level of expectation from the simulation. That level of quality is not met by the 27 model that just happens to be what me and my fellow squad mates fly (used to fly - now that FC3 is out) in rather intimate formations, and even if flown outside of formations given FC3's missile mechanics (under developed) the fight normally evolves into WVR where external models, once again become relevant. To conclude, I feel that objects that are interacted with by players on a consistent basis, especially in multiplayer environment, must have a minimum level of detail in both 3D shape and texture to be considered worthy of the product. Thanks to Hungaro we now have a model that doesn't result in explosive puking when lining up for a fingertip take off. :thumbup:

Formation lights are awesome! :thumbup: Are they skin specific? or built into the model?

Not resolved: 18 - EOS scanning not functional in elevation I know you just spoke about it. However, I feel rather worried about removing it from the list of issues and then having the final product where our EOS is gimped to say the least. 21 - SU-27 native HUD "ИЗЛ" symbol overlaps over distance scale in BVR mode with Radar See screenshot: http://d.pr/i/ZZF2

С точки зрения БЧ, меня по сей день поражает умножение БЧ 77,120,АИМ-7 в 3.5 раз... когда БЧ Р-27ЭР значительно больше (лень лезть в методичку) как питарда в воздухе... даже в ГС2 когда Фека не была бронепоездом нужно было два или три раза попасть в ЛЮБОЙ самолет чтоб его точно уничтожить. И это даже не дистанционные взрывы... а прямые попадания когда первая ракета повредила самолет, а вторая и третия уже прямыми попаданиями "добивают" а он продолжает лететь и пускать ракеты... мало того еще иногда на одном двигателе добирается обратно на базу. Олег прав, что уж спорить :(

С Днём Рождения! :thumbup:

Running an EVGA 670 4GB with 3x 27" screens at 5900x1080 with no issues.

Неадекватно. Прямые попадания... и у тебя выбивает только гидро... или например САУ. Писал об этом ранее без реакции.

Thank you! :thumbup:

Can this be done for the SU-27 c0ff?

You are welcome, your works might just save this sim for a lot of pilots that would rather keep flying SU-27/MiG-29 than what we are given stock with the simulator [can't really call them models by todays standards].

A bit late to be asking these questions... multiplayer environment of the series has been decaying for years...

Right but in FC2 we had the same sound engine... and even if doppler effect was applied why would it be applied when you are spooling up and opening/closing the airbrake?

Was messing around with sounds yesterday, adjusting the gains a little bit to boost hearing of things like air brake going out and gears... Noticed that while the sound files are one thing... in game they are played back higher pitched and very different from source. A good example is the AirBrake sound, any explanation to this?

Сделай пожалуйста :thumbup:... думаю будет что обсудить... только отдельную тему под это.

No such decision exists...

Where it really gets interesting is the bits where OLS and RLS cooperate and use each other as backups. But it quickly gets out of hand and I can see why ED has tried to simplify it as much as possible in FC.

Понял! Спасибо.

I can confirm all of the information that has been said thus far by GG in relations to the basics of Semi-Active guidance is correct per the manuals/lecture notes I have on the SU-27P.

A bit of a spotty subject, and would require me reading up a little more as I do not have it memorized. As far as I remember, the radar switches to STT to authorize the launch (which is not a very correct term, the Russian radars have two modes for single target tracking one provides target telemetry for launches the second even more precise/stronger for missile guidance and painting and this is only activated after launch and runs for 60 seconds) Should the lock be lost or interrupted the missile is lost as the radar will not resume this mode until another missile is launched. Will the first missile resume guidance should second missile be launched - I do not know. There is a 10 second window where the radar will attempt to resume lock automatically based on last known target vectors and OLS information provided - it is also unclear whether during this 10 second window the missile be recovered or not. The seeker is passive and is only "receiving" so it is active the moment it leaves the rail. There are no set ranges here because target's reflections could be strong enough to be acquired way in advance, giving missile better terminal guidance.