britgliderpilot

Can it do DoS attacks on enemy aircraft? :D Your point is noted on crisp digital avionics - they're brilliant - but there's still a point at which you have to fly somewhere in order to drop a bomb on a target or shoot a missile at somewhere. The Aardvark's excellence was in the strike role - the Super Airbrake apparently isn't so good at carrying heavy payloads long distances.

yuo lie!1!! it's also the result of evil oppressors and unfair sanctions that prevent weapons parts from being imported into the country, thus aircraft are unservicable, making it unfair!1!!! Read Venik's site much?

So you're saying that stealth gives the ability to give a devastating first strike? Well yes . . . . but I don't see how gaining that ability leads directly to war. Your Cuban missile case is a bit of a moot point - the USA had missiles in Turkey, next door to the USSR, before the USSR put missiles in Cuba. In this case the USA had the decisive first strike capability - it didn't use it. Neither has the USA started a war purely because it had the F-117 or the B-2. Yes, you should try and prevent your enemy from obtaining a decisive first strike weapon before you - but that's what foreign intelligence is about, keeping abreast of a nation's progress in that area. It still goes on, y'know.

But the million-dollar question . . . . . Who would win in a fight between an F-22 and Chuck Norris?

Just a general observation, no accusations here ;)

What would "a real competitor" be? Most of the middle Eastern wars have been against older tech aircraft. Seems there's equal numbers of people who whine about that and people who whine that the aircraft doesn't make a difference. Shrug. F-15s did shoot down at least one MiG-29 over the Balkans, but again you'll get people saying it was unfair for one reason or another. Also remember that training and an integrated war machine are part of the equation - a country with F-15s backed up by AWACS, datalink, and 300 pilot training hours a year would most likely wipe the floor with a country equipped with F-15 but which could only afford 30 pilot training hours a year.

Except the F-15's combat record? ;)

(looks shifty. hides paperwork in safe under bed) . . . . . seriously, with the publicised upgrade program of a whole ten Flankers (and perhaps a bomber) a year, I really don't think they've got the cash to spend on an advanced fighter program.

I'm not quite following your logic here . . . . You're saying that the F-22 being better than everyone else is going to cause a war between the nations with aircraft of lower capability? For the record, the Russians can't afford a new aircraft, let alone a stealthy one. Seen their air force spending recently?

I give this thread . . . . one and a half pages? :P Stealth is certainly a decisive advantage. It's also bloody expensive. Most other countries just can't afford to match that level of R&D investment - and that's something that's been going on since the 60's, with the Blackbird and the F-117. In the event of a future airborne conflict, it's likely that an F-22 would defeat most threats you can see at the moment - but in the majority of cases, the know-how and funding for others to produce an aircraft of that capability Simply Doesn't Exist. A mistake implies you could have done something differently - I don't think that's true here.

In a modern fast jet, where adverse yaw doesn't tend to be so much of a problem, using rudder in turns is pretty much unnecessary. You just roll and pull - put the lift vector where it needs to be and yaw isn't a problem. It becomes more important when flying at higher angles of attack, vital when recovering from spins . . . . otherwise I don't use it much. Landing can be done just fine without it, as can air-refuelling - I hear a lot about using it to line up on strafing runs, but I've never really used it that way. Shrug. It's a big deal on sailplanes because of the magnitude of the adverse yaw effect, mainly due to the long span - I occasionally fly a 20m DG-505 that pretty much requires you to lead every turn with rudder. Flying the ASW-22 in Condor is even worse - there just isn't enough rudder authority to keep the yawstring straight, the wings are that long. But modern fighters . . . . thin wings, control surfaces deflecting into the airstream whichever way they go . . . adverse yaw isn't nearly so much of a problem in "normal" flight. Changes a bit in high-lift situations.

Yeah, it tends to do that :P I was wondering why the skin looked odd - I updated it for the Navy mod, changed it to the version with a solid roof panel for the rear cockpit.

It's not just the vehicles - you get more of an opportunity to see the 3D detail that's always been present in towns and cities. There's some really impressive stuff - although I seem to recall F2.5 went down to the level of flowerbeds and (unanimated) barriers at level crossings. Not seen those in Lomac.

Don't think it's giving too much away to say "a bit of both" :P If there's a new feature or something's been deliberately changed then we'll be asked to investigate it, otherwise it's up to us. Knowing something's broken requires detailed knowledge of how it SHOULD work, which as you can probably guess from the startup videos makes spotting broken things on the Ka50 a bit of a challenge! The NDA stops me revealing specifics, that's up to ED's staff - but in general terms, the complexity of the featureset and any features still in development complicate things even further. A lot of the time it can be hard to tell a possible bug from a clever feature . . . .

Perhaps true, but: That aside . . . . the general impression of the reports I've heard is that the Aussies have got the thing working as it should have done all along :)

No. The AI has a magical ability to accelerate, even in aircraft that should be AFM . . . . If you take the Su25T and tweak a game file so it can spawn on the Kuznetsov, a short-run take-off will result in a very short flight of about 50 feet straight downwards off the ski jump at a speed of 120km/h. However . . . . if you take an AI Su25T and do the same thing, it somehow manages to accelerate to 200km/h before reaching the edge of the ramp. I guess it's easier to program it that way than to simulate post-stall, oh-crap, out-of-control-splashes for the AI. In any case, it is plenty possible to take off from the American carrier in the Su33 . . . . use the chocks provided, use full afterburner, use flaps, be good at holding your aircraft on the AoA limiter, and just for good measure try not to do it at maximum weight . . .

If the A-10 ANG trainer's avionics are as complicated as those in the Ka50, integrating it into the code now would be a serious chore . . . . I won't beg for mercy on behalf of the beta testers, but just testing the product would suddenly take twice as long!

Errr . . . . . obvious question . . . . Isn't there an option to recalibrate it hidden away somewhere? My X45's at home, but I'm sure there was an old-fashioned way to recalibrate, should set the bottom movement limit to zero throttle . . .

I couldn't bring the figures to mind immediately, so quick Googling says . . . . F-111 combat radius is 1160nm, with 14,000kg of ordnance attached. Tornado combat radius is 750nm, with 9,000kg of ordnance attached. I'd take the Aardvark ;)

Not a permanent decision, it's just a transition aircraft for the JSF :) And to be fair . . . . nothing's got the same capabilities as the F-111, certainly not in the low-observable market. Shame, but there it is.

Somewhere I've got a copy of some public US Army Helicopter battlestuff. From what I remember, the general principle was to set up, take two shots, and then go find another place to hide . . . .

Just out of interest, have you fired an email to ED about the legalities of using their product to advertise yours?

Hmmn. I don't remember that. Got link?

. . . . and to actually answer the question, yes the Su27 does bounce on landing, as do most fast jets. You don't see this in Lomac for the reasons Pilotasso gives. The landing gear is effectively a damped spring, to absorb the vertical velocity of the aircraft when it comes into contact with the runway. It's just not perfectly damped, so you still do get a bit of bounce.

(looks embarassed)