britgliderpilot

Bingo. There is no other problem here - all you have to do is make sure that you've selected the right drogue. There should be a number in your HUD in refuelling mode that denotes which drogue you're set up to refuel from - by default it's 2 (the centre drogue), but by using the cycle waypoints key you can cycle it through all three of them. 1 is the left wing, 2 is the centre, and 3 is the right wing. Select the one you want to refuel from, and you're away . . . .

It's based on the strategy employed by the USAF when the F-111 entered service. You're going to be flying so low that only people sitting in a hole in the ground will be able to see the underside of the aircraft . . . . . so why bother painting it? :P This whole "flying above 10 feet AGL" thing is overrated, y'know.

Just a suggestion - Su33 FM with F-15 cockpit files? IIRC this is now possible in FC - got a link to the vid?

Oh, I can do better than that. The Swedish word for Quality Control is spelt SlutKontroll. Don't ask me how I know that . . . . . . Video was pretty cool, but sadly contained two languages I didn't understand! I think I've flown at least two of the missions featured in the vid, but can't remember why or when . . . . . .

It's an interesting question, for sure.

Heh - spot the Spitfire pilot amongst that lot :P

Glass cockpit usually means a digital display - the dial is replaced by an LCD screen or MFD. That's all. Having three big screens in your cockpit instead of thirty dials just looks neater - plus you can choose which to display and which not to, etcetera etcetera.

All F-15's - USAF, Israeli, and Saudi are the ones that scored, IIRC. I think an F-15 kill was indeed claimed by one of the Arab countries, but hey, the Serbs occasionally claim to have shot down three B2's and Hans-Joachim Marseille claimed to shoot down fifteen Spitfires in Africa on a day when no Spitfires were lost ;) A claim isn't everything! The better the aircraft the more chance of being shot down? Yes, rather a no-brainer . . . . . grin. If you have no warning at all that there's anything else in the skies, and suddenly an AMRAAM goes active five miles away, you'd have to be almost superhuman to dodge it. Possible, just about . . . . but I wouldn't like to rely on it. The Typhoon is an awesome aircraft, and I'm nothing less than delighted that we're getting it - however, the Raptor is still going to get first look/first shot against the Typhoon. After that . . . . . well, it's not really in any better a situation than an F-15 would be. Even with all the goodies, you need to be able to see the enemy to shoot at it - Typhoon's radar (even in later tranches) isn't going to be any better than the Raptor's, and the Raptor has a smaller RCS. 'Tis a bit bleak. Memo to El Presidente Tony (or soon-to-be-Presidente-Gordon): "Stay friends with the 'Merrikans"

Wait one second - isn't the F-15C's kill ratio, by some fantastic mega-coincidence, currently standing at 107:0? I don't doubt the Raptor's that good, not for one second, but I do think it's awfully convenient :P

It's a mockup, fitted at an airshow. The missile has not been test-fired, it is not in service, and it does not exist.

Well until they've finished developing the magic HMD, they do rather need a HUD . . . . even if future tranches/blocks will do away with it ;) Your best bet for the moment, anyway.

Sure - for the Ka50 :P Look, it's not just a matter of switching it on. You have to model and texture a complete 3D cockpit from scratch even before you start coding that in. If it was so easy to do all of this, we'd have Black Shark already ;)

mutter . . . mutter mutter . . . . muttermuttermutter grumbleGRUMBLE

Google isn't infallible, and neither is the internet ;) The Kh41 was supposed to be an air-launched version of a ship-launched missile. It's been made in mockup form and hung underneath an Su33, and you can look as hard as you like for evidence about it actually having been test-fired and entering service . . . . . but there isn't any. The air-launched missile known as the Kh41 does not exist. The ship-launched version does, though. The much publicised upgraded Su33 doesn't exist either. The shiny capabilities that most of the internet says it has are based on a Sukhoi brochure released some time ago, which basically detailed a proposed upgrade for the Su33. Note the word "proposed". That upgrade was never funded, and never took place. Versions of the Su27 can carry the R77 and precision-guided munitions - but in order to model those versions accurately, you need information which is currently classified. I think you underestimate how much work it takes to model these aircraft - the only aim for Black Shark is the Ka50. We'll have to wait for a future project for any significant further work to take place on the fast jets.

Finished watching it, IMO it deserves it's own thread . . . . More footage than I've ever seen of this aeroplane, including some extraordinary ordnance testing clips. The whole aeroplane is suspended from a frame by cables, undercarriage down, and weapons test-fired from there . . . . . amazing. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWWPVjA3juQ&mode=related&search=

. . . . I love YouTube. By following that link, you can find a whole three and a half minutes of Su34 footage - more than I've ever seen of that aircraft, all in one go. Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWWPVjA3juQ&mode=related&search=

Sounds about right. Have just been reading a book (that I wholeheartedly recommend to anyone interested in this sort of thing) about PMC's (whether you choose to call them bodyguards, Private Military Contractors, mercenaries, or evil-babykilling-bloodthirsty-dogs-of-war) in Iraq, written by a former SAS soldier. His general conclusion on the Iraqi insurgents: "Brave as hell - but can't shoot for shit" Book's called Highway To Hell - strongly recommend it.

In order: Bug fixes from FC - well they're not going to bring old bugs back in, are they? Kh-41 - the missile doesn't technically exist except in mockup form, so I'm not sure where you're going with that. New version of Flanker - errr, no. Black Shark is about a helicopter, not a prototype Flanker for which there are no flight manuals or performance data ;)

Yeah, the whole "money" thing tends to be rather important as regards all these shiny upgrades . . . . grin.

Mmmmmmn . . . . . yummy.

It runs like a dog on high settings if you're trying to run it on a P4 2.8! Upgrading *in anticipation* may have backfired on you slightly - on any single-threaded game you've suffered a significant (but predictable) loss in performance. If you had taken the A64 route, for example, you could have a 3700+ now and a 4400+ dual core when games were released that used the technology. Rather better than a 2.8 Have a look at this benchmark, purely for an example: ph34r teh Athlon 64!!! ;)

Official answer - it's less CPU-intensive to model the water this way, than break it up into smaller portions. I'm mildly surprised that maximum water would have that effect even on an X1800XT - what CPU are you running again? edit - whoops, in the sig. D 820 is a dual-core Intel P4 - OK. Given that Lomac, being a single-threaded application, does not run on both of your dual cores simultaneously, you're running Lomac on a single-core P4 2.8. Which isn't fast enough ;) edit twice - for a bit of a discussion of coding for multiple threads/processors, go here: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38610606/m/6401024654/r/3751015654#3751015654

(stuck record continues) What CPU's do you both have? :D

Hehehe, I know the feeling ;) Occasionally I get the urge to do something new and interesting with Lomac . . . . last couple of times it resulted in the Navy Supermod and a two-seater Su30 for v1.02. Very time-consuming, but very satisfying when you get it right ;)

Plastic model ;) I think it's a bit over-weathered, but DAMN! the detail . . . . .