192nd_Erdem

You "found" those screenies? :P

No,you don't have to :) :)

Ops,tasso is quicker :)

Although the title is "Su-27",the video is about the story of Sukhoi planes.Starting from WW2,the video details in Su-27.Although it doesn't provide much "in action" scenes like missile launch and bombing :) About emule link,I don't think it's the right place to discuss it.You can find it easily if you know what are you looking for though ;)

I have just found this and it has some nice AH1W guncam footage. NOW this shows how explosions and hit effects should be in 1.2. http://virtual-jabog32.de/index.php?section=downloads&subcat=30&getfile=295

What about something more complicated than just random explosions?Like tanks taking damage depending on which part of tank is hit,which weapon did that and proper damage calculations for weapons type? But it still be okay with random explosion effects if devs don't have time and resources for that.

No the original post isn't about that,you guys just talk about what you want to understand. This is the third time I'm saying,the original post is about vehicle damage modelling,and how to make a helicopter sim more interesting. About that "not burning" thing,I didn't say that,tanks DO burn depending on how they're hit.I just mentioned the current "burning" modelling is exaggerated and not realistic.I suggest reading my posts over and over :)

What he said. Please.

Guys,I'm not talking about if that video is fake or not and I didn't make this thread after I saw that.That's just here for reference of what happens when a missile like vikhr hits the tank. The point is,since we'll be more involved with ground combat;Lock-On needs some improvements over the last versions.Like vehicle damage modelling,infantry modelling and of course proper AI for those.Or else,like Locsta said;even that Ka-50 will get boring after you have done playing with switches and AFM. Right now,it looks like we'll be flying a complicated modelled helicopter in a really simple environment.

As the addons progress,we're getting closer to ground pounding business.I think the current vehicle damage model and weapon blast effects are good for a plane sim,but I don't think it will be sufficent for helicopter modelling. I read that weapons will have more advanced flight and physics modelling,but I haven't found anything about vehicle damage modelling. The current damage model of vehicles is very simple.Every weapon has it's own damage,and if it exceeds the vehicles hitpoint;the vehicle is destroyed.Note that you have to have a direct hit to destroy,except Cluster and some "overkill" bombs.This is most noticable if you're using rockets to attack a convoy.A salvo two S-8 launchers to a road isn't enough to take out those "M-118" trucks.The rockets fall just 1mt of those trucks and nothing happens.Just try that 25T quick mission and you'll understand. I don't expect a Hollywood explosion,but at least we should have those trucks damaged,and out of action. Also a damage modelling for tanks and APC's is needed.We should be able to damage tracks,take out engines,take out their turret and concentrate on fleeing ones.IMO this is a really important point for 1.2. Now,coming to cosmetics.With current modelling if you hit a tank and destroy it,a hell gate will open and burn the tank :) Here's what I mean. Tanks shouldn't "burn" after they are hit like that.If not disabled,maybe explosion of ammo storage.Also those "burning shapes" are very primitive. In this video,you can see what happens to an APC hit by Ka-50(with Vikhr I think). http://www.aviation.ru/www.rusarm.ru/video/Ka-50.wmv To sum it up,we need; *More detialed vehicle damage modelling. *Better weapon blast effects that will work with vehicle damage model. *Better destroyed vehicle effects. *No "Hollywood" explosions.Less flame and more dust in explosions.

ED is the only company that is experienced enough to simulate all those beautiful Russian birds,so I say I'm very happy with how they are going.Add that they have good sources from Russian Airforce too. I think it's the wrong place,wrong game to wait for something "Western".ED is a Russian company where it's main consumer base is CIS and Russia.Also,there's many people from West who "love" to fly those well made Russian birds. Maybe you guys should check out if "Figher Ops" will satisfy your needs.

Oh come on,can't you see the whiners around?There have been many posts on how "unbalanced" sides because they only add Soviet aircrafts right now...What a shame,they should have added a western aircraft 43534098x times modelled in other games :) Ok,sarcasm off.I just want a "true" Su-27 or Mig-29 sim,and only ED can do this :(

Now these videos are awesome,thanks chizh :) I don't think 10-12mt is too far,if it doesn't destroy it would at least make the aircraft disengage and try to save it's ass from second missile.

Russians broke my heart this time :P This thing looks like an ugly duck near those "piece of art" designs like Tunguska,Tor and Shilka :)

:) Of course it is civil,but pointless.What do think you can discuss after 35 pages and 345 posts?It's been explained many times in this thread why do they shoot down those missiles,but many of you still try to discuss it further because they don't work as they told you or you've seen from movies. And if ED had anything to say about this matter,they would;right after the first post.

I think Ironhand put the period. Isn't it the time to lock this thread,or are we going to continue discussing the same thing until we reach the 10k post mark here? Don't forget the endless discussions of the usual "I know everything,you dare to say me 'I know better than you!'?You *****=)(/%=)'^+=)." discussion we always have around :)

That's just the problem we have around.You're not alone.

I saw a Tunguska hit 3 mavericks with one missile yesterday,Russian engineers said they did it very overmodelled ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

Then it is 1966.

Well,I just did some testing too.I noticed both Tunguska,Tor or other SAM like KUB and BUK,doesn't fire at SEAD or SEAD like missiles like KH-25MPU,Kh-25ML and AGM-88. I don't if it's a bug,realistic or not;but only logical explanation I can give is,all the missiles mentioned above are fast missiles always approaching their target no less than Mach 2+. BUT both Tunguska and Tor fired at Kh-29 and KH-29T variations,which are nearly identical to Mavericks. They're longer,but they don't move as clumsy as Mavericks and Kh-29T's.Please don't look at their max speeds,but their approach speeds. I mean 25MPU max speed is slower than Mavericks,but a MPU fired at max range,when it's booster is silent approaches at Mach 2+.Though a Maverick and KH-29T makes it's approach with nearly 800km/h. I say way too slow for such a big missile to avoid detection ;)

Well Scud is a remake of the WW2 German design of V2.What do you expect? :)

Hmm... It would be interesting if they could hack and have AIM-54 on that heli... :P

Well,I'm looking forward to 1.2.Not because it will feature Ka-50,but it will be a big step forward for Lock-On series. A truly modelled aircraft with clickable pit and weapon systems,AFM for missiles,no more simplified FM for AI aircraft makes me more than interested ;)

Ah,the old "Undermodelled,Overmodelled!" matter... Cry,cry...

Try some Foxhounds instead. Then sit back and have your tea while hordes of F-16's get toasted.Mmmm... (no,I only have Sukhoi fetish)