Pyroflash

It is also a product that by all rights should, or rather would have been discontinued if it was any other company. It is nice that ED updates FC at all, I don't see how anyone can expect ED to spend a large amount of effort on it.

Awesome!

Yeah, it isn't a Klingon so much as it is a Borg. And by that I mean it assimilates the most important aspects of each of these instead of trying to match them outright.

No, and you wouldn't want that kind of future. And you wouldn't be forced to accept it either if you understood what happened specifically, at these "disaster sites". Increased technology usually carries with it increased safety margins, but those are just that, better margins for people to screw up. Just because you put a safety on a gun doesn't mean that it will stop people from accidentally shooting people. I know it is a harsh comparison, but look at the Fukushima reactors. The facilities were old, and newer facilities would have increased the safety of the facility and decreased the risk of problems arising. However, these facilities still exist in the U.S. as well, and it's not a solely isolated issue either. Nuclear power is expensive on the back end. It costs close to $2 Billion to commission and run a single modern reactor for about a year. Because of this costs, power companies may not even have the money available to reduce the risks by upgrading their facilities. On the other hand, the EPA can't exactly shut them down either. Millions of people would be without power for who knows how long, and good luck trying to tell these people it is for their better good. While they are waiting three or four years for a new reactor to be commissioned, people are dying from heat stroke anyways, and businesses lose out too if they can't run. Yes, you can build them better and safer, yes, you can mitigate the risks to people living in the area. But do you want to force them to be this way? Probably in due time, yes, over a period of say, 20 or 30 years, but to force them all to shut down and get recommissioned is silly. You can't expect people to come up with the money to do such a thing. The best you can realistically hope for is a start, a plan for dealing with future disasters more decisively, and for better fail-safes to be put in place for the current systems. The thing you should not hold your breath for however, is a complete upheaval of the current system. So, I think the important thing to remember is that all of the media hype has to be taken with a brick of salt, and a bit of common sense. You don't need a revolution for that. Only a fool would look to war as a first solution. Or if you meant a social revolution, but look where that got America. Do you really want another college hippie becoming the next Steve Jobs? Do you? :D

Uhh, I don't think this applies here.

You are right, I don't, but I do have to live with people in constant worry of having to lose everything, or having lost it already, and I will agree with you that it isn't something that is easily coped with. And to say that I don't worry like that makes it seem like I don't care. No, it won't, but the compensation received by victims of other natural disasters such as the tsunami or earthquakes, won't replace what they lost either. First off, the explosions weren't that bad. But then again, it wasn't the explosions that caused the issue, rather the explosions were a byproduct of the reactor heat. And I am not trying to say that no one has to worry about anything. And nuclear power is safe if handled properly, however what happened at Fukushima (and what continues to happen in many place around the world) represents a lack of control over the safety of current nuclear reactors and is a complete humanitarian travesty. No, I stopped having sympathy for people a long time ago.. What I do have however, is respect. Respect for people who can keep on living and who still have the will to build a new life out of the ashes that they used to know despite the hardships they may face right now. And that, at least to me, takes more courage than a lot of people have. Good video, thank you for that. However I will ask kindly that you stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that anything was safe. I said nothing more than that time will heal most of the wounds, and that the fear most people have over what is going on is largely unjustified. In the video, the teacher mentioned that in the building there was a background level of 0.09 mSV, this level is about the same as for an eight hour flight in an airplane. She also mentions that "It should be okay, because the GOVERNMENT SAYS THAT THE LIMIT FOR CHILDREN IS 1mSV". This is important, because it shows that she probably understands what she is reading, and what it means. If this limit has any bearing on U.S. EPA standards, it means that while precautions are necessary, special care needs to be taken to ensure that people do not scare themselves into a state of nuclear paranoia. "Uncontrolled fear is the worst enemy of mankind, because that, inevitably leads to blind hatred; and blind hatred knows no reason."

The difference is (I think), that the scorpion is a preferred system in many cases because it is less restrictive, less bulky, and displays only needed information, while the JHMCS system provides a whole host of useless data while being bulky and visually restrictive.

Oh, this was just an abstract statement to show how true facts can be significantly distorted for the purpose of scaring people. My favorite is the old Dihydrogen Monoxide joke. "Beware of the deadly chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide. What is it? it is a chemical compound that can cause suffocation if inhaled, causes burns, and has already resulted in the deaths of countless people. What is it really? Water". ..Or something to that effect anyways :D

Yes, Radioactive substrates are leaking into the ocean through the soil. Also, there were significant coverups performed to increase the public faith in the reliability of the Fukushima plant, when in fact it was not to par with current standards as much as they made people believe. However, I don't want to accuse the power company of trying to cover anything up after the fact, as there is no substantiated evidence to support this argument either way. it could just as easily be that that people are incompetent, or more likely that the news simply doesn't care enough. It can be fixed as much as the nuclear bombs could be fixed. Yes the area might be uninhabitable for the next 60 years, however the reactors can be decommissioned, removed, and contained, wherein the problem will solve itself over a number of years. I live over 5,000 miles away from Fukushima. So far our farms, water table, soil, food, and atmosphere are all irradiated, and many people are dead or dying from the harmful radiation. And you are right in saying that the fallout is everywhere, however it is important to know when factual reporting becomes fear mongering (if you have a link to an article that shows actual radiation levels in Becquerels for food products, soil, and water for your area, I would be interested in reading it). There is, and it isn't. it might be hard, or extremely difficult even. However if the government didn't want to deal with this eventuality, then it should have made sure the reactors were up to date. There is always a future, and if you spend your entire life in fear of what might happen, then nothing will happen. And the most harmful thing that can possibly be done is nothing at all. Sure it might not be the future you had in mind before, but it IS a future, and everyone has to make changes in their plans if they want to survive, nuclear fallout or no. Or you can take the third option and speak out against or do something to rectify the various indiscresions that led to the incident in the first place. "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

The T-Toad had some TV guided bombs, however I don't ever remember there being any TV-command guided missiles in lockon or DCS.

Just shoot a heater at it next time, that's what you have them for right?

Plus you don't want to simply forget about it and assume everything is fine while it is still leaking away.

The effect of Fukushima on the rest of the world is negligible. It self contains the issue by dissipation of material over the trillions of cubic meters of water and atmosphere. When the dirt is removed and the reactor is properly decommissioned, the problem will stop for the most part. Granted it won't be a quick process, but it won't take 60,000 years either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And yes, an arch (that is a LOT more than a simple arch mind you) has the potential to disperse vertical loads to side bearing structures (a very nice thing to have BTW), however, like all structures, it can suffer structural failure if loaded too heavily on the top (in the case of an extremely large one like the planned structure at Chernobyl) if it does not have adequate bracing. Add in severe weathering effects and difficult maintenance coupled with the already high load, and you have the potential for cracks and the like to start appearing. Though if built correctly it is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY that the arch will undergo a complete structural failure resulting in its collapse. More than likely however, it will start to develop cracks and imperfections in the enclosure which will render it ineffective when it comes to dealing with its intended purpose.

Yeah, about time we had a new one :P

The SH is its own refueling aircraft.

Happy birthday anniversary.

The situation is improving quite rapidly, and will recover within the century. Compared to the potential that this disaster COULD have represented, I think that the situation has improved remarkably. And while it is true that the reactors continue to leak radioactive material into the atmosphere, ground, and water, it is important to note that in addition to this problem being contained, and efforts being made to remove it entirely being underway, this situation is far from being another Chernobyl.

Easy enough, just say something bad on youtube about a song that you have open :D

Hate us for what? Unlike Chernobyl, the Fukushima incident is manageable (even if it takes time), and the area will recover within our lifetime. Chernobyl on the other hand is something that we have to deal with, but at least we didn't cause it.

Except this could be problematic when it comes to fighting with the suit on. The helmet would be heavy and restrictive for one. Enough pilots already have problems with the new generation JHMCS helmets. They say that they are too heavy under high G loads, and restrict the field of vision too much. A lot of them would much rather wear the "monocle" HMS than the full on JHMCS helmet because of this and a slew of other different reasons. In addition, the "space suit" isn't a G-suit, and this has the potential of introducing additional problems.

A regular tailwheel pilot: "Okay, I'm going to get it into a 3 point and let it settle down." A Pitts pilot: "I'm going to slip it in and force it to the ground until the damn thing stops moving. This thing settles in about as well as my ex-wife." P.S. The Pitts is an absolute blast. All the Extra 300's in the world couldn't replicate THAT feeling.

ArmA 2 maybe?

They are upgrading it to utilize more than one core. The sound already runs it a separate thread, and upgrades will continue to be made to the engine as it becomes required. The fact of the matter is that many things that the engine needs to do are not going to be able to be done by the GPU, so the code needs to be more efficient in order to make better use of the CPU. This however, is no easy task. Oh, and to see the benefits of having an F-15 over an F-22A, look no further than the F-15SE project. It is a low cost alternative based upon a proven platform. ED doesn't have the time, nor the resources to re-develop a whole new engine, but this does not mean that the current engine is a pushover. In fact, many of its limitations are purely limitations based on the need of the simulation itself. The fact is that flight sims are always going to be power hungry. They aren't going to have stellar looks, and those that do often have terrible performance.

I didn't know the mission editor was self aware. The product pamphlet said that it was powerful, but I had no idea.:lol: