power5

Still ugly. :megalol: And that FACT can not be argued. :music_whistling: Nice try, but I know Top Gun is real in every way a movie can be. Every maneuver is an approved and even preferred tactical move. F/A 18 is ugly, you are wrong about that. Tails look goofy being 10 feet in front of the engine outlets and at that awkward angle. Wings fold in the wrong direction as well. They are supposed to just rotate back. And really does folding the last 6" of the wing save that much space? How many f14 got shot down in Top Gun? Out of how many flying? How many F18 got shot down in behind enemy lines? Out of how many flying? I think you will see this data proves without refute the supremecy of the F14. :P :megalol: :pilotfly: All joking of course but still do not like the design of the f/a18.

Nope, no real yardstick as most people do not. It seems to have raised the bar though. :) I thought the f18 and f14 were pretty equal in dog fighting capabilities. F18 is still ugly :P

Falcon was the yardstick till DCS came along and introduced a brand new yard stick. I will take anything but f18. Not sure why, but that plane has never done anything for me. And it took over the spot of my all time favorite plane, the tomcat. From all I remember years ago, the F16 was a better plane than the f18 as was the F15. F18 can do some of the stuff the f14 did, but no where near the range or speed. Its the result of compromise. It is better than no other plane in the fleet at any job, but I guess if you average all mission types, it may beat the others. Oh, well it can land on a carrier.

I don't think so. I thought I remember that question being asked.

Not 10 years. Depending on the challenge of getting the frog into the newest DCS engine, you would have 2 years for the frog and Apache at most. Probably 1.5 years is my guess. So, if they make FC2 work with the new engine somehow, the fighter jets could be flown still, although not in the full fidelity DCS realm. But, would be a hold over till they could hit the market with a couple fighters before 5 years from now. Besides landing on a carrier, naval ops are really no different. Except the ground is always perfectly flat, save for the rogue wave or 2. In IL2 my goal for carrier landings was to basically crash the plane into the deck without blowing it up. :) That was about as close as I could get to a good landing. I always always messed up the glide slope.

Nice :) Few things I notice. 1) For lift off, ease the collective up and nose forward slightly. Do not pull back on the stick to lift off. B)Your AP dampners are all off after your initial crashes. This makes it remarkable that you were able to fly as well as you did. C) Your rotors would have lasted for about 1% of your total flight time and that is the end when you had 0 collective. That stick on your left is not a throttle, you do not just keep it all the way up. IV) Keep up the practice. it takes a long time to get the hang of this helo.

That is what I have been thinking. See if FC2 was made to work with the DCS series ongoing, then the sides would be less lopsided. Right now we have a US jet and RUS helo. No matter what is added next, the sides will be off. Again, not sure what it would take to get a frog into the new DCS engine, but it has to be less than a from scratch job. So, if they were to make a frog, then an apache could be just behind it. Could possibly take less people to get the frog into the new engine, and more people could be put on the apache team figuring out how to make 2 seats work. And that would lead nicely to many nice 2 seat modules in the future.

Again what gets me pumped about this Porno vid most is the fact that I can recreate all the scenes when I get the game and play it. I can not say the same about the hawx and ace comba trailers. Not sure if casual gamers understand this or not. Nothing in the promo was created in a "studio". That right there sets dcs apart in my mind and there is not another trailer on the web that can say the same. If you show me one I will conceed.

To be fair, Hawx2 and ace combat have very little in game clips. They have much better film quality because its almost all clips. GA achieved the same feeling using all in game video. If people understand that, I would think it would put DCS above ace combat and hawx. Anybody can call up a rendering studio to produce a movie that looks like the game its promoting. GA used the game to create a movie. The only added elements in his is basicallly the title sequences. That says a lot about the game to me.

Pretty sure the military does not have clowns dancing around in front of the AC during their training either. The instructors are not cracking jokes for the pilot when he is starting up a very expensive AC. The voice over guy is not in the AC, you are. He is talking to you through some god like radio because its a sim, not real life. Not quite sure how you can compare this to the BS tutorials. They were not interactive like this. I don't think its a failure because you want dancing gorillas on unicycles keeping you entertained. Glad to see I was not the only one thinking it was Samuel L.

Yeah, welcome, but you don't count with your F16 suggestion. :lol:

I love the abrupt change from the blowing stuff up action to the "finale". The music is calling for a war ravaged hog limping down the taxiway after taking a beating in a mission, but still bringing its pilot home. This would show off the damage modeling as well. The landing gear shadow of the hog on the tarmac at the opening of the quiet time looked like it was missing the tire shadow. Stunning work GA, very stunning in HD. Whats with missing those 2 sitting duck BS though? Have a soft spot for them and could not bring yourself to shooting them down? :P

I can not wait for the helios. Its the only thing that I will be able to afford to get a "pit" and get off my computer desk.

Video was made with Dx9 game footage I believe. Not sure if XP supports DX11 but I have been off of XP since vista launched. What is taking my damn download so long?

Yeah, check the input section for the helios cockpit.

Heh, I know X is the roman numeral for 10. X has been overused and has lost its appeal to me. I like project 10 at the end better so you are wrong. :P Now, why is it incompatible with my iPhone? I can not watch it while I am on the go and that will make the evening rush hour so much longer.

Nice video indeed. I will be downloading HD when I get home from work ONLY criticism from the you tube version is the title in the beginning is project x. Project 10 sounds better and looks better to me on screen in the end.

What is that on top of the prop plane in the beginning

Amazing work. Only thing that could help it would be to make it a bit "used" looking. Its pristine.

Can we run unwindowed with ATI cards? I have a 4890 not a new eyefinity equipped card.

I have edited config files in win7 notepad with no issues. Not sure if I have done a lua file though. Sound files though. Are they different?

How do you provide CAS at 20k? With a laser guided munition? Ok, now what about very hostile CAS where the good guys can not sit for 5 minutes painting a target? What needs more training? Picking off targets at 20 miles with smart weapons where you simply push a button, or getting in close and visually identifying the target and neutralizing it. As for F14 using guns. What is the turning radius of a F14 at speeds where it will not get blasted to pieces by a guy with an Ak? A10 could make 3 passes with guns before the F14 returns. Why do people keep asking the A10 to do stuff its not designed to do? Taking on a Su33 or something is not what its meant to do. That is for the F22 or F16. Lets see a F22 circle the hot zone at a couple thousand feet or less taking AAA and protecting the forces. Dont get me wrong. I love the F14, F15, F16, F22, but that letter in front means its not really supposed to get in close. And for a combat "Game" I would like some action. If I want to fly around at 20k-40k without usually seeing the enemy, I will fire up FSX.

That was the setup I used. Not same resolutions but small monitor for abris shkval and large one for main view. Though mine did not match in height. There used to be a very detailed write up on this site on how to write the lua file but I can not find it any more. Someone even made a simple excel file that allowed you to input your monitor dimensions and it would output the exact lua code needed. I caught myself looking at the main screen abris more often than I thought still. And I had background clutter since the abris and shkval are different orientations. You get some junk in the void area where the shkval is not shown. Can be a bit distracting.

No one but us care about a low quality stick. They would want to make money like every other business. They are making $0 on sales of MSFFB2 right now. So cashing in on the name for a few more sales would mean nothing. Okay, so they get a bad name, are gamers going to switch to apple? Even if they do, to play the games they still need to buy Windows to run parallels, or they could try linux if they know what they are doing and want to mess around even more before playing PC games.

Wow, what kind of super computer is needed to show all that ground clutter and traffic? The night landing pictures are amazing.