advise for buying Falcon 4

[suntrace1]

Go to your control panel to see your rep points. Rep points can be taken away as well as given. Perhaps someone disagreed with some of your posts.

 

Do people actually bother about them?

 

I really don't care about those points; they're really pointless in a sense. But what I do care about is, if someone dis-rep's me, I want to know why & from whom. Although I have a hunch feeling it's because of that F-22 topic and the article I mentioned, that didn't speak so much in favor of the whole project.

 

About FO: I wouldn't hold my breath; it's an ambitious project that won't be finished in a long time.

[23rd_SATAN]

Oh man, I just hope they make it into this SIM. I have faith but Its realy hard to believe they will actualy put their rpoduct out. I realize they will do it by several installements. But IMHO it just sounds so fantastic it makes me wonder if they will be able to be funded so much time between releases. Because making the whole word with a dynamic campaign system and several aircraft flyable, seems a guttsy way to go for a team that is only now making its first product, and for what I understood some of the team has never participated in a similar project before.

 

My best wishes for FO.

it may not be as hard as you think for them to model the entire world, as they are working from the X-Plane code base and X-Plane already models the entire world. I currently have ver 8.40 of X-Plane and the world comes on 7 dvd's/60 gigs of data. It looks incredible too.

 

X-Plane

 

X-Plane Global Scenery

[GGTharos]

I really don't care about those points; they're really pointless in a sense. But what I do care about is, if someone dis-rep's me, I want to know why & from whom. Although I have a hunch feeling it's because of that F-22 topic and the article I mentioned, that didn't speak so much in favor of the whole project.

 

About FO: I wouldn't hold my breath; it's an ambitious project that won't be finished in a long time.

 

Strange. Look in your CP, you should see what you were dis-repped for, if not by whom. THat kinda sucks if that was the reason, bringing up information, wether disputed or not, should notbe discouraged.

[23rd_SATAN]

Speaking of F4:AF here is a short clip I made for no real reaosn at all.

 

 

F4:AF clip

[Arbitrator]

how many aircrafts are planing to be flyable in FO? are there going to be russian birds or just a pure US thingy?

 

i even saw F22's in the screenshots, what's the story on that?

 

BTW, nice video satan.

[SuperKungFu]

how many aircrafts are planing to be flyable in FO? are there going to be russian birds or just a pure US thingy?

 

Please look at the faq in the fighterops site. IIRC, i remember reading a couple F-16s, and F-15s, and A-10. Those will be in the first release along with a couple training aircraft. Russian birds are not planned yet, but they said Figher ops will have a whole mess of addons (hopefully that's true) such as a navy pack with F-14 or F-18...etc. they have better access at acquiring the information needed to model these aircraft than ED. But if no russian planes do show up, that's why we still have ED :smilewink:

 

The F-22 is just modeled as an AI aircraft, but they did mention when its information gets released they would model it which will be a long long wait.

[Force_Feedback]

I have a quick Falcon AF question I don't dare asking at Frugals, why don't the labels work when you select realistic avionics? Is there any fix for this, so that I can have both realistic avionics and labels?

[23rd_SATAN]

I have a quick Falcon AF question I don't dare asking at Frugals, why don't the labels work when you select realistic avionics? Is there any fix for this, so that I can have both realistic avionics and labels?

 

I have no idea, but I understand why you are hesitant to ask at frugals.

[Force_Feedback]

I have no idea, but I understand why you are hesitant to ask at frugals.

 

I want to play the campaign, and without completely knowing all the radar modes and greatly sucking in WVR engagements against Mig-29s/Su-27s due to the AoA limit of 24 degrees in the damn F-16 (all the manuals say its maximum AoA is either 30 or 40, but that is I guess the max. airfoil angle of attack), so all the migs outturn me, and gun me down, or I run out of fuel doing loops and scissors endlessly :P This all is cause my SA sucks, the game is too dark, and I hate padlocking. Well, if these labels just worked with realistic avionics I'd be all happy and stuff.

 

Sorry for being OT, but I expect a flame barrage at Frugals, from all those smug guys saying that labels are gay and you should buy a trackir or use padlock, which IMHO is more unrealistic and annoying to use.

 

I think I've set a new record on n00bieness, I've flown Falcon 4.0 (SP2,3,4, BMS and AF) for over 4 years, and I still haven't passed one mission in the campaign, no kidding. Even if I stay in the designated taret area, my mission always fails because I stayed there too long or something like that.

[Woorzel]

FF

 

You have to click labels 'on' in setup. Then, once you are in the sim, click Shft+L for 'near' labels (up to 20nm I think), or Ctl+L for 'far' labels (>20 Nm).

 

 

No shame in using labels tho' - helps to build some SA I think, 'specially when you're learning :thumbup:

 

Martin

[23rd_SATAN]

I want to play the campaign, and without completely knowing all the radar modes and greatly sucking in WVR engagements against Mig-29s/Su-27s due to the AoA limit of 24 degrees in the damn F-16 (all the manuals say its maximum AoA is either 30 or 40, but that is I guess the max. airfoil angle of attack), so all the migs outturn me, and gun me down, or I run out of fuel doing loops and scissors endlessly :P This all is cause my SA sucks, the game is too dark, and I hate padlocking. Well, if these labels just worked with realistic avionics I'd be all happy and stuff.

 

Sorry for being OT, but I expect a flame barrage at Frugals, from all those smug guys saying that labels are gay and you should buy a trackir or use padlock, which IMHO is more unrealistic and annoying to use.

 

I think I've set a new record on n00bieness, I've flown Falcon 4.0 (SP2,3,4, BMS and AF) for over 4 years, and I still haven't passed one mission in the campaign, no kidding. Even if I stay in the designated taret area, my mission always fails because I stayed there too long or something like that.

 

yeah the frugals forum can be a bit unfriendly at times, but you should give them a chance. When I was learning F4:AF they were generally very helpful.

[Force_Feedback]

yeah the frugals forum can be a bit unfriendly at times, but you should give them a chance. When I was learning F4:AF they were generally very helpful.

 

Visited the forum over 3 years ago, didn't like it very much. At lease they can't call me a n00b based on post count/account age :P

 

BTW, I enabled labels, and F4 became a joy to fly, after a few practice gunzos VS a Mig-21MF, and later an F-15E (they didn't have a chance, the AI that is), I went on to engage the most expensive, plastic, duck-nosed snake-like abomination that costs about 360M USD a piece, well, the dogfight lasted 10 minutes, I was bingo fuel, but I got the bastard good. Nothing feels as statisfying as downing an F-22 with all its gizmo's. No, he wasn't on my side, and the AI was set on veteran :P.

 

And I discovered missiles CAN be eveded in falcon, wow, the things you learn when you pick a sim up again.

 

Thanks soo much for pointing out the key combo to toggle labels in-game (didn't even look for it, thought the options screen was all we had)

[SUBS17]

I want to play the campaign, and without completely knowing all the radar modes and greatly sucking in WVR engagements against Mig-29s/Su-27s due to the AoA limit of 24 degrees in the damn F-16 (all the manuals say its maximum AoA is either 30 or 40, but that is I guess the max. airfoil angle of attack), so all the migs outturn me, and gun me down, or I run out of fuel doing loops and scissors endlessly :P This all is cause my SA sucks, the game is too dark, and I hate padlocking. Well, if these labels just worked with realistic avionics I'd be all happy and stuff.

 

Sorry for being OT, but I expect a flame barrage at Frugals, from all those smug guys saying that labels are gay and you should buy a trackir or use padlock, which IMHO is more unrealistic and annoying to use.

 

I think I've set a new record on n00bieness, I've flown Falcon 4.0 (SP2,3,4, BMS and AF) for over 4 years, and I still haven't passed one mission in the campaign, no kidding. Even if I stay in the designated taret area, my mission always fails because I stayed there too long or something like that.

 

Ok the radar modes are no different to FC on the F-15 for a start there are only two A/A modes I use for BVR I use RWS or TWS which works the same as lockons F15 A/A BVR mode. For WVR I use the ACM mode and engage the radar by pushing the button above overide(this turns the radar on when in ACM mode). After the missile has locked a target use the AWACs to Declare since there is no IFF. As for dogfighting the corner speed of an F-16 is between 330-440kts. Outside this speed the aircraft is outside its optimal performance. As for your campaign missions failing that is strange, try easy missions with large targets like Airfields and buildings. And as flight lead make sure you give your AI wingmen weapons free and attack targets command on the ingress. Another point is always do a reccon on targets, record grid references of primary targets incase theres bad weather and bring the right weapon for the job.

[Shepski]

Please look at the faq in the fighterops site. IIRC, i remember reading a couple F-16s, and F-15s, and A-10. Those will be in the first release along with a couple training aircraft.

 

From what I understand the first release will have a turbo texan, T-37, and T-38 as flyable... all of which are meant for training with no combat capability.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Ah yes...the Turbo Texan...otherwise known as the Pilatus PC-9. Sweet little aircraft actually, and it'll be loads of fun to fly that C Talon as well. Its a kinda cool concept actually...but its gonna be for purists. We'll all get to experience the "when do I get to fly the real stuff?!" feeling.

 

Mr. Miyagi "You learn how punch, when learn how to...KEEP DRY!" :D

[pho3nix]

I know that this may be going a little OT, but with all the talk of people geting married to FO and having its babies:music_whistling: , (just to be clear i will get it also if it delivers what it says it will deliver) we all play LOMAC, we all have followed the progress of BS and most of us have used F4, so it is realy encoraging to me that we all love the absolute realism factor, but as far as i can tell interms of FM only LOMAC has demonstated this fidelity with FC and if we are taking the ED testers and ED themselfs seriosley the avionics is at worst going to match that of F4 but without the constraint of 2D - 3D pit.

 

What iam geting to is this. If BS is a supream demostration of what LOMAC can do, it is only a function of time, man power, money and publisity that we will get the F-16 and F/A-18 as stated on the Battle sim web site. (although they have taken this down shortley after posting that fact:P )

 

Just imagen, u are siting in the pit of one of these two figthers with ur TIR4 on, enbarked on a BARCAP, then u tilt ur head to look behind u and around the seat (6DOF) than back to get back in to the field of view of the outstandingly realistic hud:pilotfly: .

 

Even if no one is there, it is still a fealing to be experenced.

 

Basicaly LOMAC has the best chance of implementing this properly and faithfully... in my opinion any way;)

 

P.S. I also dont dont belive the clause of restricted information on these two fighters as ED are already working with the proper governing bodies to create the A-10C personal simulator.

[GGTharos]

While I cannot comment on how quickly ED will have BS, Tank Killers or the fighter project out (and I'm really keen on the fighter project! ;) ), it seems as if ED and FO will be in direct competition.

 

Both seem to be putting excellent offers on the table, and I believe that this is a good thing . I will likely have both sims on my HD!

 

Also, as far as avionics fidelity goes vs. F4 ... i don't know. I think the Ka-50 is pretty darned complex as is, just for navigation systems alone.

 

Although I believe it may not model every single switch like F4 does, on the -other- hand, pilot workload, IMHO, is very realistic, as is the immersiveness of the 'pit itself. Not -only- do you have a -lot- of switches to play with and they -do- do something, but the interaction between polayer and cockpit -rocks-.

 

And I -cannot- stress enough how -awesome- 6DOF is.

 

If your wingman hiding behind that pesky canopy frame? No problem!!!

 

Move yoru head to the side a little and there he is!

 

need to see over the nose for that landing? Move your head up!

 

Need to look over your shoulder?... Guess what ... you can :D

[pho3nix]

And I -cannot- stress enough how -awesome- 6DOF is.

 

If your wingman hiding behind that pesky canopy frame? No problem!!!

 

Move yoru head to the side a little and there he is!

 

need to see over the nose for that landing? Move your head up!

 

Need to look over your shoulder?... Guess what ... you can :D

 

:D :D :D :megalol: :yay: :clap_2: :D :D :D

 

Cant wait !

[Arbitrator]

does FO have 6DOF?

[GGTharos]

I think they'd be fools to not have it in there :)

[SUBS17]

From what I understand the first release will have a turbo texan, T-37, and T-38 as flyable... all of which are meant for training with no combat capability.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

There might also be F-16C/D followed by A-10 and F-15C/D and E later on as downloads from what I've heard. Most likely with 6dof(I think 6dof is minimum standard now for flight sims). I'm definately looking forward to EDs Destroyer(Fighter) sim whenever that gets finished and of course BS. Those 6dof comments by GG already got me drooling:D .

[Sleek]

does FO have 6DOF?

not sure..but EECH has :lol:..ok enough about eech sleek! :music_whistling:

[Floyd]

While I cannot comment on how quickly ED will have BS, Tank Killers or the fighter project out (and I'm really keen on the fighter project! ;) ), it seems as if ED and FO will be in direct competition.

 

Well, concerning future products from ED i would say the question is when we'll get

them and not if. Big difference IMHO. FO has yet to deliver anything to dispel my doubts - selling pretty shirts isn't enough :)

[Pilotasso]

Ah yes...the Turbo Texan...otherwise known as the Pilatus PC-9. Sweet little aircraft actually, and it'll be loads of fun to fly that C Talon as well. Its a kinda cool concept actually...but its gonna be for purists. We'll all get to experience the "when do I get to fly the real stuff?!" feeling.

 

Mr. Miyagi "You learn how punch, when learn how to...KEEP DRY!" :D

 

My brother told me that after flying the T-6 and the T-38 he had the impression although the T-6 had a much lower top speed it felt more powerfull in turns. He described me the T-38 like this:

 

"Man that thing is a HOG. Whenever I tryied to make a turn with any intent to manuever into someone, it craped itself up just to maintain airspeed. Sometimes I had my nose as low as 10 degrees down and the thing still bled speed like an airbrake. The wings are laminar so I always need to have AOA to keep airborne. Its a strange aircraft. When I turn and AOA gets higher the wings thump as if an elephant was kicking the airplane up. And it bleeds speed so badly I can barely make any hard turns at all."

 

He reported last week at our local air superiority squadron and was treated with a joyride on the backseat of a block 15 OCU F-16B. He made 2 VS 1 BFM, with the 2 aircraft being Block 15 and the oposition being a sole MLU aircraft.

He said to me:

 

"That was a sweet ride! It certainly blasts the T-38 away completely. We all had wing drop tanks and I went right up to 7.8G's (this conflicts with previous Info I had on CAT) and didnt blackout. The perfomance of the plane was surprising even with those drop tanks on. One awkward thing I noticed was how retarded the cockpit intruments seemed compared to the T-38C's. In the Talon I had all the navigation aids and neet lights and all. In this block 15 I have the HUD and litle more than that. Even the MLU is not better than the the T-38 in this respect but then I have not yet fully reviewed this plane, maybe sometime later."

[leafer]

While I cannot comment on how quickly ED will have BS, Tank Killers or the fighter project out (and I'm really keen on the fighter project! ;) ), it seems as if ED and FO will be in direct competition.

 

Where can I get more info on Tank Killer and Fighter Project? I've heard Tank Killer mentioned but never Fighter Project!

 

Also, as far as avionics fidelity goes vs. F4 ... i don't know. I think the Ka-50 is pretty darned complex as is, just for navigation systems alone.

 

Although I believe it may not model every single switch like F4 does, on the -other- hand, pilot workload, IMHO, is very realistic, as is the immersiveness of the 'pit itself. Not -only- do you have a -lot- of switches to play with and they -do- do something, but the interaction between polayer and cockpit -rocks-.

 

As my daughter likes to say when she sees me coming at her with a milk bottle, Mmmm MMmm MMmmmm... Translation, give me give me give meee...

 

teh

 

Damn it! I cannot wait for BS.