Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1 year later...
  • Replies 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
pic1_8.jpg

 

I'd say lock on simulates the flight performance of the real F-15C very well (compared to the figures in the real Dash 1 manual). There's always room for improvement of course - like AFM. Avionics/Weapons Systems are another story and can only be simulated to a certain degree due to classified info limitations and other things in that area. On a side note - and not to hijack the thread - has anyone noticed that IRL most US aircraft release one flare at a time and not two at the same time like in the game?

 

If accurate, this data shows that LO's F-15 is slightly better than RL one!

However, maintaining a cornering speed with F-15 in LO leads to G-Loc but that's more related to LO's G tolerance modeling! :doh:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

There are other issues too - you're seeing a graph under very specific conditions, which make the F-15 look good, but in LO, MIL is underpowered, thus limiting high-altitude maneuvering - also, and this affects all aircraft - stores drag is attrocious in LO and kills performance on everything.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

Embarassing for whom?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

I haven't seen anyone else here attempt to write a flight sim ... let alone attempt to 'get it right'. ;)

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
There are other issues too - you're seeing a graph under very specific conditions, which make the F-15 look good, but in LO, MIL is underpowered, thus limiting high-altitude maneuvering - also, and this affects all aircraft - stores drag is attrocious in LO and kills performance on everything.

 

On the other hand, lowering the gear on all flyables doesn't disturb airflow as it should and doesn't create enough drag!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted
On the other hand, lowering the gear on all flyables doesn't disturb airflow as it should and doesn't create enough drag!

So it seems, only the folowing factors like 20 ton of an aircraft is not 1 ton of sesna the diferece in terms of lift/drag as in 100kph and 300kph and the diference in power settings to 80-85% + angle of attack (related to the lift and thrust).

How does that relate to the landing gear drag where if you double the speed the drag would quadruple?

Sound like some kind of maths doesn't it?

I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.

Posted

It's funny how people like to equate software to cars.

So, where were you to tell ED they had done the F-15 wrong when it was released?

 

The moral of the story is, simulating something complex requires a lot of knowledge; simulating something complex and in large parts classified is an error-prone process.

Finally, adapting it to the limits of your simulation engine is the nature of the beast.

 

It was 'common sense' that everyone thought the R-27ET was a datalinked BVR weapon, when in reality it wasn't so. The moral of this story is that 'common sense' without actual knowledge can be pretty worthless.

 

Further, you have a right to say anything you like, but conversely, it doesn't mean you're correct. ;)

 

I had a plumber at my home last week. I'm not a plumber but I could tell what he was doing wasn't going to work. I knew there would be a leak. There was. The moral of this story is that sometimes common sense bypasses any technical prowess. I also had a right to say something because I paid my plumber. People have a right to complain about the F-15 in this sim. It's blaringly obvious that there are huge problems and that there are many things that need to be fixed. Black Shark may supplant Flaming Cliff for some here, but not all of us.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
It's funny how people like to equate software to cars.

So, where were you to tell ED they had done the F-15 wrong when it was released?

 

The moral of the story is, simulating something complex requires a lot of knowledge; simulating something complex and in large parts classified is an error-prone process.

Finally, adapting it to the limits of your simulation engine is the nature of the beast.

 

It was 'common sense' that everyone thought the R-27ET was a datalinked BVR weapon, when in reality it wasn't so. The moral of this story is that 'common sense' without actual knowledge can be pretty worthless.

 

Further, you have a right to say anything you like, but conversely, it doesn't mean you're correct. ;)

 

As I recall, from the initial release to the release of the last patch and every patch release in between, there has been a chorus of ED's customers giving constructive criticism about various flaws in the modelling of LO. Nobody is bemoaning the fact that ED didn't get it right the first time. The problem is that they STILL haven't got it right and there are only a few of us clinging to hope that there will be another patch. Your reference to the ET and "common sense" is arguable. But the main thing is that ED did something about it, unlike other aspects of the modelling.

 

Who said anything remotely involving cars? The main point there was that you don't have to write code to see that something is modelled incorrectly in a sim. And no one that paid money for the product should be expected to keep quiet about its flaws. GG, I know you, probably more than anyone else, have given ED results from your research and testing. I hope ED never responded to you with, "We haven't seen you attempt to write a flight sim ... let alone attempt to 'get it right."

  • Like 3
Posted
I haven't seen anyone else here attempt to write a flight sim ... let alone attempt to 'get it right'. ;)

 

Here you go GG.

 

FLIGHT SIM.

  • Like 1
Posted
Here you go GG.

 

FLIGHT SIM.

:D You forgot "A"; A Flight Sim :megalol:

  • Like 1

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Posted
See how he didn't even get that right? Imagine ED's difficulty!

 

Sheer Brilliance! :megalol::megalol:

  • Like 1

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Posted

Waaaah, I can't rep RT any more :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
See how he didn't even get that right? Imagine ED's difficulty!

 

Well your wrong, "A" or "The" or "That" is subjective to the subject "Flight Sim" so your answer has no relative or lingwistic relivance.

 

In all logical sence ED has "Programed" "The" or "That" or "A" or "This" "Flight Sim". Which we all are wrong because "IT" the "Flight Sim" has a distinctive name "Lock On"

 

So, eeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrr..............aaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........?????

 

:doh::joystick:

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...