Caretaker Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 One question, those screenshots, are they an add-on for Falcon4? Very impressive cockpit shots. Yes, Falcon4. Very nice work, although of course it's only a 2D cockpit ;) One more thing, is the Ka50 going to have AFM? Yes. Caretaker ED Beta Test Team
SUBS17 Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 Ka50 with AFM, thats gonna be good :D Is that F-15E addon for Falcon got a proper Flight Model or is it a tweaked F-16 one? cheers Subs [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Caretaker Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 It is a tweaked F-16 flight model. Falcon4 has never received a "true" implementation of other planes' flight models, although I certainly cannot judge how true to life this F-15E flies in the end. The same goes for the avionics, they are F-16 avionics with a different range limit - again a limitation of using a sim that was only developed for the F-16 in detail. However using tweaked F-16 avionics in the Strike Eagle can probably be considered "close enough" for practical purposes ;) Not nearly as misplaced as F-16 radar images on a MiG-29 MFD... :P Caretaker ED Beta Test Team
Starlight Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 It is a tweaked F-16 flight model. Falcon4 has never received a "true" implementation of other planes' flight models, although I certainly cannot judge how true to life this F-15E flies in the end. The same goes for the avionics, they are F-16 avionics with a different range limit - again a limitation of using a sim that was only developed for the F-16 in detail. However using tweaked F-16 avionics in the Strike Eagle can probably be considered "close enough" for practical purposes ;) Not nearly as misplaced as F-16 radar images on a MiG-29 MFD... :P Maybe I'm wrong but only the flyables in LockOn have their own equipment and FM simulated in a realistic way. That is, other AI aircraft IMHO have a generic avionics suite tweaked for their own capabilities. For example I don't think the AWG-9 radar is properly modelled. The A2G radar functions are not even implemented in any aircraft... And also for the FM, I think that the non-flyables also share a generic FM tweaked for their own purposes. Not to mention that many actions are scripted and sometimes your wingmen actually get out of the flight envelope to do some things... And this also seem to hold true for AG equipment (SAMs and ship defenses). Maybe I'm wrong but this is the feeling I get with Lomac. So this is why it makes me smile when I hear people complaining about F4 models not being original but simply the F-16 one tweaked...
Caretaker Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 I'm not complaining, I'm explaining. Of course Lock On's AI objects have greatly simplified avionics - that has been the case in any flight simulation so far for good reason, and anything else would be pretty stupid design ;) This was however about flyable planes anyway. And while Falcon4 certainly goes into much more detail with the F-16 than any other sim has ever done with any plane, it is still a fact that the F-16 is the only plane for which this is the case, right? The original plans of Microprose to provide more flyable planes unfortunately never saw the light of day after the team was disbanded :( As I said, for some planes - F-15 or F/A-18 variants - the use of tweaked F-16 avionics and flight models are fair enough in my view. For others this approach is obviously a bit more problematic (an A-10 with full AA and AG radar suites is questionable). This is neither criticism nor a complaint, but an observation for someone who asked about this topic. There is no doubt that a lot of amazing work has been done for Falcon4 over the years despite such limits of the engine. Caretaker ED Beta Test Team
SUBS17 Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 I have to agree on that one, those guys did an amazing job. Its a real pity that team was disbanded. damm Atari :evil: [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts