Is there any hope of ever seeing the F-15 intake ramp fixed?

[Rampstrike]

Maybe I'm the only person in the whole LOMAC universe bothered by this, but bothered I am. The problem I'm referring to is how the F-15C's intake ramp stays stuck in the full open/up position no matter what the flight envelope, while all of the AI F-15C's seem to have intake ramps that move to the down/smaller profile position.

 

Is it too much to ask that this minor tweak get fixed in the midst of the myriad of other fixes being done? Seems that if it works on the AI aircraft, it should work on the players' as well. I'm sure the biggest problem is just that nobody really cares... but, being a big fan of the Eagle, it's something I'd like to see fixed. Even if it's just stuck in the down position, I think it would look better...

 

Feel free to flame away, but seriously... can this minor annoyance be fixed?

 

Thanks,

Rampstrike

[enigma6584]

Re: Is there any hope of ever seeing the F-15 intake ramp fi

 

Maybe I'm the only person in the whole LOMAC universe bothered by this, but bothered I am. The problem I'm referring to is how the F-15C's intake ramp stays stuck in the full open/up position no matter what the flight envelope, while all of the AI F-15C's seem to have intake ramps that move to the down/smaller profile position.

 

Is it too much to ask that this minor tweak get fixed in the midst of the myriad of other fixes being done? Seems that if it works on the AI aircraft, it should work on the players' as well. I'm sure the biggest problem is just that nobody really cares... but, being a big fan of the Eagle, it's something I'd like to see fixed. Even if it's just stuck in the down position, I think it would look better...

 

Feel free to flame away, but seriously... can this minor annoyance be fixed?

 

Thanks,

Rampstrike

 

It is a question of legitimate priorities. Does the man-hours and expense justify work on this issue compared to other issues with the simulation and other projects ED is working on? I say it doesn't.

[britgliderpilot]

Re: Is there any hope of ever seeing the F-15 intake ramp fi

 

Maybe I'm the only person in the whole LOMAC universe bothered by this, but bothered I am. The problem I'm referring to is how the F-15C's intake ramp stays stuck in the full open/up position no matter what the flight envelope, while all of the AI F-15C's seem to have intake ramps that move to the down/smaller profile position.

 

Is it too much to ask that this minor tweak get fixed in the midst of the myriad of other fixes being done? Seems that if it works on the AI aircraft, it should work on the players' as well. I'm sure the biggest problem is just that nobody really cares... but, being a big fan of the Eagle, it's something I'd like to see fixed. Even if it's just stuck in the down position, I think it would look better...

 

Feel free to flame away, but seriously... can this minor annoyance be fixed?

 

Thanks,

Rampstrike

 

Meh?

 

I've never had that problem . . . . the one I see is that the AI control surfaces and intake ramps stick while mine continue to work.

 

 

In any case, I'm agreed that there are slightly more important things for ED to be doing right now . . . . :wink:

[Rampstrike]

Hmm... legitimate priorities.

 

I guess that makes sense, to a certain degree. I suppose, for example, that having the choice between flashing or steady beacons on an Su-25T is far more important than having a working intake ramp on an F-15C...

 

As for me, MY priorities would have been to make this fix way ahead of adding an Su-25T -an aricraft I have absolutely no interest in flying - to the mix, but hey, we all have differing opinions, right? Well, if this is something the developers don't want to fix, then they should at least make the tools available to the modding community so that a fan could fix it. I'm sure someone would have a working solution within a day or two...

 

Thanks for the help, I guess.

 

Cheers,

Rampstrike

[coldcrew]

intake what? nobody cares about that, not at the cost of 1 or 2fps for silly eye candy anyways. Next you'll be asking for spinning turbine and vapor trails when high g's are pulled :twisted:

[britgliderpilot]

As for me, MY priorities would have been to make this fix way ahead of adding an Su-25T -an aricraft I have absolutely no interest in flying - to the mix, but hey, we all have differing opinions, right? Well, if this is something the developers don't want to fix, then they should at least make the tools available to the modding community so that a fan could fix it. I'm sure someone would have a working solution within a day or two...

 

Thanks for the help, I guess.

 

Cheers,

Rampstrike

 

Lessee . . . . Russian developers, being paid by Russian publishers, to put in a Russian plane in order that they can sell a sim to the Russian public . . . .

 

What was that about legitimate priorities again? :wink:

 

 

What we would need to try and fix it is the source code to Lomac. Because it would be a clever idea for ED to release that, really . . . . .[/sarcasm]

[Rampstrike]

Very well.... so the short answer is, "No, there is no way to fix it, nor will there ever be."

 

Nice to know my opinion is taken seriously. I'm sure no one has ever asked for a minor graphical fix to LOMAC before... :roll:

 

As for the eye candy argument, hasn't that been LOMAC's biggest selling point all along? It's certainly not for the sense of immersion in a dynamic combat environment...

 

Well, thanks for the mostly civil answers, Brit. At least I know now for sure that I am indeed the only person playing LOMAC that is bothered by this trivial matter.

 

Cheers,

Ramp

[Pilgrim]

Take it like a man 8)

[TekaTeka]

Rampstrike, you are not alone.

 

I'm sure no one has ever asked for a minor graphical fix to LOMAC before... :roll:

I am sure someone asked it in UBI forum before.

 

At least I know now for sure that I am indeed the only person playing LOMAC that is bothered by this trivial matter.

I am bothered. And a lot of Japanese are, too. We have Eagles in our country.

It is very odd that the player's ramp position and the AI's ramp positon are different in same formation.

I hope it will be fixed in future version.

[Guest DeathAngelBR]

Maybe it's time for Japan to go with russian planes, eh?

[britgliderpilot]

Very well.... so the short answer is, "No, there is no way to fix it, nor will there ever be."

 

There is no way for the community to fix it . . . . ED might have a play with the code at a future date, but right now it isn't where their priorities lie.

 

Programming legend has it that these bugs appear spontaneously . . . . finding the precise problem that causes the AI's control surfaces to stick in the wrong position could take forever. Fingers crossed for some point in the future, though.

 

 

Nice to know my opinion is taken seriously. I'm sure no one has ever asked for a minor graphical fix to LOMAC before... :roll:

 

As for the eye candy argument, hasn't that been LOMAC's biggest selling point all along? It's certainly not for the sense of immersion in a dynamic combat environment...

 

Well, thanks for the mostly civil answers, Brit. At least I know now for sure that I am indeed the only person playing LOMAC that is bothered by this trivial matter.

 

Cheers,

Ramp

 

I'm not particularly bothered about the intake ramps - however, the exact same bug is responsible for odd flap positions on the Russian aircraft, which I do find mildly irritating. Nothing like your wingman flying with full flap at Mach 2 to make you curious.

 

It would be nice to have it fixed . . . . but I'm willing to wait a while.

[F l a n k e r]

Rampstrike, you are not alone.

I'm with you! Plus the internal ramps are absent even on the Flanker...

(Downstream of the intakes are moveable

ramps which control the amount of air admitted to the engines)

[britgliderpilot]

Rampstrike, you are not alone.

I'm with you! Plus the internal ramps are absent even on the Flanker...

(Downstream of the intakes are moveable

ramps which control the amount of air admitted to the engines)

 

Yeah - I finally figured out what the dial that indicated the internal ramps in the Flanker was, and now it turns out it doesn't even do anyway?

 

 

Technically, the ramps don't control the amount of air admitted to the engines - they control the speed of the airflow into the engine. The engines still want to eat the same amount, but jet engines don't like being fed air at supersonic speeds . . . . the ramps do clever stuff with shockwaves.

 

Anyway, that's an add-from-scratch feature, not a feature to be fixed . . . . comes under a different heading.

[Guest ruggbutt]

Having "modded" the demo w/the other planes it looks to me like it's been fixed. Works great on my rig.

[F l a n k e r]

Technically, the ramps don't control the amount of air admitted to the engines - they control the speed of the airflow into the engine. The engines still want to eat the same amount, but jet engines don't like being fed air at supersonic speeds . . . . the ramps do clever stuff with shockwaves.

 

The function of an air intake of a jet is to slow down the air flow compressing it in the same time before it enter in the compressor. For example when the throat of the intake is in choking (i.e. M=1) we have the max amount of capacity of the air intake. Because of that the air flow upstream is modified.

Thus, ramps control the amount of air admitted.

And no, in general the engines don't want to eat the same amount of air. For example starting the jet the airflux is not sufficently compressed and than it must be reduced.

 

Anyway, that's an add-from-scratch feature, not a feature to be fixed . . .

 

And then?

[F l a n k e r]

(Please read the previous post)

And we have… the internal ramps picture! (Sorry I don't have any better...)

 

 

1-first convergent ramp

2-bleeding holes (I think) or boundary layer trip devices

3-second convergent ramp

4-divergent ramp

5-sing of the max deformation of the ramps

6-Pitot tube (I think)

7-compressor

 

Hope this clear what I mean.

Can ED add them in the air intakes of the F-15, Su-27 and so on? TIA.

[bflagg]

They're not putting the F15 to what it is supposed to be and you wan't them to fix eye candy :?:

 

no offense.. but I don't get it.. :?: :?:

[Guest ruggbutt]

Read my post again.........................

Idle

Part Throttle

Full Throttle

[britgliderpilot]

The function of an air intake of a jet is to slow down the air flow compressing it in the same time before it enter in the compressor.

 

Yes.

 

 

For example when the throat of the intake is in choking (i.e. M=1) we have the max amount of capacity of the air intake.

 

Yes.

 

 

Because of that the air flow upstream is modified.

 

Seeds of doubt begin to form . . .

 

 

Thus, ramps control the amount of air admitted.

 

Bugger, you're right . . . . I didn't follow that through all the way before posting. Thought you were speaking from the uninformed perspective . . . . was wrong. :)

 

However, the primary function of the ramps is not to control the amount of airflow into the engines . . . right?

 

 

And no, in general the engines don't want to eat the same amount of air. For example starting the jet the airflux is not sufficently compressed and than it must be reduced.

 

True again - but when talking about accelerating through Mach 1 the primary problem is that the engines don't like supersonic flow, not the difference in amount of air flowing into the engine.

[F l a n k e r]

Thought you were speaking from the uninformed perspective . . .

 

Oh, sorry, I am only an Aerospace Engineer... I don't know so much about aircrafts... :goodman:

[britgliderpilot]

Thought you were speaking from the uninformed perspective . . .

 

Oh, sorry, I am only an Aerospace Engineer... I don't know so much about aircrafts... :goodman:

 

I figured as much, but only after I got comprehensively pwned for assuming you were a member of Joe Public 8)

 

Ah well . . . . I'll know better next time. :wink:

[F l a n k e r]

to britgliderpilot:

 

Why so resentful where not necessary?

I express only my opinion that is important exactly like yours. I respect you and I don't have offended anyone. Why you do?

 

PS. I'm not english speaking... what is Joe Public?

[Skywall23]

Dont worry Flanker. Brit is a british, and I think that says it all :weedman: .

[SUBS17]

Re: Is there any hope of ever seeing the F-15 intake ramp fi

 

Maybe I'm the only person in the whole LOMAC universe bothered by this, but bothered I am. The problem I'm referring to is how the F-15C's intake ramp stays stuck in the full open/up position no matter what the flight envelope, while all of the AI F-15C's seem to have intake ramps that move to the down/smaller profile position.

 

Is it too much to ask that this minor tweak get fixed in the midst of the myriad of other fixes being done? Seems that if it works on the AI aircraft, it should work on the players' as well. I'm sure the biggest problem is just that nobody really cares... but, being a big fan of the Eagle, it's something I'd like to see fixed. Even if it's just stuck in the down position, I think it would look better...

 

Feel free to flame away, but seriously... can this minor annoyance be fixed?

 

Thanks,

Rampstrike

 

If you check the F-15 sticky thread you'll see its been mentioned before. The intakes are visible from the pit as well. The problem is mainly with the ai aircraft which are fixed in one position.

[britgliderpilot]

to britgliderpilot:

 

Why so resentful where not necessary?

I express only my opinion that is important exactly like yours. I respect you and I don't have offended anyone. Why you do?

 

PS. I'm not english speaking... what is Joe Public?

 

 

Sorry, didn't mean any of it to sound resentful - I just have a rather cynical brand of humour (guess it's typically British in some ways). Apologies for any offence.

 

I'm in my second year studying to be an Aeronautical Engineer at the moment - so I guess one day I want to be like you :D

 

 

"Joe Public" is a term used to describe average members of a community - in a flight sim community, aeronautical engineers are knowledgable, valuable, and very useful to have around - as are people like JJ_Alfa and SwingKid - there's generally a level of knowledge and understanding that "Joe Public" doesn't always have.

 

Not that Joe Public isn't a vital part of the community . . . . it's just that sometimes they get a slightly skewed or under-informed view on things.

 

I thought your original "purpose of the ramps" post was from this under-informed perspective (having been taught that the purpose of the ramps was to keep subsonic airflow into the engines) . . . . . and got owned when it turned out it wasn't.

 

 

Again, my apologies for any misunderstandings,