Flaming--Cliffs--2.0

[cool_t]

No, that would be DCS. You aren't getting DCS level detail in FC2. Sorry, but I have to lower expectations here. Things have been done to increase realism as much as possible, but with constraints. For some people, these changes will be radical. For some, it'll be more of the same with some interesting changes - mainly the battlefield will likely be deadlier in a lot of cases.

 

Sweet......Well with the post from "Wags" introducing FC-2.0 I will come 2 the verdict that the F-15c will live up to its reputation, or at least NOT represent a shadow of the F-15c's concept and purpose. "eg" Power-plant, radar-IFF, Weapons-Gun sight/Missile-physics; also the same with other air-craft as well; radar platforms-power-plants-weapons-ect ect. I think there was a post way way way back about F-C-F-15c Flight envelope compared to the "Real" flight envelope of the F-15c...One thing wrong about the comparison was the "Time" it took to get up to specific altitudes/Speeds..F-C- was WAY off... Still all in all...cant wait..

[GGTharos]

Missile physics and radars remain unchanged.

 

While the F-15's FM was tweaked to be more realistic, the same is true of other aircraft.

 

Edit: And just to be particularly pedantic: Missiles have had some parameters tweaked, including rocket motor burn times, radar scan zones and fuzes. In general, they have been made more realistic in relation to each other, but the actual code behind them remains the same.

Edited January 11, 2010 by GGTharos

[sniffer]

Missile physics and radars remain unchanged.

 

:mellow: Hmm...

 

Q: Has the AIM-120B/C performance been improved?

A: Yes in regards to range, speed, fuze ranges, and counter-counter measure effectiveness. Other missiles have also been improved. In a related manner, ECM burn-through ranges have been moved significantly out (based on aircraft type) and a 15 second ECM warm-up time has been added to address ECM blinking online.

 

It's not missile physics? :unsure:

 

Edit: Now after Your post edit I understand... Thanks

[Pilotasso]

Various ED team menbers have said there wont be AA missile advanced flight model for FC 2.0 or DCS (for a while yet). However do expect game changing (sorry for the pun) tweaks.

 

Many people will change habits after having rather horrible, horrible deaths :D

[Boberro]

Many people will change habits after having rather horrible, horrible deaths :D

 

Exactly :D

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Many people will change habits after having rather horrible, horrible deaths :D

 

:fear:

 

Now I'm scared.

[104th_Crunch]

Missile physics and radars remain unchanged.

 

While the F-15's FM was tweaked to be more realistic, the same is true of other aircraft.

 

Edit: And just to be particularly pedantic: Missiles have had some parameters tweaked, including rocket motor burn times, radar scan zones and fuzes. In general, they have been made more realistic in relation to each other, but the actual code behind them remains the same.

 

GG is it possible to mention if 2.0 will include the fact that the faster your launching platform is when it launches, the further the range of the missile will be? As we know, currently you can be .4 Mach or 1.5 Mach and it doesn't matter. Thanks

[GGTharos]

Missile physics are not changed ... so the top speed is still unaffected by platform speed.

[RvEYoda]

Missile physics are not changed ... so the top speed is still unaffected by platform speed.

 

It is as GG says, but a little clarification.

The physics models are not changed, but some of the numbers may be tweaked a little.

However there are no astronomical changes.

[cool_t]

It is as GG says, but a little clarification.

The physics models are not changed, but some of the numbers may be tweaked a little.

However there are no astronomical changes.

 

Well in that case some Air-Craft will be able to use there "Stand-Off" performance as intended when they were created. In LOMAC- B 4 F-C- The F-15c was more of a "Stand off" Air-Craft platform, where T-W-S-Kills in one flight were very common. When F-C-1.0.. was implemented the Eagle turned into a rather sluggish, single intercept Air-Craft where T-W-S kills in one flight were VERY RARE/ TWS-engagements in F-C-1.0.. were more of a way to push bandits away from a specific bandit that I would target for the kill/Due to missile "Tweaking" ect ect ect... So with "Some" missile "Tweaks" in 2.0 perhaps the T-W-S-Multiple engagement success envelope will become more deadly for pilots that can manipulate multiple targets into a kill zone. ;) Flight physics for Air-Craft platforms---The Eagle has a very very distinct power-plant performance as do migs/Su's....and going up against many great pilots in Migs/Su's I had to "Tweak" my moves according to my Eagles Power-Plant and the load on the jet..where in 2.0 shall the Eagle live up 2 its "Known" power-plant performance? As well as the Su-Migs? Looking back at F-C- and the LOMAC development I hope 2 C the Eagle in 2.0 soar to an aloft perch, high above the battle field, ready to scream down with fear and deception only to return to its nest to rest.... Muuuuhahahahahahaha.......Muuuuhahahahahahaaaaa!!! P.S. RELEASE DATE?????

Edited January 11, 2010 by cool_t

[monotwix]

I think cool-t is ready for some new generation moves.

& manoeuvres.

[Panzertard]

P.S. RELEASE DATE?????

Announcing Flaming Cliffs 2.0 post#1

[Boberro]

People don't excite F-15.... if someone sucks in LO1 ... he will suck in LO2. If someone is good, he will be good in LO2.

Edited January 11, 2010 by Boberro

[RvEYoda]

Well T, nobody said imrovements were for the F15 only. Some seem to believe that

FC2 is some kind of F15 only upgrade, while nothing could be further from the truth.

Edited January 12, 2010 by =RvE=Yoda

[cool_t]

Well T, nobody said imrovements were for the F15 only. Some seem to believe that

FC2 is some kind of F15 only upgrade, while nothing could be further from the truth.

 

 

Oh...Not the case at all...Yes I do hope the EAGLE gets some of its feathers back in the right places, indeed. Also I am assuming the SU-27 will carry the R-77 which would be "Up to date" and also good for SU-Pilots, the Su-27 has a nice fuel load/air/ground configuration. It would be nice 2 C the Su-27 with R-77s...More of a challenge in my eyes. Going up against the Su-27 in F-C 1.0 was a game of Cat-n-mouse, I always assumed there was an ET-launch from 10-15 nm. therefor I engaged accordingly (Many good SU-Pilots out there).

 

The Mig-29....well Fuel was very very small, radar was way of the charts and it was better in close/med range engagements. a large percentage of my kills we Mig-29s. The Mig-29, in F-C-1.0 was a bit over kill with its power-plant compared to the F-15c where in reality we all know specific power-plant details.

 

The SU-33...Seemed a bit sluggish in its power-plant as well. It had a great fuel load and weapons load but all in all not a good platform in a target rich battle field...you need a good wing man to be effective against multiple targets in the SU-33.

 

The F-15c in F-C 1.0 configuration in my opinion is the premier fighter platform in the LOMAC series. With its massive fuel load, TWS, weapons load, and SA-tools its is the most deadly air-craft in the right hands. Many times I have intercepted A-50s far behind enemy lines and made it home (Also got shot down) but the mission capability of the F-15c goes far beyond any fighter in the LOMAC series, in the right hands.

 

The A-10 is very fun, as with the Su-25s'

 

I just hope that at least the AIM-120 is not a dud and the AIM-9 does not perform like a bottle rocket.

[GGTharos]

Also I am assuming the SU-27 will carry the R-77 which would be "Up to date" and also good for SU-Pilots, the Su-27 has a nice fuel load/air/ground configuration.

 

Su-27P/S does not carry the R-77 in RL ... nor in FC2.

 

It would be nice 2 C the Su-27 with R-77s...More of a challenge in my eyes. Going up against the Su-27 in F-C 1.0 was a game of Cat-n-mouse, I always assumed there was an ET-launch from 10-15 nm. therefor I engaged accordingly (Many good SU-Pilots out there).

Right, find some solid info on Su-27SM, and who knows what might happen? Unless you can present a flight and weapons operations manual though, don't bother ;)

 

The Mig-29....well Fuel was very very small, radar was way of the charts and it was better in close/med range engagements. a large percentage of my kills we Mig-29s. The Mig-29, in F-C-1.0 was a bit over kill with its power-plant compared to the F-15c where in reality we all know specific power-plant details.

The 29A was undermodeled in certain respects, and yes, we do know specific powerplant details, and the MiG has plenty of TWR to spare inside its favorite combat envelope.

 

The SU-33...Seemed a bit sluggish in its power-plant as well. It had a great fuel load and weapons load but all in all not a good platform in a target rich battle field...you need a good wing man to be effective against multiple targets in the SU-33.

The single purpose of the Su-33 is defending the submarine fleet from air attack. That it is even modeled in FC is a nice touch, but people like to use it for things it wasn't meant for.

 

The F-15c in F-C 1.0 configuration in my opinion is the premier fighter platform in the LOMAC series. With its massive fuel load, TWS, weapons load, and SA-tools its is the most deadly air-craft in the right hands. Many times I have intercepted A-50s far behind enemy lines and made it home (Also got shot down) but the mission capability of the F-15c goes far beyond any fighter in the LOMAC series, in the right hands.

 

The A-10 is very fun, as with the Su-25s'

 

I just hope that at least the AIM-120 is not a dud and the AIM-9 does not perform like a bottle rocket.

I don't think you know half of what the F-15C is missing in terms of SA and other things - for that matter, same goes for the flanker I suppose. Edited January 12, 2010 by GGTharos

[cool_t]

Su-27P/S does not carry the R-77 in RL ... nor in FC2.

 

Right, find some solid info on Su-27SM, and who knows what might happen? Unless you can present a flight and weapons operations manual though, don't bother ;)

 

The 29A was undermodeled in certain respects, and yes, we do know specific powerplant details, and the MiG has plenty of TWR to spare inside its favorite combat envelope.

 

The single purpose of the Su-33 is defending the submarine fleet from air attack. That it is even modeled in FC is a nice touch, but people like to use it for things it wasn't meant for.

 

I don't think you know half of what the F-15C is missing in terms of SA and other things - for that matter, same goes for the flanker I suppose.

 

Right....LOMAC-FC-Configuration all jets...........

 

It will be interesting....Im just taking a break from LOMAC for a while.

 

P.S. http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27_weapons.htm

Edited January 12, 2010 by cool_t

[GGTharos]

Irrelevant. The Su-27P/S DOES NOT carry R-77s, nor guided A2G munitions.

 

P.S. http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27_weapons.htm

[cool_t]

Irrelevant. The Su-27P/S DOES NOT carry R-77s, nor guided A2G munitions.

 

Right...LOMAC-FC-Config...which are far from real life. So being that this is a simulation why cant the SU-27 carry R-77s? or "Represent" variants of the SU-27 family?

 

In most cases its just a hard-point and soft-wear upgrade...simple ans effective on a good platform.

Edited January 12, 2010 by cool_t

[GGTharos]

Right...LOMAC-FC-Config...which are far from real life.

 

In terms of weapons carried? It's correct.

 

So being that this is a simulation why cant the SU-27 carry R-77s?

 

Because the Su-27P/S, which is the aircraft modeled in LOFC, never has and never will carry the R-77!

 

or "Represent" variants of the SU-27 family?

 

Sorry, 'represent' what? Things that are not modeled?

 

In most cases its just a hard-point and soft-wear upgrade...simple ans effective on a good platform.

 

Except that is simply not how it is, period. If you want 'hard-point-and soft-wear' upgrades, there's always HAWX. Simulations are not based on your imagination - they are based on what is out there. Sometimes, even the lite sims. ;)

[cool_t]

In terms of weapons carried? It's correct.

 

 

 

Because the Su-27P/S, which is the aircraft modeled in LOFC, never has and never will carry the R-77!

 

 

 

Sorry, 'represent' what? Things that are not modeled?

 

 

 

Except that is simply not how it is, period. If you want 'hard-point-and soft-wear' upgrades, there's always HAWX. Simulations are not based on your imagination - they are based on what is out there. Sometimes, even the lite sims. ;)

 

Right..... My purpose here is only 2 understand if ED...has heard "Our" ----"Wish-List"... As far as "Whats out there" GG...we dont need to go into who knows what about what.... As far as this sim...I wont Fly anything else...period.. I guess Im just lost in the fact that the SU-27. cant use R-77s?? in this updated version? I know it sounds like Im in left field because im a die hard F-15c driver but if the 27-gets no upgrade or the mig...whats the use?? As far as the EAGLE is concerned well time will tell... P.S. PROBING.....Muuuhahahaha,......Muuuhahahahaaaa

[GGTharos]

Right..... My purpose here is only 2 understand if ED...has heard "Our" ----"Wish-List"... As far as "Whats out there" GG...we dont need to go into who knows what about what.... As far as this sim...I wont Fly anything else...period..

 

I think you have misunderstood something. ED reads the wishlist and implements what is feasible. The Su-27SM is not feasible. That's all there is to it.

 

I guess Im just lost in the fact that the SU-27. cant use R-77s?? in this updated version? I know it sounds like Im in left field because im a die hard F-15c driver but if the 27-gets no upgrade or the mig...whats the use?? As far as the EAGLE is concerned well time will tell... P.S. PROBING.....Muuuhahahaha,......Muuuhahahahaaaa

 

The Su-27SM is not modeled in FC or FC2. Does that answer your question? The 'updated version' is not modeled in this sim.

[cool_t]

I think you have misunderstood something. ED reads the wishlist and implements what is feasible. The Su-27SM is not feasible. That's all there is to it.

 

 

 

The Su-27SM is not modeled in FC or FC2. Does that answer your question? The 'updated version' is not modeled in this sim.

 

K.....Understandable... Well in your wisdom G.G.....How do you feel about 2.0 so far? Compared 2 F-C-1.0 ect.ect???

[borchi_2b]

so when i read all that, i think the effectivness of chaffs to the SARH will stay the same old crappy way?

like the video of 16 su27 shooting at a single f15 and not getting a single hit?

 

is that a fact that stays or not.

 

i mean, people say and roumour about the r27et, that the seaker will be tweaked down and that no override launch without lock will be possible,although the range of the r27et is allready tweaked down by 1/3, cause this was the only way for the su27 to get some effectivness in combat, do to the poor modelled r27er, unfortunatly.

if this is true and the r27er in its poor effectivness of fc1.12 will stay, then we really have an f15 update only and i am very sure, the community will not be amused, to say it with the words of the queen.

plus the fact that the radar of the su27 shuts down when the bandit has jinked out to some certain level and the eos switches on and there is no more radar lock, although i see the underside of the bandit which gives my radar the biggest cross section i can have.

same for the mig, and we have an old DDR technigian in our squad who worked on the mig29g who said that this is by far not real in lomac, cause the radars were still on, but eos only switched to aktive as a suport and laser range finding, not more and not like it is represented in fc.

 

i really would like to read an answer to that

Edited January 13, 2010 by borchi_2b

[GGTharos]

so when i read all that, i think the effectivness of chaffs to the SARH will stay the same old crappy way?

 

SARH has been tweaked up as much as was possible.

 

i mean, people say and roumour about the r27et,

 

It isn't a rumor. No seeker lock at launch? No track.

 

the r27et is allready tweaked down by 1/3,

 

Incorrect. There is a difference in the trajectories flown - the range is correct.

 

plus the fact that the radar of the su27 shuts down when the bandit has jinked out to some certain level and the eos switches on and there is no more radar lock, although i see the underside of the bandit which gives my radar the biggest cross section i can have.

 

That happens to be because the earth has a big radar cross section than your bandit - I see that you are unfamiliar with the doppler effect and the doppler notch.

 

same for the mig, and we have an old DDR technigian in our squad who worked on the mig29g who said that this is by far not real in lomac, cause the radars were still on, but eos only switched to aktive as a suport and laser range finding, not more and not like it is represented in fc.

 

That's right, it's not real in lomac. It has arcade radar by comparison to the RL cantakerous, difficult to use and easy to jam one.