I am new, Few questions

[Manny]

Yes, and let your brother be court martialled for dealing out secret documents.

 

Yellonet, if you believe that statement, then I have some beach-front property for you in Oaklahoma. To begin, it is doubtful my Brother has a Secret Clearance to access that information so mute point, I would not ask my brother anyway since he has no access to F-14 information. He is at NAS Lemoor in California instructing on F/A-18s. I had a secret clearance once but I am sure I cannot access that info anyway.

 

Besides, since when does classification have anything to do with modelling an aircraft? It hasn't stooped developers who don't use that as an excuse to develop still classified systems. Look at Janes EA, they modelled the Longbow, Strike Eagle, hell that stuff is still classified.

[Yellonet]

Yellonet, if you believe that statement, then I have some beach-front property for you in Oaklahoma. To begin, it is doubtful my Brother has a Secret Clearance to access that information so mute point, I would not ask my brother anyway since he has no access to F-14 information. He is at NAS Lemoor in California instructing on F/A-18s. I had a secret clearance once but I am sure I cannot access that info anyway.

 

Besides, since when does classification have anything to do with modelling an aircraft? It hasn't stooped developers who don't use that as an excuse to develop still classified systems. Look at Janes EA, they modelled the Longbow, Strike Eagle, hell that stuff is still classified.

So you're saying that they used classified material when they made those games?

The thing is that ED doesn't have any such material, and they don't want to make a sim that is based on too much guesswork.

Anyway, if your brother is a F/A-18 instructor he should have access to all the manuals, ask him to give them to you and then you can send them to ED... we might get a flyable F/A-18 then :)

[504 Wolverine]

To quote Wags on this subject on another thread

 

The team already has the 12/2001 NATOPS, so they would still need the A1-F18AC-TAC-010. However, this is generally classified as a S/NF document.

[Yellonet]

To quote Wags on this subject on another thread Quote:

The team already has the 12/2001 NATOPS, so they would still need the A1-F18AC-TAC-010. However, this is generally classified as a S/NF document.

Don't worry, Manny's brother will get that for us :p

[Manny]

So you're saying that they used classified material when they made those games?

The thing is that ED doesn't have any such material, and they don't want to make a sim that is based on too much guesswork.

Anyway, if your brother is a F/A-18 instructor he should have access to all the manuals, ask him to give them to you and then you can send them to ED... we might get a flyable F/A-18 then :)

 

Lol Yello that is not what I am stating. They worked around those limitations, brought on consultants, i.e. real pilots, former pilots, etc. did what they had to present a realistic representation of what it is like to operate those military aircraft and not make excuses.

You may not want the F/A-18 C/D manuals since the E/F Models are already developed and in operation.

 

Also, Patricks Aviation website contains the F/A-18 manual as well. In my mind, it won't matter what you send to ED. It is up to them to perform the work required to develop the aircraft and I am convinced they would rather take the easy way out and do the F-16 and mod their MiG-29.

[Manny]

Don't worry, Manny's brother will get that for us :p

 

If it is still classified, negative. Certain parts of the document may be classified as secret and since I no longer have a secret clearance, negative. Besides, it is on a need to know basis and I have no need to know lol cause I don't want to see that aircraft modelled by ED.

 

BTW, the F-16 TAC is still classified as well is it not? If so, well the aircraft is so widely exported, those who have access to it did so by other means, not through the US but likely through other export countries or perhaps through a US fighterpilot who assisted in the design of Falcon 4.

 

Who knows.

[Starlight]

NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1 US Navy F-14D flight manual (NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1, dated February 1st, 1997). http://www.patricksaviation.com/files.php

 

Olgerd, please point your browser accordingly. I think an F-14 would make a fine addition to LO-MAC particularly since that aircraft is the least modeled in the flight simulation genre. The F/A-18, like the F-16, is modeled to death and would certainly bore me.

 

Of course the F-14 is a two-seater and that would , of course, encourage you to incorporate cooperative play ...

 

While this is a great manual, ED would probably need NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1A, which contains chapters 25-36 about the F-14 weapons system (radar included). And I think that is classified

Anyway, great manual!

[Yellonet]

So if you had security clearance you would leak the secrets? :icon_neut

[GGTharos]

Jane's DID have access to classified material in one form or another. IIRC they didn't model NCTR quite as faithfully as they could have because ti was classified, but the point is, as a US company THEY DID HAVE THE INFO.

 

Not so easy fro ED.

[GGTharos]

If it is still classified, negative. Certain parts of the document may be classified as secret and since I no longer have a secret clearance, negative. Besides, it is on a need to know basis and I have no need to know lol cause I don't want to see that aircraft modelled by ED.

 

BTW, the F-16 TAC is still classified as well is it not? If so, well the aircraft is so widely exported, those who have access to it did so by other means, not through the US but likely through other export countries or perhaps through a US fighterpilot who assisted in the design of Falcon 4.

 

Who knows.

 

Look for the F-16 MLU manual on the net ;)

 

You'll see a LOT there.

[Yellonet]

Jane's DID have access to classified material in one form or another. IIRC they didn't model NCTR quite as faithfully as they could have because ti was classified, but the point is, as a US company THEY DID HAVE THE INFO.

 

Not so easy fro ED.

Well, then didn't the game expose the classified details?

[Manny]

While this is a great manual, ED would probably need NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1A, which contains chapters 25-36 about the F-14 weapons system (radar included). And I think that is classified

Anyway, great manual!

 

Classified to an extent. Also, there is much information known about the F-14D, its' weapons, its' role, its' mission, its' capabilities, present anf past, the radar iw well known as well.

 

There may not be specific information like how wide is the azimuth search and how much can it be slewed but a trip to Microprose's F-14 Fleet Defender and you have a lot of information available right there. Come on F-14 is such a nice aircraft and good challenge for the Su-27... all disrespect intended for the F-15 lol

[Manny]

So if you had security clearance you would leak the secrets? :icon_neut

 

Negative. Need to know basis pard and I have zero need to know, zilch, nada, niet, no need to know. Other than that, I could not divulge the info to you but could to an authorized third party if I have permission. My Brother can not relate to me anything about the F/A-18 that is not public domain either. That goes for every pilot. Though for some reason I suspect it depends upon what info and how much. Some simes are far to accurate in my opinion to believe the developer is working off Google.

 

Janes had access because Janes has been in the mil business for some time, have operatives in government, and Janes is totally connected. Janes had permission to divulge the info to Electronic Arts. This is not necessarily preferred but hey the F/A-18 E is very nice sim.

[504 Wolverine]

When CJ and I designed F18, we had "unique" access that is simply not going to be available to a Russian developer, much less anyone outside the military / defense industry.

 

Regarding a university, no such S/NF documents will be held outside secure channels.

 

So, as I said before, attaining such documents are far more difficult than many might assume.

 

Found this again also.

[Manny]

Well, then didn't the game expose the classified details?

 

Lol Yello, only those the US government and Foreign governments had no problem exposing. There is still much classified about the F-16 today that will not be released even under FOI regulations.

 

I just can't wait till the F-14 is scrapped in preference for JSF and weget the damn manuals at last finally.

[504 Wolverine]

I just can't wait till the F-14 is scrapped in preference for JSF and weget the damn manuals at last finally.

 

The F-14 has been withdrawn from service already and was replaced by the F/A-18 E/F

[Olgerd]

If it is still classified, negative. Certain parts of the document may be classified as secret and since I no longer have a secret clearance, negative. Besides, it is on a need to know basis and I have no need to know lol cause I don't want to see that aircraft modelled by ED.

 

BTW, the F-16 TAC is still classified as well is it not? If so, well the aircraft is so widely exported, those who have access to it did so by other means, not through the US but likely through other export countries or perhaps through a US fighterpilot who assisted in the design of Falcon 4.

 

Who knows.

 

Again. All TAC manuals for F-14/F-18/AV-8B are classified. This means that we have very few usefull information about weapons systems of the aircrafts.

 

So called "dash 34" for F-16 is not classified as well as same documents for A-10A/F-15C/F-15E. This is because these manuals do not contain any weapons performance data (as it do TAC series), only procedures.

[britgliderpilot]

The F-14 has been withdrawn from service already and was replaced by the F/A-18 E/F

 

Not true - still in service with two squadrons.

 

 

Besides, I don't think it's as simple as "whoops, it's not in service anymore, hey, let's declassify the manuals!" . . . .

[MBot]

So called "dash 34" for F-16 is not classified as well as same documents for A-10A/F-15C/F-15E.

 

*hint* ;)

 

 

On a more serious note, how is the general documentation availability of the Strike Eagle then ? For the F-16 there seems to be quite much ( and in depth ) be puplicaly available. Is this a phenomenon specially applying to the F-16 or is it simmilar with the F-15E then ( or any other USAF plane ) ? The different policies on aircraft documentation is quite an interesting subject.

[GGTharos]

I've spoken to an F-16 pilot who got his hands on the E's manuals.

 

According to him, 90% of the E's avionics are classified - in other words, fat chance.

[MBot]

Copy that. Was to be expected, considering what a high-tech weapon system the Strike Eagle is.

 

I am still quite surprised that there seems to be so much open available docs for the F-16 ( wich is while not being the king of the hill in any compartment, still very modern and capable ).

[GGTharos]

That's because it's so widely exported.

[Woodstock]

@ Olgerd:

 

1st: Thankx for doing anything at all to support the genre.

 

2nd: The argument not to model an aircraft because you don´t know everything about it is lame and does not count.

According to this argumentation ED could have never released any Su-27 or LO simulation because there was always new information to be discovered and incorporated into patches or new versions.

You still don´t know all details about the Su´s and the Mig but you still model them.

I appreciate that you raise the quality standards for yourself but do not hide cowardly behind them. Step forward and admit: "This is the best we could do. It´s not perfect, but it´s the best we could do. And we did it."

Everyone will respect you for trying and further information, hints and input will flow that you can incorporate in patches.

Why should anyone share his knowledge with you when you announce not to use it and not to try right from the start?

I am very shure that there is absolutely enough information on the internet, in older games and in the forums of the reallife and simpilots communities to model any western 1960s-1980s combat aircraft to a level of detail that makes everybody happy.

And those who are still not happy will tell you why and share their information and you can further improve your product.

 

Please keep at least trying and everything will keep getting better and better!

 

An F-16 or F-18 in LockOn with 80% correct flight model, 60% correct avionics and only 50% correct radar and weapon systems would still be more fun to fly than the actual F-15 and A-10 because of the new and wider range of capabilities and possibilities Viper and Hornet offer. Those aircraft would enhance LockOn as a whole and attract new users.

[GGTharos]

And see, that's where you're wrong to begin with.

 

They have no Aerodynamic data without this information, so if that's the case, what's the point of AFM? Just go back to Fleet Defender!

 

They have a reason for doing things as they do them, and they've made an executive decision to do it this way.

[Woodstock]

And see, that's where you're wrong to begin with.

 

They have no Aerodynamic data without this information, so if that's the case, what's the point of AFM? Just go back to Fleet Defender!

 

They have a reason for doing things as they do them, and they've made an executive decision to do it this way.

 

Come on, Tharos, stop being rhetorical and insulting!:icon_roll

You know very well that I don´t want to go back to Fleet Defender. I want to go forward and I want improvement and so I wonder why we are stepping backwards in some respects. How can it be that the best sim on the market is not better in every important aspect than a ten-year-old one?

 

And for AFM, you know very well that not one bit of other new aerodynamic data than the already known is needed. All you have to do is to process the known flight envelope through the advanced aerodynamic engine, thus adding 6DOF, rudder in turns, turbulence reaction and true instead of scripted landings to all aircraft, and BAMM! - better game.

 

I acknowledge that ED has neither enough money, time, personell and resources to do all they wish to do or even all the community wishes them to do. I do not blame them for making executive decisions that I consider unlucky. I do not expect them to do what I suggest.

 

But I do expect you and everyone at ED to respect my opinion as a customer and to appreciate my spending my time to give you my thoughts and feedback!:icon_evil