FastCargo

When it is ready it will be released and we will let the community know. Thanks for your interest. FastCargo

Yep, just go to the loadout screen and unselect everything (including no ammo). You'll end up with a 'slick' aircraft. FastCargo

If it's programmed in a compiler type code (most are), it tends to look like your old style BASIC stuff (more complex of course...I use BASIC as the example because that's my more familar ref point). Until it gets 'compiled'...then it looks like hex code. Compiled code is what is released...the 'source code' is what is kept. FastCargo

Well, in a sense he already has. Because the license is based individually (ie buying the game). The problem is that licensing the engine wouldn't change certain aspects of the engine (MP limitations, avionics limitations, etc). C5 is looking to change certain aspects of the game...which essentially is rewriting code. That's no longer the same game engine at that point...and that's what TK was addressing...at least I think so. FastCargo

I'd definitely advocate a multi-role aircraft...I liked F-14 FD back in the day...but compared to F-15 SE III, it got sort of old after a while. I'd also advocate a 'verses' scenario. And it has to have a wide as possible fan base. Finally, prefer that it hasn't been done before in recent memory. With all of that, plus C5's conditions, narrows the field pretty much... 1. F-4 2. MiG-21 3. Harrier Having said that, the CF-105 story is pretty popular in Canada. You might get a lot of Canuck sales if someone made a dedicated CF-105 sim...and I mean a LOT of them. FastCargo

Nope, you're not making a mistake. There is a workaround...but it's fairly involved. I'll post how this afternoon when I get the time. FastCargo

Well, regardless, glad to see everyone got out ok. FastCargo

I'm thinking the TW series is more like Basic...Advanced would be something closer to LOMAC? Am I correct in this assesment there C5? FastCargo

Wouldn't even have to do that my friend. Using the 'add a pilot' method I do, the pod would for all intents and purposes become a always loaded part of the model. The option wouldn't even show up in the loading screen. FastCargo

Jug, I see exactly what you mean. The closest in terms of a campaign engine that this has gotten is the Falcon 4.0 series, with with EECH/EEAH series a close second. The only problem with these sims is that they are VERY complex, esp F4AF and so appeal to only a limited audience. I think the TW series campaign engine strikes a better balance...maybe could use some slight beefing up... FastCargo

It sounds pretty feasible. There wouldn't be any parts to make 'disappear' I don't think. I have to admit, a Raven would be pretty cool... I've got other projects I'm working on...but now my interest is peaked. Besides the tail 'pod', what else would be needed modelwise? And which model of the F-111 is the EF-111 derived from? FastCargo

Interesting too...seems like we may have to alter a few SAMs... Wonder if it would make them more or less of a challenge. FastCargo

But, WWII has been DONE. Several times. By several makers. IMHO, that's the LAST place we need to go back to. You need a 'hook', someplace different if you want a 'study' sim. Modern and WWII sims have been done in study sims...Rhinos have not. FastCargo

Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Though at the time, the JASDF didn't exist. FastCargo

I don't know...you tell us. FastCargo

Now here's where we would need to get to brass tacks. Either make it a 'study' sim or not. If not, then you're not offering much more than the SF series offers now. If so, you need to limit it. Otherwise, your budget/time increases geometrically... I think 2 aircraft to start is fine...with other aircraft as AI only. We're already getting feature creep here. FastCargo

Actually, that's a pretty good idea! A 'verses' scenario to start with would be great 'hook' to get people into the series. Both aircraft have never had a 'study' sim.... FastCargo

Well, I think part of the problem is gamers themselves. Our expectations keep going up. Don't believe me? When's the last time you SERIOUSLY played F-19 Stealth Fighter? For any length of time. For as much as we lament Tornado...how many of you have recently spent a LOT of time playing it. I don't mean onese twose...I mean NUMBERS of people. It isn't so much that recent games are crap (they are). It's that developers are going where the money is. They've been casting a wider net...but to catch the max number, you have to go for the cash with games that have flash...and cater to the ADD audience. Deep sims? Sims that take hours to learn and weeks to years to master? I mean think...seriously think about what a modern sim would have to offer to be widely successful: Near perfect fluid dynamics simulation. AI that could pass the Turing test. Avionics that strongly mimic the real thing. ECM and weapons envelopes based on data either classified, or more likely has never been realistically fielded (anyone evaded a SA-10 lately). Graphics with all the latest tech. Multi layered and detailed tutorials. Scaleability for AI, physics, and graphics. People talk about MSFS or X-Plane as the basis for a combat sim. Either one of those engines actually been used to mimic a modern air combat sim? Or even a decent jet missile combat sim? That has actually made it to market? I'm actually asking...I'm not completely sure. The fact that MS themselves haven't put out a modern (or at least something based on the jet age) air combat sim since the CFS series first came out should tell you something. I'm not trying to be a downer here...I'm really not. Normally I love stuff like this...and REALLY like the idea. I think though, we need to be VERY careful about what we want, what we expect, and what's pragmatically possible. FastCargo

I love the idea... But I have a lot of reservations. Time for development...which causes several other problems: Feature creep, engine/hardware changes, media releases, etc. I just keep thinking of the sheer amount of TIME such a project would take...to the point where it folds. I just look at the promising projects that never made it and the monumental development time and money budgets needed. If guys were doing this for 'free' in their spare time, the development time stretches even farther out... FastCargo....

Torque, You're new here...so I'll cut you some slack. Asking questions is okay...posting the same topic in 3 separate forums is not. Post and give some time for someone to give you an answer. FastCargo

Actually, I JUST figured out how to do it. Fixed. FastCargo

There have been experiments, none of them ended positively from what I remember. FastCargo

Sorry, you didn't include my favorite...the F-108... FastCargo

Jug, You do know he was asking about LGBs....you CAN'T do a 'ultra low, one pass, haul ass' type delivery...the LGBs won't get enough time to guide. FastCargo