FastCargo

Migbuster, you got it my friend. It's a Nexus 5 phone streaming to a Chromecast. Google just rolled out a public beta of the Chromecast app that 'casts whatever is on the screen of your phone directly to the TV...you no longer need an app that has Chromecast support built in.

So of course I had to see how well it works with a 3D app. The answer...pretty darn good. You can see in the photo that there is a very slight bit of lag (note the position of the radar sweep on the screen vs on the phone) but it was undetectable in real world play.

This got me thinking of just how powerful our phones are getting. Think about it...the phone was producing 1080p 3d imaging at least at 24 fps, and dumping all that through the WiFi at the same time. The TV screen was almost at the same res (not sure why there was cutoff...my downstairs TV showed the full image at 1080p) plus all the sound. All this on hardware not dedicated to gaming.

Certain consoles are able to do something similar...the Wii U with its controller and the PS4 with the PS Vita. Even Steam now has that functionality...you can play on a low end computer games it couldn't normally play because the actual heavy lifting is being done by your gaming strength computer that is streaming to the low end computer.

It makes me wonder if the future of console gaming will have 'controllers' that are actually the entire console. That they will stream to a simple, small device that plugs into a port on your TV. Or simply stream to any device that it would support through various protocols. Basically, the Ouya concept, except as a controller with more power. Or a PS Vita type device that can stream to anything...no PSx needed because it would BE the PSx.

FC

Daddyairplanes...no worries. I was using this example to show a particular advancement in technology.

FC

(facepalm)

You guys are killing me here....

Does anyone notice what the controller I'm using is?

FC

That would be Strike Fighters Android....

Fc

Well, sorta...

FC

MS Flight Sim coming back?

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/470863/next-microsoft-flight-sim-targets-2015-arrival/

Microsoft has signed a licensing deal with Train Simulator developer Dovetail Games to allow the studio to produce new entries in the Microsoft's Flight Simulator series.

Argh....the last 10 percent always seems like 90 percent of the effort.

Anyway, it's released, includes a proper MOP model (shrinking the MOAB wasn't good enough).

You should find it to be a satisfactory performer as both an AI and player flown aircraft.

FC

September was almost a year ago.

FC

Rock on!

FC

Sounds like a frames issue.

Remember, the aircraft 'clean' is frame 0, Animation slot 1 is frames 1-10, slot 2 is frames 11-20, etc.

Each group (1-10, 11-20, etc) must be totally self contained. What that usually means is frame 0 and frame 1 are EXACTLY the same...do not start any movement of parts until frame X2 (2, 12, 22, etc).

FC

A captain who flies for the Collings foundation, and is one of the very few people who has flown the 'factory built' Me262 with the J85 engines, says the Me262 had some very nasty flying characteristics at the low end...insufficient rudder being the big one.

It's not hard to figure out why looking at the podded, low slung engine design. The combination of high yaw and pitch moments caused by the loss of an engine would overcome the max rudder authority of the aircraft. During the takeoff roll, you had a 'dead man' area, where if an engine was lost, you did not have enough altitude to be able to throttle back the good engine (in combination with max rudder) to keep the aircraft pointed straight. You'll note this is why modern fighters have closely spaced engines.

In addition, you don't want radial (centrifugal) designs in a jet engine for a couple of reasons. One, they tend to be more inefficient, because energy is being used bending the airflow outward and back inward. Two, they tended to use large, heavy compressor disks...which made them more resistant to throttle changes because of simple inertia.

FC

Maybe not quite this way...

While I was looking through YouTube for a Harrier video to play for my son, I came across something called 'The Alraigo Incident'.

I had never heard about this before...but thought it was interesting enough to post on here.

Watson saw that some cargo containers formed essentially a deck, one similar to a landing pad he had used during training. “Well, I thought, in for a penny, in for a pound, and I landed the airplane on the containers.”

Full story here: The Alraigo Incident

And video from the news reports at the time:

FC

Heard you needed a mop...or is that a MOP...

Took my old MOAB model and shrank it.

Thanks to ST0RM for some high res photos that allowed me to complete the area around the cockpit.

The B-2A is basically done.  The last thing is tweaking the aerodynamics, loadouts, and making a readme.

FC

Damn.

FC

And yet there is no independent verification...

Take that for what its worth.

FC

oh yeah!!!

I've seen a Corsair one in a catalogue too

We have that one:

Installed it in my son's room...but I cut off the gear and gear doors so it would look like it was flying.

We used to have this one:

It was very hard to find since they long since stopped making it.  By the time we did find it, we had already installed the Corsair one and so sold it to some good friends of ours.

FC

That's exactly normal.

Let me think about that...ummm, no.

FC

Okay, glenn, stop.

Stop spamming all the threads about the laser designator.

I want you to learn how real F-16s drop LGBs using pods.

Go and research that online, and that should clue you in on how to load your F-16.

FC

Decals for all the B-2 tail numbers done.

Texturing done except for a few placards on nose gear door and around cockpit windows...waiting for either a picture of a B-2 model decal sheet or excellent pictures around cockpit and nose gear areas...have to be able to read them...

Data.ini tweaks to go.

FC

Not much left to do now...mainly decals and fine tuning the data.ini file.  It will use Dels' excellent B-1B cockpit.

FC

I finally just figured this out...you are attempting to use LGBs on a F-16A Block 10.

That aircraft if I remember correctly can't carry PGMs...the chin hardpoints for self lasing weren't even added until the Block 15 versions.

FC

Ignore those...they are meant for the AI aircraft to use (a limitation of the game engine).

FC

Okay, what exactly are you trying to do? Aircraft pylons and weapons must match up to be able to be loaded.

As an example, here is a weapon station on an aircraft.

[LeftUpperStation]

SystemType=WEAPON_STATION

StationID=2

StationGroupID=2

StationType=EXTERNAL

AttachmentPosition=-1.4470,-1.5845,0.5024

AttachmentAngles=0.0,0.0,180.0

EjectVelocity=0.0,0.0,4.0

MissileRollAngle=180.0

LoadLimit=600.0001

DiameterLimit=0.5101

LengthLimit=4.0001

AllowedWeaponClass=LGR,EOGR,ARM,IRM,SAHM,AHM,FT

AttachmentType=NATO

ModelNodeName=UpperLeftPylon

NoJettisonTank=TRUE

NoJettison=TRUE

PylonMass=55

PylonDragArea=0.05

FuelTankName=SF400DropTank680L

FuelTankNodeName=LeftUpperDropTank

Note the lines in bold. Here is a sample weapon:

[WeaponData001]

TypeName=Mk84

FullName=Mk.84 2000-lb Bomb

ModelName=mk84

Mass=893.580017

Diameter=0.460000

Length=3.280000

SubsonicDragCoeff=0.092000

SupersonicDragCoeff=0.357000

AttachmentType=NATO

SpecificStationCode=

NationName=TERRA

StartYear=2030

EndYear=2050

Availability=3

BaseQuantity=50

Exported=FALSE

ExportStartYear=0

ExportEndYear=0

ExportAvailability=0

WeaponDataType=0

RailLaunched=FALSE

Retarded=FALSE

FinStabilized=TRUE

SpinStabilized=FALSE

EffectClassName=VeryLargeBombEffects

DragAreaMultiplier=1.000000

WarheadType=0

Explosives=429.000000

FusingDistance=0.000000

ClusterBomblets=0

ClusterDispersion=0.000000

GuidanceType=0

Accuracy=0

MaxTurnRate=0.000000

MaxLaunchG=0.000000

LockonChance=0

LaunchReliability=0

ArmingTime=0.000000

SeekerFOV=0.000000

SeekerGimbleLimit=0.000000

SeekerTrackRate=0.000000

SeekerRange=0.000000

LiftDragRatio=4.000000

ReleaseAnimationID=-1

EODisplayFlags=0

CEP=20.000000

Also note the lines in bold...you can see that there are some direct translations. Basically, if the weapon does not pass any one of the restrictions noted in the weapon station on the aircraft, it will not be able to be loaded. If any one parameter in the weapondata for that weapon does not pass restrictions on ANY of the weapon stations on the aircraft, it will not even show up to be attempted to be loaded.

Also, things like the theatre of operations, what year you are trying to fly in, etc will determine what weapons are available to use.

FC