JediMaster

Yet somehow the next 2 in the series were 10x worse. As soon as you have people standing up in cockpit to fire a rocket out the back, you've REALLY jumped the shark.

I don't know about that, but I do take issue with the back-flipping the 190s and P-47s do in Il-2. Doesn't matter how gently you pull back on the stick, they do it once the angle of attack exceeds far too small a value. You can watch combat footage of them strafing and pulling out, but don't try it in Il-2 or you'll wind up inverted and hitting dirt.

Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked, in the head, with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question, Ted. Skip it.

How many Su-25Ts were there? Less than a dozen, and they're out of production. The Ka-50 is upcoming, so the logic there matches the wave of F-22 sims we saw in the late 90s. I love helos but have had nothing but EECH to fly in the 21st century. I remember Rick Hawley had started on an AH-64 sim a few years back, but that just disappeared.

I fondly remember the infantry charges in RB.

Another thing to consider is the speed with which you initiate the turn. Pull it back too abruptly and the rapid onset creates a huge amount of drag. A more measured pull back will keep the speed from bleeding off as fast.

Well, Russia has had serious funding trouble and India hasn't been making very fast progress with their plane developments. How many years now? Maybe, just maybe, the two working together will be the impetus to get one made in a timely fashion.

Sighting a fan of John Tesh is one of the signs of the apocalypse.

It's not really an option here, but in Il-2 I perfected the "meat grinder" method of chopping off a tail with my prop.

Looks like I picked the wrong thread to quit taking amphetamines!

The F-14's wing sweep IS automatic and in only 3 positions...I don't get it.

Yeah, I also noted the demo was pretty short. The amazing thing to me was it didn't look anything like the previous CoD games...yet you could instantly tell it was CoD when you played it!

Indeed! Don't make my MP44 or shotgun weak just because it "unbalances" the game. If that's the case, restrict the ammo available as at least THAT is a realistic issue. However, don't make the gun work at half power!!

I know many people that are happy with the Saitek Evo, if not exactly happy with its looks.

Looking at the shots you can tell this isn't a "new" engine. It's the same one, but it's been modified to the extent that it's no longer backwards-compatible. For those who remember, this is exactly what happened between Il-2 and Il-2:FB, which was planned as the first add on. Another one like this is Company of Heroes:OF, which will actually uninstall the first game and then simply unlock the stuff from the first game in the new one. If you only buy the new one, that stuff stays locked. As for promises, I'm sure the dual-edged sword of original intent and Ubi's strings necessitated the change that they apparently didn't plan on from the start. The broken relationship with Ubi certainly affected this, and we should be glad they're now free of that, even if it means we don't get our cake as we wanted.

I've never done it, but I recall it merely replaces an existing plane with the 3D model of the replacement but leaves cockpit and FM and such the same...which is why I never bothered.

That's a long road traveled.

The YF-17 and F-18 have as much in common as the F-18 and Super Bug do. I would like to see a pic of the YF-17 with a Super Bug, though. Having seen the others compared against each other, it would be very interesting.

I had a friend who did it. He said something about you need to go through at least 2 batches of "expendable" fish (that will die) to get the tank balanced well enough to put the "good" fish in.

I love oldies, rock, some of what some people consider "pop" (although I usually don't), some soundtracks, and a smattering of classic disco. Lots of those categories, however, I never touch!

I'm sorry, but this thread has become entirely too silly. No, the whole premise is silly and it's very badly written. I'm the senior officer here and I haven't had a funny line yet. So I'm stopping it. I've done it. The thread is over.

I think there is a known issue with CM effectiveness being too high, for chaff anyway, against any radar missiles no matter the type. Not so much flares, but perhaps a bit there as well. With the explosions, maybe if you set your weapons down towards hard that wouldn't happen. I'm not sure what variable that affects, but if it's warhead size/blast radius it could explain why a missile detonating near you is taking you out. I admit I've never had my own take me down, but I've also never had it on full/easy.

Easiest way to get a lock is switch to boresight mode and get within 10 miles then just point your nose at the target. Insta-lock! Then for the AIM-7 you watch for the "in range" light on the panel (and not a large X saying you're too close) or for the AIM-9 or other IR missile you listen for the growl to get louder. Locking up a target using search mode is more difficult.

Wags is around, but his online participation is greatly reduced nowadays. I'm sure you'll see him on DCS' own forums. While nothing else may happen with LOMAC FC, this is a new start free of Ubi. I will certainly give them the benefit of the doubt with Black Shark before I make any determinations on whether to continue or not. It's also going to be interesting to see how things go on DCS' forums. If they do include SF, that will have to be weighed against each person's experience with it, of course. Personally I think CP is a burden only to the legit customers as the hackers either get past it and play it anyway or can't get past it and move on to something else, having lost nothing but a little time. The hackers aren't going to buy it no matter what. For now, anyway, only a few companies like Stardock and Thirdwire see things that way.

The F-35 will have less costly stealth, but I think it's mostly the airframe while the F-22 has its emissions strictly regulated to a higher degree. The F-35's single engine will put out over 40,000lbs of thrust, while the F-16's never broke 30,000. In combat loadouts the F-35 should have a better T/W ratio. Only an F-16 carrying nothing but 2 missiles could likely match it, but the F-35 will have far greater range without tanks. Of course, right now it's hard to say what the combat weight of the F-35 will be, although it seems the T/W ratio may be just better than 1 most of the time. F-35A weighs 8k lbs more empty, but its engine has more than 10k more thrust while its MTOW is 18k lbs higher. In fact, the F-35A can carry as much fuel as an empty F-16 weighs!!