PaperArtillery

Yeah, I almost had a freak-out moment when I saw the price...but yes, then I saw that it was only a static display. Damn.

I think I can make a valid point by saying this: "If you do not stop what you are doing, we at the UN will send you an angry letter telling you how angry we are." That's pretty much all they do. I mean, it's been established that with the combination of states on the Security Council, what's going to get done? Nothing. US, UK, CIS, France, and China are always going to disagree on everything, and they all have veto power! Stupid organization, for whatever reason you choose. That's my two...cents. Kopeks. Hrvina. Whatever.

Um...hate to be a LO-MAC player jumping into the wrong forum, but shouldn't Mach 3.4 be a fireball for any normal fighter anyways? The SR-71 reached Mach 3.2 and that was only at obscenely high altitudes...I doubt an F-14 or -15 would be able to get remotely close to that kind of speed without some major issues. Although I guess the point of this forum is just for fun, so I can't complain.

Post date aside, I think it's still worth noting that no matter how tight your maintanence is, no matter how many precautions are taken, luck and fate - if you will - always play a bigger part in flying than can be offset. So long as mankind continues to pry the skies, accidents will inevitably happen.

If your life, and by logic your airframe, is in danger and there's even a 1% chance that jettisoning is going to save it, then by all means. The value of a few explosives, no matter how advanced or - well, explosive - doesn't compare to the value of the airframe and moreso the pilot's life. Ever notice how many hours and <insert units of currency here> go into one man's training? Yeah. If you think it'll save your life, absolutely. Just remember, though - it's generally unadviseable to eject over the area you just bombed. Oh, and don't drop fuel that'll make your time in the air less than what you need to get home.

Yeah, Fastcargo has the right idea - no matter how VTOL it is, it's still not really a helicopter. Therefore you should obey general principles of flying it like any other fixed-wing, except think of your landing as just an airborne taxi to a stop, if that makes sense. I never got good at the Harrier in games; I could land, shakily and intact, but never "up to spec". Good luck learning!

I don't think I'd be remotely comfortable performing such a "simple" maneuver without time and time again of training repetitions. What yield of warhead was the over-the-shoulder, for example, designed for? Certainly nothing bigger than 8kT...I wasn't aware they still made them that small. I know for certain that the former East Bloc doesn't prefer to, at least.

I think you guys misinterpreted Mike, I think he's saying just that you train hard to make the fight look easy... When spectators watch, for example, any aerobatics done in such jets (the Thunderbirds, the Blue Angels, the Russian Knights or the Ukrainian Falcons, to name a few) there are people who don't quite understand how much effort goes into the maneuvers, just because the pilots are so proficient - it looks simple, and it looks effortless. If you put one of those spectators in the cockpit, and show them what it's really like, they'd understand. You train hard so that "hard" becomes "just a day's work". That's all that training really is.

My thoughts are with the pilot and family. It takes a great deal of courage, respect, and pride to be in the cockpit, and I'm sure every airman understands loss like this. - Komarov

@ Viper - That little Polish PZL Scorpion? I want it. Now. In my yard. Anyways, when you say the "ultimate jet fighter", do you mean with technology reasonable for this day and age, or something far more futuristic? I don't find the reversed-wings (or whatever the word is for them) to be terribly effective, since most of the aircraft that've used them...well, you don't see too many still flying. The swing-wing, however, was a pretty good concept despite only really seeing good, well-known use on the F14 "Tomcat" (it was on the MiG 23 and MiG 27, and some random Sukhois too). I've always liked the concept of planes like the more recent F-22 with the large planar wing, for some reason. The security of a strong, large lift surface is kind of comforting. And it looks nice and sleek to boot; yes, the HiMat also fits the bill here, as does whatever TX3RN0BILL posted. I used to try to design aircraft, especially jets (props, though I love them dearly, are just not very modifiable in terms of drastically different builds due to their low airspeeds), but I never had a whole lot of luck and pretty much gave up. Have fun with the project, Jetdemon. As much as I don't like reversed wings, maybe playing around with the X-29 as aforementioned is a good idea.

Does anyone know if there will be another op anytime in the future? I'd love to represent the 78th in a large-scale MP mission; so long as I get to fly a Sukhoi (preferably the 27, since I have the most hours in that particular model) for either side - again, preferably Ukraine or maybe Russia - I'll be happy. :yes:

I'm a fan of civil, too; I'm working on my private pilot's license now, and taking ground school for the FAA tests. I live about 10 miles from a small regional airport, so when I'm in the area I make sure to see what's parked and/or taking off/inbound.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that, with the right music, you can make any game moving. When flying in Lock-On against enemy aircraft in my Su 27, it can be just outright unnerving to hear a piece such as the Adagio for Strings or Agnus Dei - it adds that graceful, cinematic feel to what you're doing, even outside of a scripted cutscene. You'll feel tragedy with every missile fired on both sides...or you can put in electronica or rock for an action-oriented feel, and sometimes the only thing that works is silence. Give it a try sometime, and experiment. More often than not I feel like I fly much better with a soundtrack.

Having played CoD4, I can't believe I forgot about the first two...some of the saddest and most shocking moments in a game, ever. The Call of Duty series has its moments, too. And as for the Homeworld thing, I think the choral version of Adagio for Strings is another Samuel Barber arrangement called "Agnus Dei". And I'm pretty certain the topic specifically said things in-game and not error messages and such, right?

Hands down for me, the Medal of Honor series has gotten me in several instances. Most of all in Medal of Honor: Rising Sun, when the soundtrack goes almost completely silent and you hear over the radio, "the Arizona is hit! it's -". Up ahead, you hear sirens on the Arizona and you can see people jumping for their lives and some going down on the deck...and then your PT craft drives by the ship ever so slowly and there's almost nothing left but an oil slick and the upside-down hull where you know hundreds, thousands of men might be trapped. The worst part is, you know that all of it really happened. It's pretty moving, I'd say. If you ever listen to any of the soundtracks you'll understand how the whole series can be that way.

I believe Microsoft is planning to drop a version of DX10 into Windows XP sometime in the future; no expected release date. However, you are right in saying that most developers are sticking with 9 - it's a lot like when the PS3 came out: sure, it had a lot of awesome features and could do many incredible things, but the problem was, the ability to program for it didn't catch on as quickly as Sony tried to sell the devices.

The problem I had is that my computer was manufactured after Vista had been out for a few months; after a complete system death I installed XP, but the issue was now that HP didn't offer XP drivers, and the manufacturers of the components would just point me back to HP. I ended up just trying to install whatever drivers would work, but it often glitched out even the most graphically and audially simple of games. I've gone back to Vista, just trying to get by until they fix everything that needs it.

Yeah, as far as I know, Thirdwire out-and-out states on the webpage for First Eagles that "[the] game will not work with Windows Vista". I'm not really certain about the other ones. There is a pretty comprehensive list of general software and games' compatibility with RTM Vista (unsure about the new OEMs and SP1, though) at this link. The problem with that list, however, is that it lists only "mainstream" games and applications, not the type of things flight simulators fall into a category with.

That much is true. My high altitude sciences are a bit rusty... Nonetheless, though, I think we all know it's a ridiculous stunt.

Heh, I remember reading about this on BBC...the line that stuck out the most was "it's pretty simple; if the suit fails, I die". Isn't there something inherently stupid, and awesome, about trying to break the speed of sound? Even at an altitude of some obscene number, Mach 1 is at least 600 MpH, and I can't imagine freefalling to that point. My initial reaction was also one that questioned friction - is there any likelihood he'll burst into flames or something? Well, best of luck to the guy.

Well said. It's also worth noting that in all versions of Windows Vista you can turn off Aero or Vista Basic interfaces to use "Windows Classic", e.g. the original 1995 look of Windows. Less glass and visual effects = more CPU, RAM and video power that can go towards gaming.

Yeah, I can't see much practical use for it right now outside of superficial things - y'know, characters' facial expressions, maybe looking around (which TrackIR does just fine, I must say), and other than that, there can't be too many games or even concepts that would use the push/pull and so on. And I will say this: encephalographic gaming today; mind control, zombies and robot wars tomorrow.

I didn't even have a computer up until maybe 2000 or so, and therefore my first CFS experience was the first Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator. At that point I'd had a little experience on other people's systems, but most of it was spent in gravity- and liftless sci-fi "flight sims" like X-Wing. After MCFS 1 I picked up on the civilian flight sims, then FlightGear, finally settling for MCFS 3 for a year or so. I later discovered LoMac and Aces High II, the latter of which is mostly an MMO WWII sim (I'm surprised I don't see much of it on this site, by the way, because it's really quite good). Now I play mostly LoMac and Aces High II, with little else in any PC gaming category with the exception of Call of Duty 1 and a few select RTSs.