von Baur

Agreed! Though Windows 8 is already upon us and Microsoft no longer supports XP, I imagine a lot of people still use it and a lot of smart people (smarter than I, anyway...which leaves a LOT of room) still know how to make it do what you want. My "noodling-around" computer runs XP and the only reason I went with W7 on my flying computer was so I could go beyond the 4GB RAM limit of XP.

I've got my TIR mounted to the wall behind the TV, pointed straight up into a mirror also on the wall but above the TV. It increases the reflector-to-camera distance, which improves performance (TIR 3 Pro w/Vector prefers farther to closer...and it still works great, so why spend $$$ on something new??) It also maintains the distance and angle no matter where I position the TV. I had to reverse all left/right axes but that was simple enough. The biggest problem is that having the camera that high above the center of the screen, leaning forward also moves the viewpoint down and leaning back, up. Bear in mind, I'm using a 32" screen. The effect would be more pronounced the bigger the screen and the closer you are to it if the camera is mounted directly on it, Hauksbee. Corsaire, you seem to be missing my point. Widowmaker was commenting that so many people are attaching their selected devices to their ever-more gigantic televisions that monitors for home computers may soon become a thing of the past. I was observing that, with so many people doing all of what they used to do on home computers on these other devices instead the home computer itself could go that way. I'm not suggesting that you ditch whatever makes you happy and go buy the latest little gadget. In fact, I opted to get a second computer optimized for flying and move my now older one into the living room rather than buy a laptop or tablet when I decided I wanted to be able to do my non-flying things while I watched television.

And I agree with both of you (although smartphone cameras are capable of taking some extremely clear pictures). I'm just saying that the vast majority of what most people used to do with their home computers...which is[i/i] internet related (check emails, social media, shopping, etc)...can be done with cell phones and tablets and the like. People like us, whose games aren't available on consoles, and those who use their PC's for work...drafting, serious video and audio editting, etc.)...will soon be the only ones who will keep these clunky boxes and their associated equipment. And Corsaire, my cell phone is a five- or six-year old flip phone. I can call in a pizza order or text/call my son in Texas to chat on it. I'm good.

Then who jumps out of the cake? Olham? Lou?

Day of the Monitor? The day of the PC may not be at an end, but it's certainly declining in popularity. With laptops, tablets and even smartphones that are millions to billions times more powerful than the computer systems that saw Neill Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin to the Moon and back the desktop PC will be more for work and gameplay and less for day-to-day users. And all of them can be plugged in to any HDTV, at this point. Let's face it, guys. Our computers are (or will soon be considered) the biplanes and airships of digital evolution. To quote Agent K in Men in Black, "Imagine what you'll know tomorrow." *edit* Let me change "declining in popularity" to "declining in relevance".

Not unlike MvR being assigned to Jasta 11.

I have AMD video cards, Tamper, and their Eyefinity (three displays acting as one) is the same...i.e. only three identical displays and resolutions, making a PLP setup impossible. SoftTH is supposed to allow it and I've read of others who've used that successfully for quite some time. Unfortunately, I'm apparently not smart enough to get it to work for any time at all. I temporarily set up a three-display system using my 32" in the middle, a 27" on one side and a 24" on the other, all native 1920x1080 so Eyefinity liked it. However, the 24" was my son's and besides the height of each was different and the whole mess was just too darned big to use for anything more than a test.

Here's my idea of immersion...start a campaign on the actual calendar date (minus the year, of course) and fly each mission on the date and time OFF/WOFF says. I might just try that when I retire. (of course, by then the "W" in WOFF won't stand for Wings...more like Walkers...or maybe Wheelchairs)

For a fixed display system, multiple displays is definitely the way to go...the more, the merrier (to a point, I suppose). What I don't understand is, if someone can come up with a third-party program that will allow Eyefinity (and probably one for NVidia cards, too) to operate on displays of various sizes and orientations why can't...or won't the manufacturers?!?! If it were me, I'd want my customers to use my approved software, developed and tested by my inhouse people, rather than something someone else came up with and maybe blaming the hardware when it doesn't work properly.

Been doing (and recommending) this for 2 1/2 years. Mine is a Vizio 32" LED, which I would also recomment (the LED part...not that there's a problem with the Vizio, just that I would never recommend one brand over another) because of the lower weight and better contrast than normal LCD. I chose the size because its height is nearly the same as the widths of the two 19" 4x3 monitors I already have. My goal is to use them in portrait mode as obliquely aligned wings to the TV so as to get a wrap-around effect, though I haven't been able to make it work yet. I haven't given up though, and anyone who has that working, please IM me. I apparently need some more direct coaching. OTOH, the Oculus system may make fixed displays as passe as using a hat switch or mouse for views. (no offense meant to anyone who still uses them)

Hit me up if you want someone to test MP out with you, daaawwwg....sorry, that should be duuuck. Nothing would please me more than to have full, and fully-functioning, multiplayer capability in this sim. No matter HOW many "P-"s it takes. Wellll, there might be a few things.

Not Einstein, but Lucy van Pelt once said to her brother, Linus, "The quality of your stupidity is rising." I always liked that one. Used it a time or two myself.

I'm torn here regarding distribution method. On the one hand, if they release on DVD it will undoubtedly take longer before it's made available. On the other hand, with my internet speed it will probably take me longer to download than if I waited for a DVD to be cut, ordered and delivered to my door. On the other hand, if it's a DVD I'll need to have it in the computer while I play and risk losing or damaging it. On the other hand, if it's a download it could simply disappear into the ether. On the other hand... OMG, I've run out of hands. Not only that, but apparently I'm channelling Tevye. (walks away humming "Tradition")

When you think about it, I probably should have known. I doubt they had "STAR WARS" Monopoly sets in WWII.

I call BS!! I just cut up all my monopoly pieces into tiny bits and didn't find a thing!!! oh, wait...no small red dot in the "Free Parking" square. Drat! On the plus side, I can now have four times as many players as anyone else.

Yeah, student wind limits are (or were when I was learning) 10mph, which is not much more than a gentle breeze. Many's the day that I sat around and watched everyone else havin' fun because of the wind. It was actually one of those days my mind started wandering and ultimately came up with the idea for a vertical wind tunnel at terminal velocity. When I mentioned it to the others I was roundly made fun of. And only a few years later Flyaway vertical wind tunnels were 'invented' by someone else and one is now part of HALO school. And it might be for the best you never tried it, Lou. Otherwise you may have become hooked as I did. It's an expensive passtime and you may not have had the money to amass your magnificent collection. Memories may last forever (though the older I get the less I'm sure of that) but they can't be truly shared with others the way your treasures can.

A little of both, Lou. I let the Air Force pay to get me started (Ft. Benning in Oct of '73), then once I was sure I liked it I started doing it on the weekends. All told, I figure I have more than 1,000 more takeoffs in aircraft than I have landings in them. A pittance compared to those who've stayed with the sport as long as I would have liked, but still something to look back on. Of course the ultimate was when I got to go HALO in Combat Control and went out at 20,000 feet with oxygen. Tailgating C-141's was extremely cool, too. First they'd raise the top half of the ramp, then they'd open the clamshells and finally drop the bottom of the gate. I always hummed the theme to "2001: A Space Odessy" when those clamshells opened.

OMG, Lou. Ditty-bopper? Then you followed me (by two years) to Keesler, too? I think my most lasting memory of KAFB was seeing a C-130 for the first time as it took off while a friend and I were playing handball on a court in "The Triangle". It looked like one of the buildings flying off. Little did I know then that I would be flinging my stupid ass from them and their brethren less than a year later. No pics, I'm afraid. Too much respect for the camera lenses.

Option A. Ingressing Allied bombers are flying with the commonly prevailing winds, which allows them to get to their targets relatively quickly. Since there is no real early warning system, they are already fairly near their targets by the time German planes on the ground can be scrambled to intercept. Those planes then have to climb to altitude, by which time the attacking bombers likely have finished their runs and turned for home. If the German planes try to fly at the bombers as they approach their targets and cannot reach the same altitude prior to the bombers turning for home they then have to continue to climb as they chase them back across the lines. I imagine we've all experienced that frustration virtually, and there's no real consequences for our failure. German aircraft already on patrol might not see the enemy bombers approach at all unless they catch sight of the flak bursts and even if they do see the flak, the attacking bombers have good a lead. We're talking about aircraft with a top speed of around 100 miles per hour, unlike WWII where the fighters were 100 mph or more faster than the bombers. It's tough to catch up and climb at the same time when you're only 20-30mph faster than who you're chasing. Option B. The attacking allied bombers are sighted and their tracks plotted. Aircraft are scrambled and instead of flying toward the bombers they try to put up a net where they're likely to Egress, beating the retreating bombers to that point. That way they have all the time in the world to focus on getting to altitude. Once there they can turn toward the flak bursts and close quickly, gaining even more altitude and putting them in better position to attack as the Allied bombers struggle against the wind. This would also likely have been the reason the "the bomber will always get through" attitude was so prevalent at the beginning of WWII. It's obviously better to stop the bombers before they get to their targets. But it's equally obvious that option B offers the better chance for success at downing some of them, given WWI limitations. And any bomber that's shot down on its way home is one less that will drop more bombs tomorrow.

Happy belated, Lou. I don't remember where I first heard this, but it seems appropriate. "You don't stop playing because you get old. You get old because you stop playing." And don't feel bad. I've got you beat by five months. Which leads me to believe we were likely in the Air Force at about the same time. When did you get to Lackland?

Thanx. I wonder how much, if any, of this will be on BBC America on this side of the pond?

Apologies. At first glance, the bend in exhaust appeared to be on the same plane as the section coming off the engine, which could not have been the case for the Bristol, since its exhaust ran down and then along its fuselage. On closer inspection I noticed the control horns for both the ailerons (visible to the left of the rudder) and the elevator (to the right of the rudder). Clearly it AIN'T no Albatros. Thanx, Robert, for straightening me out.

I'm guessing that watching his six will become easier or harder, depending on where that cornbread lands. And I'm curious as to the looks he receives from his wife when he does the, "Contact....Clear" bit.

It's sunday. Pictures!!! LOL. Seriously, I hope everything went well and you had one of the most memorable days of your life. And I hope you appreciate what a fantastic woman you married. Happy Birthday, Tony.

Photo 42 is identified as "Bristol F.2B which Fuchs shot down on June 21, 1917 for his first victory". Based on the exhaust manifold, and wingtips it's an Albatros. Probably a D-III but it could be a D-V, depending on the angle of the rudder to the camera. But it AIN'T no F.2b. *edit* see retraction below