MigBuster

Hey folks, Sorry for a lapse in updates. I am almost comically plagued by internet issues on my trip; could make for a nice story all by itself. Almost considered doing a write-up, but perhaps in a couple of days when there’s no trace of bitterness. Catching a plane home tomorrow afternoon, where a nice PC with a nice Ethernet cable awaits. The things we take for granted. Anyway, while I was incommunicado, the rest of the team has been hard at work. We’re going to do a combined update on a bunch of fronts. The 109 cockpit, shown earlier, is virtually completed. It’s scheduled to be done by the end of next week. Here’s a teaser shot. We’ll do a full photoshoot once it’s finished and checked. The 109 external is not nearly as far along. We actually ran into a bit of delay with it, and we’re working double time to catch up. The 109 is still scheduled to be the first new RRG plane to be completed, in time for the closed alpha. The first step of making an external model for a DCS plane is to make its engine. Even though it’s not something you really see, this is what’s traditionally done first before the rest of the aircraft is built around it. We had an issue with blueprints and references that had us redo a portion of the model, and the engine is generally extremely detailed and elaborate, so we’re about a week behind schedule. The engine is generally modeled and mapped, so we’re ready to proceed with the rest of the aircraft. I am walking a very fine line here between keeping the fans and the artists happy. This is something I’m sure most of you did not think of at all, but the 3D artists making these models feel very connected to them and have a sense of personal pride, so asking them to show clearly unfinished models is always met with some resistance. I’m not the kind of boss who says “just shut up and give me the model to screenshot.” So, in this case, just like with the 109 pit, we have a modeler who really hates the idea of showing unfinished, “crappy” (in his words) WIP. He really asked to delay showing the engine until it’s shiny and perfect, so this is our compromise. Please consider this as a general showcase of our attention to detail. The flight model and the weapons and all the physics stuff for it has been in the works since July, but it's using the P-51 as a stand-in for now. We're rather far along with our physics model of the Bf.109, but obviously that's not something that can be shown with screenshots. We'll probably do some detailed lengthy videos once the 3D model is put in place, in the run-up to the alpha. Next, we have the current state of the P-47 cockpit. Again, slightly behind schedule there, but really working hard to catch up. No deadline jeopardized, just a bit of an extra crunch in the middle of the project. We expected to just reuse P-51 gauges for the Jug, but ended up having to redo most from scratch. We currently have the canopy framework, the dashboard, and the gunsight, all done from scratch for our brand new P-47D-30. All await the delivery of the last set of factory blueprints for a final accuracy check. Lastly, here’s where we are with the landscape. Been doing a lot of technical engine-related tasks. Redrew all the roads and crossroads. Redid the canals. Redid the flooded areas once again. Played a whole lot with the trees. Generally the terrain is beginning to look more detailed, but still a long road ahead. Now, the most important thing I’ve realized over the past two months is that if I was my own employee, I should fire myself as a community manager. I barely have any time to do it, and it creates a very poor impression. Now that we’ve finally received our kickstarter funds (by the way, yay) I really need to hire a more professional community manager. I’ll get busy once I’m back home this weekend. Of course, ideally it would be a member of this community. It would most likely be a salaried part-time position, and the qualifications would include a passion for flight sims, understanding of aviation, and good communication skills. I don’t know if it’s realistic to hope for someone who’s fluent in both Russian and English, but English fluency would definitely be a must, while Russian would be a huge plus. If you think you might be a good fit based on this preliminary announcement, email me at luthier1@gmail.com With that, I’m off to pack my suitcase. Hope you like the screenshots!

By deleting the file the game is now using the default flightengine.ini for that patch level. Putting old ini files into a newer install can cause problems - you sometimes need to extract the new ini files and make the changes to that. for ccip: In the A-6 ini make sure it has all the correct lines to make it flayable [AircraftData] AircraftFullName=A-6A Intruder AircraftShortName=A-6 AircraftDataFile=A-6A_data.ini LoadoutFile=A-6A_loadout.ini UserList=A-6A_UserList.ini CockpitDataFile=A-6A_cockpit.ini AvionicsDLL=Avionics60.dll AvionicsDataFilename=A-6A_avionics.ini In the cockpit ini file [GunsightFront] HasGunsight=TRUE GunsightMilSize=30 <-----------------------Set Then use the avionics ini from: http://combatace.com/files/file/9263-a-6a-diane-for-strike-fighters-2/ and also put in the cockpit folder files from that

It looks like Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works, the legendary division that designed airplanes which represented a giant leap for their times such as the F-104, the U-2, the Blackbird family or the F-117A stealth fighter jet, has eventually revelead to AW&ST’s Guy Norris the existence of a project for an Hypersonic strike aircraft dubbed SR-72. “After years of silence on the subject, Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works has revealed exclusively to AW&ST details of long-running plans for what it describes as an affordable hypersonic intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike platform that could enter development in demonstrator form as soon as 2018. Dubbed the SR-72, the twin-engine aircraft is designed for a Mach 6 cruise, around twice the speed of its forebear, and will have the optional capability to strike targets.” AW&ST has the detailed story of the new platform, that guided by the X-51, Falcon HTV-2 and other hypersonic development programs on which U.S.’s perspective strike capability is being tailored, will be capable to hit or perform ISR of fast-moving targets, located in high-lethality areas at intercontinental ranges. Interestingly, a Lockheed SR-72 concept image was released. The shape is coherent with the most recent hypersonic designs and it is quite similar to at least one of those published in April 2013 on LM’s Code One article about the configurations studied since the early ’60s for an SR-71 Blackbird replacement. Noteworthy, the shape and operational speed of the U.S. next generation strike bomber is much different from Russia’s next generation stealth strategic bomber PAK-DA concept. http://theaviationist.com/2013/11/01/sr-72-unveiled/

Another: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvW4JUuH7-I

The first four F-105Bs had those little transparencies - inherited from the RF-84F The internal bay was still there - just with a non jettisonable fuel tank in it The Thunderbirds flew the B

Falcon 4 Allied Force is of no use to run BMS - you need the original Falcon 4.0 disk tor BMS - although cost should be negligible In response to the above. DCS A-10C is basically the USAF ANG Desktop simulator with a few classified bits taken out from what I understand - and IME although there are less systems on the A-10C but it goes far deeper into the systems than BMS does currently - and you can tell this by comparing IAMs , JDAM, TGP and some other things - the nav systems a nightmare and it uses SPIs If you want something even more challenging than the old Ace MiG-29S in BMS for dogfighting boresight - try the EF2000 or F-22 in guns only..................

We all wish we had a mum that cool!

Looking at 4 sources including the paper and the wiki page - they all agree that the political objective of LBII was to get Vietnam back to the negotiating table in a very short period of time - which was achieved.....all the military targets were also hit - so although each source spouts a lot of detail they all show a clear political and military success for the US. From a Strategic point of view (the Vietnam war) whether they were forced back or not Giap et al signed the papers which got rid of the US once and for all...................... Although the loss rate was relatively high (for Nam) - I'm not sure Nixon gave a toss about the 28 lost - its minor detail and actually not a bad return when you consider the scale, sophistication and experience of the SAM operators who could use various techniques with various versions of the SA-2. In the scale of things................and with over 3000 airframes supposedly lost in Vietnam.....whats a few more to get out of there with a deal!

'

Haven't used it much - but for example when I set up an intercept in SF2V - I had to set the incoming bomber flight that would arrive over their target (my home base ) 5m 49s after starting the mission so the bombers started about 30 miles away. It might refer to so many minutes after or before a main flight hits the attack point also.....

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Patterns-and-Predictability.pdf A detailed analysis of Linebacker II from Soviet sources apparently - might be of interest to some. Suppose it wants to present some positives to the Soviets - such as trying to count jets that flew back to base damaged as being "shot down" One stat I haven't seen in there and the only one that matters is: Number of targets actually defended by Air Defences = 0

Even if B-52s have been used to test it, the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is the only aircraft in the U.S. Air Force inventory currently capable to carry and release the heaviest U.S. bomb, the 30,000-lb GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). The heavy GBU-57 is a 20-foot long GPS-guided bomb believed to be able to penetrate 200 feet of concrete before exploding, thus being capable to hit and destroy deeply buried targets. http://theaviationist.com/2013/10/28/b-2-mop/

High Res FA-18 action and some MiG-29Ns! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vItrT3AoJZA

You need the Falcon 4 disk There is scalable difficulty - but really everything is geared for full realism settings in BMS - no point learning easy systems and then have to start from scratch with harder stuff later on!. If you have just downloaded DCS A-10C then - um..............do you play flights sims full time because you might best to stick to 1 hardcore job for now.

I don't have the manual but TKs pits are usually pretty accurate:

So whats changed - any MS patches lately or are you all using the same AV software?

You depress the bomb site an amount of mils depending on the angle, alt, speed you are bombing at before you do the bomb run as I understand The F-16 in BMS has a fully working one - although you dont need to use it! - I remember flight of the intruder having the charts etc for such a thing. In SF I think it can only be hard depressed from the cockpit ini

Back over Nam

Another routine affair in the A-10A

Made me laugh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkBDRUO8hAo

Just http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZp7BvQJnU8

Good to see you and many congrats on getting married.

Amazing stuff http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z1Z-WEZZGM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1F_UJaaP1A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOXxUApaaWo

Cool - wonder if it was manually depressable