sparkomatic

man the Chinese are really cranking out the designs of late

wait a minute...its all in Chinese...how are we going to download that?

I noticed that WOE 11G thing yesterday...I was in a the F-16E and a MiG23 kept turning inside my circle, even though I was clean, and ready...just laughed, jinked opposite with a slip and of course the weak AI then gave up and leveled out...which did not end well for him. No way an MiG23 was able to stay inside an F-16 at 10k...

hope your health improves!

that is part of it, but have you ever had your mission cancel due to maintenance? No? And I am not referring to MSFS planned malfunction, but that is a start. At least in iL-2 some dudes crash or fail to take off, and that adds a bit as well. Plus I like F4AF in that your mission doest win the war in a single stroke, in fact, you really have no idea if it had any effect. But as far as flight sims, even a 360, full motion ride has its disadvantages, though the really high end ones can now be logged by the FAA.

well, when SFP1 first introduced ECM into its world, we did some tweaking of the F-15...the idea is in this game how well can you make your opponent break a lock. The other niceties like static on the radar screen and creating a big heapin' pile of dots on said radar screen is a bit harder to render...unless it has changed significantly since then. Personally, I was just happy that it would prevent/disable target locks. Now, if we could get it to "spooge" the scope or "blank" the scope of your opponent, then that would be neater. Not really the answer you wanted, but hope it helps, mildly at least

- same with the earlier released Yak-28...it had "WP" but if you just add ",Soviet" after it then all is well.

I eschew "hard" settings in most games because the industry standard has been to tweak files, not make them more realistic (it is in the name, after all). For example, hit points will increase for your opponents or yours will decrease or both. I really do not think "hard" mode in any SFP1 franchise is more "realistic". Regarding flying real airplanes...it depends...on too many factors to list here, but in a word, the sims are much harder than the real thing (the fews types that I have flown) for a lot of reasons, mostly the artificiality and the lack of perception. Staring into a screen is not the same as sitting inside an airframe, smelling 30 year old sweat stains and only God knows what else. Kind of like Doom 3 would not be a real approximation of fighting hell demons (reference ex-wife) but is an amusing diversion. So take any "sim" for that, and dont try to impress any one in any bar with your number of kills or time in front of a monitor. By the by, read another post by me of what "realism" would entail, then decide how much of that you really want...the paperwork starts now...

J-8 in WOE or Lock On?

thanks!

It depends...clear day and a fat target like say an airliner size? Maybe 14 - 20 miles reliably at altitude greater than 20,000 feet. Obviously a 1m^2 like an F-16 gets a bit trickier, especially if they do not want to be seen, but know where you are. Again, atmospheric distortion, angles, pilot alertness, color or airframe in question, sun position, and altitude play factors. So, as thumb's rule, think of it as in excess of 20 miles. Again, dont wager any drinks at the bar, and there will always be some j@ck@ss that claims he saw a BUFF at 40 miles or a Lawn Dart at 22 miles...it rather gets to be like comparing sizes of...uh...feet.

Wow...just frakkin wow

wait a J-10 for Lock On? Where do I acquire that?

sorry, didnt mean to argue; rather, it is something that I feel strongly about due to the imbalance really. You see "they" tell us we are equals, but in my career (nearly as long as you have been alive, seriously) it has been a sore point of contention. Reference my earlier point about doing one's job=get medal if you are a girl while do your job=did your job for my brethern. the Bell Curve is a handy statistical way of explaining a surprisingly large number of things in nature (among other disciplines). It basically states that while the majority of people are average, there exists about 5% at the very top and 5% at the very bottom. It is also referred to as "normal distribution". Here is a convenient link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution While there will be women decathaletes and women that can bench press like 400 pounds, there is also the majority of which that cannot. I enjoy pointing to the first female Tomcat pilot, who was supposedly "pushed" through training for political reasons. She was killed in an accident. She was certainly not the only Tomcat pilot killed in an accident, the resulting investigation brought to surface some of her training records which were less than flattering even though she took a coveted (at that time) billet ahead of more qualified peers (yes, I am very aware of the USN "quality spread" selection process as well, but then so were the investigators). So you see I could go on until we run out of bandwidth on why I am so vehement regarding this subject. Never said women were weak or incompetent, quite the contrary. And the ability of some women to absorb pain (as evidence by child birth) is legendary. I never intended my comments to be taken as derogatory toward the better sex, just that there are things that women do exceptionally well, and there are things that they do not.

ah, that makes sense then

wait...found it...man that C7 is SWEET! yep works...so you are telling me one should read the "read me" file? now that is a novel concept...next I will learn about the mythical "search" button

Guess you missed the third paragraph, which was conveniently all by itself so as to be more visible... - "Yes, some women can do way better than that, but look at the bell curve there." Want to know what the "Bell Curve" is?

I like the J-8II model...you say you will use the J-10 from Lock On...how?

I mean all of this is over cashmere, right? Now those sweaters are nice, but come on, just wait and your nice Aunt will give you one for free...

ouch...which Kfir cockpit?

this was no where near the edge of the map, this time with the F-1CH any ideas? also it started in the near objective option and slewing the camera went around this point, some distance outside of the airplane. other views were normal, only the in cockpit views F1-F4 were wrong

wow...that makes sense since it was in anti-shipping missions which I have been having issues with...

more land area? that does not mean necessarily that your defenses are spread further, it is about strategic points/focus, not land mass. doubtful the pakis can assault you from any axis, really

start the mission near the objective...view is positioned as if the pilot was sitting 2 meters port of the ejection seat. slewing camera only moves around this point. its as if the pilot position point were inaccurate. does not always occur either, just on some mission types

very nice