Worldwide Sim

[Gee]

The idea for a worldwide theater is tremendous. This could allow for individual virtual squadrons to specialise in one aircraft type and to be allocated to an airbase somewhere in the world.

These squadrons could then be mobilised as the scenarios see fit by moderators that control the world situations. These squadrons would then allocate to "in theater" and would then fight against/COOP with other squadrons of different aircraft types

This would bring the entire community together into one but still allow pilots to fly whichever aircraft they love to fly.

[Vlerkies]

Yep that is what it means, and i can hardly wait

:military:
~S~

[Bladehawk]

allow pilots to fly whichever aircraft they love to fly.

I agree with except the upper frase. Why?

If you can simply choose to fly F22 Raptor do you wanna fly in a F16???

Should any pilot cleared to fly an F22 ?? 8)

No ! No ! many hours on F16 or F15 and with a good carreer (Rank...) and excellent Logbook Stats should the pilot be permited to fly in some Hi value Planes... :wink:

What do you think?

[Vlerkies]

I agree Bladehawk. It would be great if virtual squadrons only assign their best pilots to the advanced aircraft as it is lke you say a hi value A/C :thumbsup:


:military:
~S~

[jhook]

Rank v's aitrcraft is an excellent idea!!! :thumbsup: I also think we should create a highly reactive and situatiuoinal regins for conflict. For example; A breakaway republice in the Baltic decides to test the UN's no fly zone "ON YOUR PATROL" and that creates a conflict senario. Or other rouge nations invading other smaller nations trigers conflicts through a time generated/world wide theater! OOps!, I think I jumped ahead a little on my progressive wish list! :mrgreen: Anyway, what do you all think about that!!! I think al have another on me! :drink:

[Vlerkies]

Make that two :drink:
Great idea :thumbsup:


:military:

~S~

[Bladehawk]

:drink: :drink: :drink: on me !

[jhook]

Thanks for all the drinks "gulp", I wish to thank you for the feed back "gulp", AND THEEF FOURB PLUSM FRINKS POR mE "GULP" WAGA HASHUM ONE FOR ME :drink: "GULP" "HO NOOOO, IVes gots the crap locks on again" :mrgreen:

[Vlerkies]

:lol: just hope the cops don't catch you and charge you with DND

[jhook]

Anybody got any asprin!!! :shock:

[Vlerkies]

Sorry mate, lost them when i buzzed the tower :thumbsup:


:military:


~S~

[IxianMace]

About allowing pilots to fly any aircraft they like:

I think pilots should actually have the freedom to fly whichever aircraft they like. If an ensign was to start off at the pure basics, first, they would probably have to spend hours going through flight-school, reading pages upon pages of information...

Then maybe they should get into a Cessna.
When they've mastered the basics (banking, rolling, yawing, pitching, etc), they can move onto a T-38.
Then after all that, if they're still rearing to go, they might be able to hop into an F-5.
After x number of hours in the F-5, they could move onto the F-16.
After y number of hours in the F-16, they could move onto the F-117.
After z number of hours in the F-117, they could move onto the F-22... :shock:

See what I mean? :-p

People might not even bother with a system like that, it would be a long time before many F-22s hit the skies.

Maybe a system where pilots can graduate from basic flight school, then elect to fly a specific aircraft or perform a specific role that they want to specialize in, which will then determine what aircraft they want to fly, might work?

Mastering one aircraft's FM and avionics would presumably take long enough, it might be a bit harsh to make them learn an aircraft of 'lesser value' first, before moving onto the aircraft of their choice.

[Vlerkies]

That's the thing they will have the freedom to fly whichever aircraft they like, but based on their experience. This should also determine which tasks they would perform flying those aircraft.

Take it like this, there is a bomb planted somewhere in some building. there are three hundred people inside who can't get out. You call in the bomb squad and they show up. while preparing all the equipment you find out that one has experience in diffusing bombs, while the other doesn't. who will you choose? the inexperienced bomb tech and increase the risk of losing all three hundred people in the building? Or do you choose the experienced bomb tech and cut the risk down to half or even less?

Now if you take that scenario and incorporate it with the Air Force, will you take an inexperienced pilot to fly an high value aircraft like the F-22 or will you take the experienced pilot?


:military:





~S~

[IxianMace]

The point was that pilots should be given the opportunity to fly whichever aircraft they like from the start, then specialize in that particular aircraft, if they so choose. Of course, to fly different aircraft than the aircraft that he/she specializes in would require further training regarding the performance/avionics of the new aircraft that they wish to learn. How do you define 'highest value' aircraft anyway? ?_? The pilot matters, not the aircraft.

Take it like this:

You have 5 people. They all want to do different things. One wants to be a sniper, one wants to be a bomb expert, another wants to be a spy, another wants to be special forces laser designator, the final person wants to be tank commander.

Which is the most important role here? Should a person be made to go through all the previous training (which they may or may not want and/or like), before being allowed to graduate to the task of 'highest importance'?

Experience really comes from training/real combat. I'm saying that people should be allowed to train for whichever aircraft they like from the start. If a new pilot wants to specialize in flying the F-22 from the start of his or her career, I really can't see why they should be made to fly lower value aircraft first, provided they get adequate training in the intracies of the F-22. :military:

[Bladehawk]

IXIONMACE
PLEASE !!!! :roll:

The F117 pilot is not a F16 pilot with more hours of flight... :evil:
The F16 pilots has balls of steel ... but the A10 pilot must have of TITANIUM !!

The pilot profile is VITAL to put a pilot in a F16 or F117 or F22

This is the way I think it would be best...
IF the pilot is Exellent in AG and as a personal flight history (rank, hours, aircraf lost, mission rates, etc...) it could be given the transfer option to a squadron of F117 .

IF the pilot is Exellent in AA and as a personal flight history (rank, hours, aircraf lost, Mission rates, etc...) it could be given the transfer option to a squadron of F22.

More If there are 10 - F22 raptors available only the 10 top Pilots should be permited to fly them. Now imagine this ONLINE ... 8)

[Vlerkies]

The reason they have to go through the training is because even in the Air Force you can't fly any aircraft you want to. You can't say i want to fly this aircraft and start training with that particular aircraft. The reason why it is called a high value aircraft is because of the technology involved not neccissarily the price of building and buying one. If you have an aircraft that is superior to your enemies aircraft you don't want that technology to faal in their hands and let them use it against you do you? That is why experience regarding aircraft type is important. It is also unlogical for a base commander to train an pilot on the aircraft he wants to fly. Because if he uses an pilot with experience in other aircraft it will be more cost effective as the training will not be as long as it will be with a completely new pilot.

The experienced pilot just needs to do a conversion, because most of the systems in the new aircraft are the same as in the other aircraft he flew, whereas the new pilot needs to do everything from ground school which includes radio ops to learning just how to take off afly around hen land and after that learning the weapons systems. Which can take alot longer than it will for an experienced pilot.


I understand that not everybody wants to go through all the correct procedures just to get to take off in a F-22 let alone fly it. But that is the way it works in R/L and this sim is all about hyper realism, so i support the idea of aircraft vs rank and experience. After all that's what we want right? REALISM



:military:

~S~

[IxianMace]

EDIT: Never mind.

[Vlerkies]

I understand where you are coming from IxianMace. Not everybody is willing to do the REALISM thing and endure intense hours of training and combat to fly the aircraft they want to fly.

I on the other hand would love it, because i had to go through allt of that anyway to be able to fly the SAAB Gripen. I also just wanted to train for the SAAB but unfortunately that's not the way it works, you have to go through the correct procedures.


Whether this idea of aircraft vs rank, and experience gets implemented really won't spin my world upside down, i'lll buy the sim whatever happens. Because this sim is going to be Hyper Realistic.

But the sad part is although so many hardcore and dedicated simmers want realism to the max there will still be people who want to bypass everything for e.g. going straight to take off, not needing to first do a ramp start, check all systems, get permission to taxi to runway. Hold short of the active, taxi into position on the runway when told to do so by the tower and then requesting clearance for take off.

I would love to do that and not take short cuts, and i'm sure there are others who will agree.

So by saying you wouldn't follow the idea. You are saying that if they implement this and all the other procedures you would'n't buy the sim because it's too real?


:military:


~S~

[IxianMace]

I edited my last post because I thought it was giving the wrong impression. I'd most likely buy the sim anyway, provided that it was realistic (but not unrealistic). :thumbsup:

I guess what I was trying to say about the previous issue with people being able to fly whichever aircraft they like, is that if you look at it from a newbie's point of view, the multi-player may seem a little... unfriendly.

By this, I mean that there is no guarantee that everyone who goes to fly online will want to go through the whole deal with full realism. Some people may just want to have fun, and jump right on in without going through all the intracicies. If lots of people that were new to flight simulations came online, only to find that they couldn't fly their favourite aircraft due to some regulations (I'll call it that for now), then they may not be very happy. Don't you think this would hurt multiplayer online play? If online virtual squadrons followed this idea, then perhaps the following scenario might occur:

Fairly soon, there would be two distinct 'groups' of virtual squadrons. Those who want the full deal with realism, and those who just want to fly. How would you keep them separate in multiplayer online? Maybe have different servers for 'realistic' settings, and 'unrealistic' settings, where people that either have full realism, or less realism can fly, respectively.

Don't get me wrong, I do want realism. :o The F-22 does happen to be one of my favourite aircraft, and I'd be happy to spend the time learning how to properly fly it and take advantage of it. I would buy the sim regardless of whether or not this idea is implemented. However, I wouldn't like the idea of a virtual squadron being made to put restrictions on what I could do online, as far as flying aircraft is concerned. Additionally, how would you ensure that virtual squadrons follow this 'regulation'? Virtual squadrons would likely have their own ways of operating.

When you try to look at it from a different point of view, the real losers will be the folks who just want to have fun, but can't because of certain 'regulations' which prevent them from flying the aircraft of their choice. What if ALL virtual squadrons adopted this idea, or were made to follow it? These people would be shunted and left out in the cold, which I feel is bad for the sim, and the community as a whole. This is why I'm opposed to this idea.

Just some things you may want to consider.

[Antler]

Why not have different single player and multiplayer options? I know this is a VERY bad analogy, but think of a FPS game. In single player, you start with one weapon and gain more as you progress. In multiplayer, you often start with all the weapons available.

If you're worried about everybody flying the same aircraft, maybe a 'squad based' approach could be taken whereby you need some air-air fighters for air cover (obviously), and you need some bombers as well to complete a mission.

Another idea could be that a tech-level restriction or something like that is placed, whereby you can only choose planes within a certain value range.

[Bladehawk]

I edited my last post because I thought it was giving the wrong impression. I'd most likely buy the sim anyway, provided that it was realistic (but not unrealistic). :thumbsup:

I guess what I was trying to say about the previous issue with people being able to fly whichever aircraft they like, is that if you look at it from a newbie's point of view, the multi-player may seem a little... unfriendly.

By this, I mean that there is no guarantee that everyone who goes to fly online will want to go through the whole deal with full realism. Some people may just want to have fun, and jump right on in without going through all the intracicies. If lots of people that were new to flight simulations came online, only to find that they couldn't fly their favourite aircraft due to some regulations (I'll call it that for now), then they may not be very happy. Don't you think this would hurt multiplayer online play? If online virtual squadrons followed this idea, then perhaps the following scenario might occur:

Fairly soon, there would be two distinct 'groups' of virtual squadrons. Those who want the full deal with realism, and those who just want to fly. How would you keep them separate in multiplayer online? Maybe have different servers for 'realistic' settings, and 'unrealistic' settings, where people that either have full realism, or less realism can fly, respectively.

Don't get me wrong, I do want realism. :o The F-22 does happen to be one of my favourite aircraft, and I'd be happy to spend the time learning how to properly fly it and take advantage of it. I would buy the sim regardless of whether or not this idea is implemented. However, I wouldn't like the idea of a virtual squadron being made to put restrictions on what I could do online, as far as flying aircraft is concerned. Additionally, how would you ensure that virtual squadrons follow this 'regulation'? Virtual squadrons would likely have their own ways of operating.

When you try to look at it from a different point of view, the real losers will be the folks who just want to have fun, but can't because of certain 'regulations' which prevent them from flying the aircraft of their choice. What if ALL virtual squadrons adopted this idea, or were made to follow it? These people would be shunted and left out in the cold, which I feel is bad for the sim, and the community as a whole. This is why I'm opposed to this idea.

Just some things you may want to consider.


CONSIDER THIS (AIM120C ARMED...) :evil:

POINT ONE : "if you look at it from a newbie's point of view..."
THIS NEWBIES ARE THE S.O.B THAT WILL "PLAY" F.OPS FOR TWO OR TREE DAYS AND THEN... "LETS GO TO ANOTHER GAME..."
LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING
" I HAVE A FRIEND THAT PLAYED FALCON4 AND BY IS WORDS HE WAS THE BEST FIGHTER PILOT IN THE WORLD... UNTIL THE DAY THAT I SAW THE REALISM LEVEL THAT HE "PLAYED"... CADET MAN...CADET !!!"
HOW CAN I TALK WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT ?
WHAT KIND OF RESPECT THIS PEOPLE HAS FOR THE SIMULATION ?

WHY DONT THESE PEOPLE GO PLAY LOMAC OR PS2 ???
THERE ARE MORE PRODUCTS UNREALISTIC IN THE MARKET THAT THE ONES REALISTIC ENOUGH TO MAKE AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY OF HARDCORE SIMMERS EXIST !

FO SHOULD NOT BE FOR NEWBIES ! THIS SHOULD BE A PRODUCT FOR THE THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY LOVE SIMULATORS FOR YEARS !

WHAT MAKE FALCON 4 RESIST FOR SO MUCH TIME ? NEWBIES?? :evil:

POINT 2 :
"Some people may just want to have fun, and jump right on in without going through all the intracicies."
GO PLAY LOMAC ! :evil: AND A THOUSAND OTHERS LET FO FOR "SOME PEOPLE THAT JUST WANT TO HAVE REALISM PERIOD ! AND GOING THROUGH ALL THE INTRACICIES" 8)


POINT 3
"only to find that they couldn't fly their favourite aircraft due to some regulations" - IN REAL LIFE THERE MUST BE REGULATIONS !
HYPER REALISM DEMANDS IT :evil:


POINT 4
" the real losers will be the folks who just want to have fun, but can't because of certain 'regulations' which prevent them from flying the aircraft of their choice. "

LOSERS ? WHY F.O SHOULD BE MADE TO "LOSERS" ?
WANNA BE TOM CRUISE IN TOP GUN? GO PLAY LOMAC OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ! IN NO TIME THERE BE PATCHES THAT PERMIT ANY "FUN BOY" OR NEWBIS NOT TO FLY ... BUT TO PLAY WITH ANYTHING THEY WANT FROM A CESSNA TO A SAPCE SHUTTLE OR ENTERPRISE ...

POINT 5
I M NOT MAD AT YOU ! IM JUST MAD WITH THE WAY THAT PEOPLE THAT THINK (IN THIS CASE) LIKE YOU !!!!!

[IxianMace]

There's no need for all caps, and I don't appreciate having insults thrown at me...

I also think you're completely missing the point of my post. The point was to make the sim more friendly for new flight simmers, which have the potential to learn the sim to a realistic level.

Anyway, I'm done here.

[jhook]

Ixian, You do pose a very good point. If I was base commander, I would'nt want a green piolot to take command of en entire package, or simply hop into an F22 and expect him to go BOOM! :roll: And I also agree we all have to keep it constructive!!! :thumbsup: Good or Bad points, it's all constructive. :mrgreen:

[Bladehawk]

There's no need for all caps, and I don't appreciate having insults thrown at me...

I also think you're completely missing the point of my post. The point was to make the sim more friendly for new flight simmers, which have the potential to learn the sim to a realistic level.

Anyway, I'm done here.

Please ixionMace don´t get me wrong. :roll:
my intention is NOT to insult you or anybody !

I just think that for once in 3000000 so called simulators so friendlys to new flight simmers, we might have one just one that isn´t !
The harcore simmers were in time newbies, man I was ! I played almost every so called "simulator" since ZX spectrum "... to Falcon 4
So if they want to have the potencial to learn there are many pseudo flight sims, friendly enough to start.


I don´t know what you want really, but I want much more than Falcon 4...
the stake that G2i&GenAv is setting is so high... that at this stage I don´t know if F.O is "targeted" at newbies or non hardcore, this will be an important point...

Sorry...If I hurt your feelings :drink:

[Buckshot]

Hey guys, glad to see things have simmered a little :)

The sim is definately going to be tailored toward the hard core simmer. Nothing will be compromised in realism, however ever attempt will be made to provide a way for newbies to enjoy the sim and learn how to fly realistically. I'll repeat my earlier statement though, if it comes down to a choice of compromising realism to make it easier for newbies, it won't happen. Realism is the number 1 priority (and number 2 and 3 also :wink: )

As for pilots having to have experience on one airframe before being allowed to fly another, this doesn't happen in real life. In just about every air force, once a pilot completes training he is streamed off to a particular airframe and that's usually where he stays, doesn't matter if that airframe is an F16, F15, F22 or a hercules, if the student is considered suited to that enviroment that's where they go.

[jhook]

Well stated Buck!!! :thumbsup: I think anyone could fly what they want inside a mission builder or a training enviroment to get a feel for realism before tackling the theaters. :D

[Bladehawk]

As for pilots having to have experience on one airframe before being allowed to fly another, this doesn't happen in real life. In just about every air force, once a pilot completes training he is streamed off to a particular airframe and that's usually where he stays, doesn't matter if that airframe is an F16, F15, F22 or a hercules, if the student is considered suited to that enviroment that's where they go.

Hey buckshot !

So, how the F22 pilots are selected ? :? dind´t they fly other aircrafts before ? 8)

[Buckshot]

Same as F15, F16, etc etc pilots are selected today, they come through training and are streamed toward whatever squadron they are suited to. Initially a lot of the F22 pilots would be converted Eagle pilots, but it's not very often a pilot converts from an active airframe to another in any airforce. Generally, with the odd exception, once you are part of an active squadron flying a particular aircraft, you will fly that aircraft for the rest of your career. There are exceptions of course, guys are sometimes allowed to convert, also when pilots do a tour as an instructor, or Thunderbirds, etc.

[IxianMace]

That's nice to know. :D So I take it a pilot would finish training in a basic trainer aircraft (maybe like the T-38 ), and then he/she would be considered for their 'main' aircraft that they're going to fly?

If it's done like this in real life, how would it be (and do you think it would be a possible and/or a good idea), to somehow simulate that as well in FO?

[Gee]

I was thinking ore along the lines of individual squadrons picking what aircraft they wanted to fly. If the squadrons wanted to be elitist in who they allow to fly with them then that would be up to the individual squadrons involved.

Therefore if a certain squadron wanted to fly the F22 and only recruit pilots with a minimum ammount of hours then that would be up to the SOP of that squadron.

[Vlerkies]

That would also be great if they implement that :thumbsup:

:military:

~S~

[RazorBlade]

Let me give a reaction.

Like Buckshot already said, your scores during your training often decide which aircraft you will fly during the rest of your career. (unless of course your airforce decides to use other aircraft).

You can however simulate the training program and it would be required to pass the training missions before you can fly online. I know however that this will be hacked in no time so everybody can download a crack that allows you to fly every plane online from the start.

I am however very much in favor of the option to have a sort of online logbook. So your scores of your mission will not only be stored on your local PC but also on the website of your squadron. This will allow your squadron to make its own rules about your ranking and privileges.

[Vlerkies]

I am however very much in favor of the option to have a sort of online logbook. So your scores of your mission will not only be stored on your local PC but also on the website of your squadron. This will allow your squadron to make its own rules about your ranking and privileges.



Now that part i like :thumbsup:

:drink: A cold one on me and for Buck and what the heck everybody else :D


:military:

~S~

[Zolos]

Worldwide sim? >>> Good Idea, whoever it was, to have integrated Squad web-sites with pilot stats. Exporting and importing game data to and from web-sites, and between squads could support a worldwide and integrated dynamic campaign.

Onward to Off Topic ...




I edited my last post because I thought it was giving the wrong impression. I'd most likely buy the sim anyway, provided that it was realistic (but not unrealistic). :thumbsup:
....
When you try to look at it from a different point of view, the real losers will be the folks who just want to have fun, but can't because of certain 'regulations' which prevent them from flying the aircraft of their choice. What if ALL virtual squadrons adopted this idea, or were made to follow it? These people would be shunted and left out in the cold, which I feel is bad for the sim, and the community as a whole. This is why I'm opposed to this idea.

Just some things you may want to consider.



Point taken. I remember being yelled at, made fun of, put down, and called names in almost every sim or game because I did not meet somebody else's expectations of "realism" or "experience" or "skill." Katz kindly illustrated that the word "Noob" has negative cannotations. I will buy this sim regardless of content just on the off chance that it is as much or more fun than the other dozen-or-so flightsims / flight-games I already own.

I feel comfortable, from what the devs have stated, that FO will be fun and interesting to flightsim newcomers while sticking to the primary goal of hyper-realism. But will the realism community welcome newcomers, or scare them away for not thinking exactly the same? I wish for a thriving and growing community for flightsims, not a stagnant and clique'ish one. We all just want to have fun....

For the dev / publisher it's even more vital -- will the product reach enough people to profit and justify future support and expansion.

[Vlerkies]

I for one don't appreciate people being rude towards other people or in a virtual squadron pulling off stunts like that and abusing other people. I welcome new pilots and am always willing to help out where i can


:military:

~S~

[Antler]

(A little off topic...)

Hey Vlerkies,

I noticed a few days ago, but where's your avatar image gone?

[Bladehawk]

We all just want to have fun....

For the dev / publisher it's even more vital -- will the product reach enough people to profit and justify future support and expansion.


Sorry to interrupt but ...

"We all ???" Sorry to inform but you don´t speak in my name... :evil:

and FUN ??? to me a good simulator ( hope FO...) is 99% TO LEARN and 1% to have FUN. I compare a simulator to a good encyclopedia or technical book it´s made to learn, a comic book is to have the fun you want :oops:


About the people that buy the product, don´t worry Antler there are many Hardcore simmers like me that Will buy and make FO Live !!! 8)

[Zolos]

We all just want to have fun....

For the dev / publisher it's even more vital -- will the product reach enough people to profit and justify future support and expansion.


Sorry to interrupt but ...

"We all ???" Sorry to inform but you don´t speak in my name... :evil:

and FUN ??? to me a good simulator ( hope FO...) is 99% TO LEARN and 1% to have FUN. I compare a simulator to a good encyclopedia or technical book it´s made to learn, a comic book is to have the fun you want :oops:

About the people that buy the product, don´t worry Antler there are many Hardcore simmers like me that Will buy and make FO Live !!! 8)


Ok, I do not speak for you Bladehawk. I made the mistake of generalizing that other people had fun. May you get from FO and from life whatever you desire. You win. :wink:

[Vlerkies]

(A little off topic...)

Hey Vlerkies,

I noticed a few days ago, but where's your avatar image gone?



It's gone with the wind bud :thumbsup:


:military:

~S~

[Bladehawk]

Ok, I do not speak for you Bladehawk. I made the mistake of generalizing that other people had fun. May you get from FO and from life whatever you desire. You win. :wink:


no... no... you win :-p

The best to you to :drink:

[Vlerkies]

:lol:
Why don't we just hand out drinks to everyone. No underage drinking though :wink:


:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:



:military:

~S~

[Antler]

Bladehawk,

I apologise up front if I have misinterpreted your post. But if not,



About the people that buy the product, don´t worry Antler there are many Hardcore simmers like me that Will buy and make FO Live !!!


Why do you keep implying that I'm against this project? I am all for Fighter Ops, and I will buy fighter ops, because of the realism. All I'm doing in the other threads that you seem to get so worked up about is keeping an open mind for those who truly are new to flight sims.

If when FO comes out then word spreads that it is the best flight sim available, then those who have never in their life played one... Sorry: never in their life used one, may want to try it. If it is necesserily overwhelmingly (from their point of view) difficult, they may quit there and then, and the potential next best fighter pilot may not ever become a reality.

I understand that you do not want to get entertainment out of this, but an education of fighter jets. Thats fine. Others may have other goals, and that should be fine to you as well, so long as you are happy. After all, why do you care how anyone else spends their own time?

As I said before, I am going to buy Fighter Ops, and the realism is one of the reasons why. But also remember, the fact that you will be sitting in front of a keyboard, joystick and mouse makes it unrealistic. The fact that you will have a ~20 degree field of view on the (simulator) world will make it unrealistic, combined with the fact that the world doesn't change when you turn your head. The fact that the sound you will be hearing actually comes from vibrating cones situated in small cabinets placed around you, driven by electromagnetic forces, the signal of which comes from a PCB slotted within another PCB, placed probably not more than 2 meters away from you will make it unrealistic.

[IxianMace]

I couldn't have said it any better Antler...

[Vlerkies]

People please calm down.
Everybody repeat after me FO is a good thing
FO will be the best thing
FO FO FO :thumbsup:
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: For everyone


:military:

~S~

[Antler]

My apologies. Everyone, have a drink on me. :drink:

[Vlerkies]

No problem mate, everybody is enthusiastic about this new sim, thx for the drinks.
Why don't i unpack a lot of drink and we can get drunk and laugh and talk the biggest load of BS under the sun?
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:


:punk: :punk:

:military:

~S~

[Recio]

It is good we keep the forum respectful. We all could have different oppinions and ideas and we should respect each other.

The main goal of any PC sim is to provide fun, and they do it through various ways, like arcade games or realistic games. But games.

To have 100% realism it is better to join the Airforce.

Said this, I must state I do not like Arcade games and to enphasis this I will said that for me LOMAC is halfway between arcade and realism.

Anyway whatever Fighter Ops end up being, it must have the "fun" component. Of course fun could mean different things for each of us.
Some people find LOMAC fun while other think making a manual startup on Falcon. And of course real hardcore players (As I consider myself) find fun even playing Apollo 18. (If you never played and completed a take off in Apollo 18 you cannot consider yourself a seasoned hardcore player :-p )

So lets all toast for Fighter Ops, that it becomes a realistic, fun and challenging flight sim for the next decade. :drink:

[Vlerkies]

Hear! Hear! I'll drink to that :drink:


:military:


~S~

[Gee]

From a gaming point of view we don't want the sim to exclude anyone, ACE or FNG. Everybody has been new at some point and I'm sure that If we never played in CADET mode we certainly started flying with a CADET sim (My first real encounter with flight sim being ACE and ACE on my ZX spectrum).

My point was that the sim shouldn't be elitist but certainly squadrons could be (or think that they are). This would also be an incentive to compete with the so called ACES.
It would also make for good banter at the pilots bar !!

[Vlerkies]

Now the bantering in the pilots bar about missions is a very good idea, just imagine all the stories that will come from there :D

:thumbsup:

:military:

~S~

[Bladehawk]

Bladehawk,

I apologise up front if I have misinterpreted your post. But if not,

[quote]

If when FO comes out then word spreads that it is the best flight sim available, then those who have never in their life played one... Sorry: never in their life used one, may want to try it. If it is necesserily overwhelmingly (from their point of view) difficult, they may quit there and then, and the potential next best fighter pilot may not ever become a reality.
.

People who never played one... yep thei must be great fans of flight sims... :roll:

ok forget it !!! bring me a :drink:

[Zolos]

I'll buy the next round: To FO and to all who will support her!

:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:

[Vlerkies]

Thanks bud :drink:


:military:


~S~

[Hippy16th]

Well said Buckshot. If there is a "limit" to be put on who can fly what depndant on their how for why, then that is something that should be done by the squadron/wing that the pilot is in. If i buy this game soley for offline play, I had better be able to fly any and ALL aircraft that are flyable in the game/sim.

[Vlerkies]

Flying any A/C you want is starting to sound very tempting, i think that it should be controlled at virtual squadron level, and in single player just have interactive training courses for the various A/C's


:military:


~S~

[Buckshot]

One idea I do like, is a "America's Army" style qualification for each airframe/weapons system. Probably would make this able to be bypassed for those who really don't want to learn first, but could be enforced for online squads etc.

[Vlerkies]

That system should work perfectly Buck :thumbsup:

:drink: :drink:


:military:

~S~

[Hippy16th]

u know Vlerkies, that is pretty much what i had in mind....One on me :drink:

[Vlerkies]

Shot bud :thumbsup:


:military:


~S~

[Vlerkies]

Sorry for the repeat post, but my browser got stuck a bit :lol:


:military:


~S~

[Hippy16th]

u got the double clickies or something?

[Vlerkies]

Yeah my browser got all screwy on me :roll:


:military:


~S~

[Bladehawk]

One idea I do like, is a "America's Army" style qualification for each airframe/weapons system. Probably would make this able to be bypassed for those who really don't want to learn first, but could be enforced for online squads etc.

I AGREE. :thumbsup:

If i buy FO with 3 planes available, example:
F16, F15, A10 it should permit qualification in all tree.

Supose I have Played offline only with F16 I get only qualification to that Plane.
When I decide to go online I should only get permition to fly in F16 squadrons, (If I pass the Online qualification...)
If I wanna fly in a F15 Squadron then first I should graduate in that Air frame Offline, then I could try the Online Qualification.

Why ?
2 reasons:

1º Marketing ! The simmer has to BUY the FO series. If He want´s to fly F18 or A6 or F14, first he has to BUY the Naval OPS Series and so on... :thumbsup:

2º This makes the life Span of the product much greater.
I must BUY AND COMPLETE before I could "Expand to Online Qualification.
What do you think of this ?

[Vlerkies]

I agree with you Bladehawk

:drink:


:military:


~S~

[IxianMace]

One idea I do like, is a "America's Army" style qualification for each airframe/weapons system. Probably would make this able to be bypassed for those who really don't want to learn first, but could be enforced for online squads etc.

I actually don't mind that idea. I'm thinking it would be up to the online squadrons as to whether or not they want to enforce it though. :thumbsup:

[Vlerkies]

Yeah it would probably be up to them to enforce it or not, but i think most squadrons will inforce it


:military:


~S~

[spyro23]

For what I've seen in this topic every one have own FO vision. Some want hyper realistic sim, some only pure action, some good campagin ect.
Can FO make happy everyone?? I doubt it!!
But developers can do something to make happy majority of this people.
They should make FO very,very scalable. For example one may want fly carrer with whole training, promotions, changing planes, other one don't want fly all this traning/career mission, want begin his career flying F-22 (I know that F-22 will be not included in FO as flyable but you often mentioned this jet).
FO dev. can make 3 career modes: Easy, Medium, Hard and this should solve this issue (of course realism settings will be independet of careers realism)
What do you think about this???

[Sehm]

I agree Spyro23, but I think the game, first and foremost, is for the hardcore simmers. If the game has got very good training missions, then it wouldn't be a problem for a newbie to learn though.

[Sehm]

And a good and detailed manual :thumbsup:
Plz dev's, make a detailed manual, I beg you :military:

[spyro23]

I agree with you Sehm ( FO should be for hardcore simmers) but games/sim market require profits! Unfortunately there is to little real virtual fighters in the world to provide enought money to developer/publisher so they must make sim for almost everyone. They must sell as much copy as they can.
This is sad but true!!

[Sehm]

you're probably right. God bless G2i and GenAvSims :military:

[Vlerkies]

It's good to see all the brainstorming going on in here, and the friendly exchange of ideas and opinions

Keep it up guys


:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:

:military:


~S~

[Bladehawk]

you're probably right. God bless G2i and GenAvSims :military:

This time I will only say that when I SEE FO IN MY HANDS... 8)

For now I say Good Luck and You can count on me !
Cheers ! :drink:

[Vlerkies]

That's the spirit Bladehawk
:drink: :drink:


:military:


~S~

[spyro23]

Well say Bladehawk!!
From my expirence I know that majority sims in produsers opinion will definitly be "No. 1" but true is very different (Lomac).
There must be at least ONE TEAM who make his promises true.
I hope that this ONE TEAM will be FO developers (they have passion, skills & experience)

[Vlerkies]

And when you combine passion, skills and experience... what do you get? No not a Ferarri but Fighter Ops the best dang sim to hit the market :punk:


:military:


~S~

[jhook]

A previous post suggest that only the F-15, F-16 and A-10 will be modeled. :? I'm not sure, but I would guess that that will be correct for the first mod to come out. But so many are wanting to see a variety of aircraft. So, I suggest a "Advanced Fighter Ops", that can model aircraft like the F-22, F-117 (somewhat) and the B-1 and B-2 (somewhat). I think concentrating on three aircraft would give G2I/Gen Av time to get into the details of these aircraft that will make way for future mods! :thumbsup:

[Vlerkies]

Now that is brilliant thinking jhook
:drink: :drink: :drink: a few on me


:military:


~S~

[Bladehawk]

Give me F16 & F22 and I BUY IT ! ! ! ! :thumbsup:

[Vlerkies]

I'll be happy even if i just get the F-16 and A-10

Bar stock is full again
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:

For everyone


:military:


~S~

[spyro23]

Give me F16 & F22 and I BUY IT ! ! ! ! :thumbsup:
F-22 would be nice but flying this jet will be to easy! (I don't talk about avionics, flight characteristics, ect which you must master) I'm talking about opponents!
Which jet can handle 1vs.1 or 1vs.2 which Raptor?? NO ONE
Stealth, supercruise, hard to detect avionics, powerfoul radar, modern loadouts, thrust vectoring, thrust/weight ratio>1.55 (average 1.0~1.3 in modern jets). F-22 will reign in the Air!
Someone can say that 2-3 Typhoons, Rafales or Migs-31M will be able to shoot this air killer down- maby. But which adversary countries will be able buy so expensive and sophisticated jets?? I know that you can put many enemies in the air and make flight more challanging but this is not good solution!(of course in my opinion). At least were you find good F-22 datas (mostly confidencial)

[Rooakh]

Has any consideration been given to modeling trainer aircraft such as the T-6A Texan II (JPATS) , T-38 Talon, and the T-45 Goshawk?

[jhook]

Spyro 32 wote,

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:28 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F-22 would be nice but flying this jet will be to easy! (I don't talk about avionics, flight characteristics, ect which you must master) I'm talking about opponents!
Which jet can handle 1vs.1 or 1vs.2 which Raptor?? NO ONE

The truth is, the stealth fighter (F-22) is prety much the "air superiority fighter"! But when it come to do'in it doggy style, the jet I would actually choose is the Su-37! :shock: :shock: :shock: The F-22 has 45* thrust vectoring, while the Su-37 has over 90*!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: I saw video of the bird doing some controlled spin moves that scard the hell out of me! :shock: But when you can sneek up on any apponent, it's pretty much a done deal! :thumbsup:

[spyro23]

Jhook wrote:
The F-22 has 45* thrust vectoring, while the Su-37 has over 90*!!!

I think you write about maximum angle of attack!! Thrust vectoring isn't the same! Max trust vector in Su-37/35/30MKI is about 15 deg. up and 15 deg. down (the same engine Liulka-Saturn AL-31FU). Thrust vectoring is effective only in subsonic speeds (100 km/h up to 600-700km/h) while the majority dogfights were between 700-1000km/h! The most advantage of thrust vectoring is ability to very short take off, of course in tactic wiev (that says scientist not only me). You can say that Su can make Cobra, OK, try use it in dogfight, Good luck :mrgreen:
Without velocity(and altitude) you are dead!!! Cobra is nothing more then very effective braking. About dogfight between F-22 and Su-37. Manouverability and combat thrust/weight ratio are most important (missiles too). Manouverability equal (no precision info) but T/W ratio 1.55 vs. 1.3 in Su 37.
I agree that Su-37 will be have powerful radar (electronic scanned array),modern avionics, FADEC and digital flight control system, but also have huge radar crosssection!! During BVR fight F-22 will detect earlier (very low crossection). I'm not try say that Su-37 will be no danger to F-22 but between this two jets is whole generation difference.
I read for many years western articles about russians jets. When Su-27 make Cobra during airshow west try quess whatfor. They speculate that Cobra is a dogfight manouver! Few years later this pilot say that cobra was only a show trick!! When russian add small lift surfaces in front of wings in Su-33/30MKI/35/37 west quess that those surfaces increase manoeuvrability. Truth is different. They instal new radar antenna, more effective but also much heavier (80-130 kg) and without this surfaces new Su's are unable to trim!!! I agree that russian planes fly hell good during airshows but in real combat......things look much different.
Since II w.w USSR/Russia is very closed country.Any data's about modern weapons was/is very protect. If you get someone only part of information second part he will be try to guess and that it work. Why russian named this same aircraft few times??(Su-27IB/32FN/34). They try deceive potential enemies.
Once again, I don't try to say that russian/eastern weapon is bad! In many aspects are better than western (for example S-300) I'm only try to make some things clear(because I have more ability to known russian airplanes, in my country majority weapons systems were made in USSR).

[jhook]

Spyro 32,
You should know more about these planes than we do, and I hope you will be asked about them by G2I/Gen Av. :thumbsup: I guess my info isn't as accuret as yours. Thrust vectoring does help in the turn though. The F-22 can turn 180* inside 300' distanced at 300nts. And I don't know about dog fighting at 700 to 1000kl per hour, but the best performance for most aircraft (I'm assuming Russian jets too) is operatiing between 300 and 450 nts. (I think that comes out to some 550kl per hour) The aircraft can turn much faster and manuver much better at these speeds. When defeating a missle (heat seaker), the first thing is to turn into the missle and eject "flare". This has to be done quickly or you exhaust becomes a better target than the flare. All in all, realy good feedback and iv'e been offically schooled on Russian aircraft,
Thanks Spyro 32!!! :thumbsup: :drink:

[Buckshot]

Has any consideration been given to modeling trainer aircraft such as the T-6A Texan II (JPATS) , T-38 Talon, and the T-45 Goshawk?

Absolutely :wink:

In fact those exact aircraft are being considered as a trainer aircraft, once we research what info are able to obtain on each aircraft we'll probably put up a poll so the community can choose which one we model.

[spyro23]

700 km/h~380Kts, 1000km/h~540Kts. Sorry for those units but we use to use "km/h" and "meters" not Kts and feets in Warsaw Pact . I know that Su-27 family have got corner speed (best turn) at about 570km/h (310kts). But in combat you must care also altitude, acceleration/decceleration ability ect. of, so average combat speed is higher than corner speed. Other words you may be unable to maintain corner speed during whole dogfight so in first part you have got higher speed because during high G manouvers you lost velocity.

[jhook]

Spyro 23,
Were on the same page here. I guess my kilometers v's knotts isn't too good. I would also agree Su-27 is problebly better in a basic turn. I think F-22 will prove that thrust vectoring with fly-by-wire controls (tied into the thrust vectoring) will prove the best turn v's speed ratios (also Su-37). There is a calculation of turn - energy - climb, and dive = energy + thrust. So, accelerating thrust into a turn is the practice, and drag (speed brakes) plus climb and turn will reduce energy. It is the pilot that can use these principles the best that wins the dog fight. As we say in the Navy, "Loose the sight, loose the fight!" so visual plays a big part too. All in all, great feedback as we dive into areodynamics and the FM.

[spyro23]

Always in duty :military: If some one have question about eastern (majority but not only) weapon system, why something work ect. I will try help!!
"Knowledge is everything" like use to say one of my proffesors :D

[Bladehawk]

Give me F16 & F22 and I BUY IT ! ! ! ! :thumbsup:
F-22 would be nice but flying this jet will be to easy! (I don't talk about avionics, flight characteristics, ect which you must master) I'm talking about opponents!
Which jet can handle 1vs.1 or 1vs.2 which Raptor?? NO ONE
Stealth, supercruise, hard to detect avionics, powerfoul radar, modern loadouts, thrust vectoring, thrust/weight ratio>1.55 (average 1.0~1.3 in modern jets). F-22 will reign in the Air!
Someone can say that 2-3 Typhoons, Rafales or Migs-31M will be able to shoot this air killer down- maby. But which adversary countries will be able buy so expensive and sophisticated jets?? I know that you can put many enemies in the air and make flight more challanging but this is not good solution!(of course in my opinion). At least were you find good F-22 datas (mostly confidencial)


:evil:
I have already write enough in other topics about the special conditions that we "could" be permited to fly in a F22 Raptor, if you haven´t read yet... go and read ! :evil:

[jhook]

Bladehawk,
Hey buddy, calm down, I read the post and I agree that you would have to quallify a certain period of hours before the sim hands off something like the F/A-22 Raptor, or the F/A-177 Nighthawk. I think if you limit the amount of super aircraft (basically, air supperiority fighter), the game could become more challanging. :mrgreen: I think "Advanced Fighter Ops" will be significant on two levels, the introduction of air supperiority aircraft for both (all) sides of the conflict. :D All in all, good feed back don't ya think? :thumbsup:

[Vlerkies]

Well said jhook

Here Baldehawk have a few brewskies
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:

And for everyone else
:drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:


:military:


~S~

[Bladehawk]

brewskies :drink:
Im calm now... thanks... 8)

[Vlerkies]

No problem bud.

:thumbsup:


:military:

~S~

[Bladehawk]

Bladehawk,
Hey buddy, calm down, I read the post and I agree that you would have to quallify a certain period of hours before the sim hands off something like the F/A-22 Raptor, or the F/A-177 Nighthawk. I think if you limit the amount of super aircraft (basically, air supperiority fighter), the game could become more challanging. :mrgreen: I think "Advanced Fighter Ops" will be significant on two levels, the introduction of air supperiority aircraft for both (all) sides of the conflict. :D All in all, good feed back don't ya think? :thumbsup:

My aircraft for "Advanced Fighter Ops"
F/A-22 Raptor
F-35/JSF why??? Because :
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/aviat-6.htm

I like to read before asking ... :thumbsup:

[Vlerkies]

Good reading bud. Shot

:military:

~S~