Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Thank you Zsoltquack! Very kind indeed :salute:
Regards, Dave.
p.s. Sorry, but I think there's perhaps one texture file missing ['extradosG_T.dds'] for the 'eyes' on the canards?
The start up procedure is very well explained on this video and then
quite easy to remember :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3DoHJi_ZIw
It became a second nature
:mixedsmi:
VaporZ
I'd like to know how the new Rafale compares to the Rollus Mirage 2000-5 for FSX. I'm a big fan of Rollus work, but on my small crapy laptop his Mirage is not very FPS efficient (radar, pfd, mfd and such are a bit on the heavy side). Would you say the Rafale is similar, or better than the Mirage? Thanks!
I run a stock Dell Inspiron 530, 2 years old. This is a tough call, as we all can operate such different hardware for FSX.
I get 35 FPS at MCAS Yuma Arizona with FSX aircraft like the freeware Royale French Navy Etendard, Iris A-10 and Dino's F-35 . The VRS Hornet gets 25-30 fps consistently at Yuma. The Rafale gets 20-24 in the same area and much lower in more even dense areas in FSX. The other aircraft mentioned still maintain good frame rates in dense areas but I wouldnt fly the Rafale in a really Dense area like LAX for example, as my frames get unacceptably low. However in those areas, the Rollus Mirage 2000 runs well, 20-26 fps. I really hope the Rafale gets an update to help frames as it looks great and is a fine addition to FSX. This has been my been my experience in FSX. Hope it helps with your decision.
It is my understanding from reading somewhere that Roland had a a hard drive crash and lost a bunch of code for the Rafale that had to be rebuilt. That's probably why you see different stuff in videos from two years ago.
:ernae: