• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

did the world stop turning or is it only us??

I wasn't a big fan of the continuation of the SU-27 family until I happened across the deploying SU-35s from India. I saw them depart and they were quite an impressive airplane. They're probably significantly cheaper than the F-22 and much easier to work on, while being a comporable airplane when it comes to vectored manouverability. Radar capabilities I have no idea of.

I think the main bottom line IS the bottom line. Lots of countries are in economic slumps and have been for a while. As a result, the cash isn't there for the gagillion dollar supertoys.
 
<slightly> getting back to the original purpose of the thread (as I understood it), more "modern" airplanes for FS-X, One of the problems is getting "reasonably" accurate performance figures, and then re-creating the "known" performance. Then there is simulating the modern systems

What's the purpose of creating an F-40 (okay, so I"m making up the designation) if we can't simulate the fancy systems? Then it becomes just a fast-handling Lear Jet....

I htink that the main problem is not a lack of enthusiasm for the modern airplanes/systems, as it may be the limitation of FS itself.





OF course I may be totally off here.... :)
 
Welll, i can certainly undersatand the misunderstanding. What i was implying is that the FS community is stuck in the past, remaking the same stuff it's made time and ime again since 2002.. It's perhaps my biggest gipe, and sorry, viet vet that i am and all, the f-22 is is mickey mouse next to an aircraft that can rotate on it's axis in mid flight and shoot back at you while it's still flying in front of you.. However, thats neither here nor there.. This isnt supposedc to be about real world aircraft and we all each and everyone of us have our personal, choices we deem best for the very reason that we believe they are. Rather this is a call for the need of us as developers to get our heads out of korea, vietnam, and georgy bushes iraq fiasco and start looking at moving this hobby into the present. There's enough f-16s and enough f-14s and 15s out there to make anyone dizzy.
I hope it's ok to post a link here. This plane is already in development and is due out in 2015. It's "little" brother is already flying and is scheduled to enter service hext year or so.. http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showfull.php?photo=15137
However, this is also where personal prejudice and hatred come into play. No one believes these people have the capbility of building anything more complex than a set of hopsticks, and yet, there sits one of the mos advanced aircraft designs in the world. Of course i apologize for using such a broad stroke in my statement but it gets very frustrating hat we as aircraft enthusiasts should allow out pride and politics to fog over the reality that is the aviation world.
Enemy wise? Well, when your in the military, the only friends you have are he ones that your government tells you you have that day, aand those can change as history has shown.. :(
incredibld pics btw. beautiful countryside. and incredible boats :D ..
 
FelixFFDS said:
<slightly> getting back to the original purpose of the thread (as I understood it), more "modern" airplanes for FS-X, One of the problems is getting "reasonably" accurate performance figures, and then re-creating the "known" performance. Then there is simulating the modern systems

What's the purpose of creating an F-40 (okay, so I"m making up the designation) if we can't simulate the fancy systems? Then it becomes just a fast-handling Lear Jet....

I htink that the main problem is not a lack of enthusiasm for the modern airplanes/systems, as it may be the limitation of FS itself.





OF course I may be totally off here.... :)
Click to expand...

Welll, this entire past year, i've staked my name, reputation ( or hope of one ) as well as any believability i might ever have in this community on denying those limitations and blowing past them. I'll be the first to admit that i've only been perhaps 80% successful at it so far, but when i started, i didnt even know trignometry. I'm still struggling with it. You all are gonna hit me real hard here, and thas ok, but i dont believe in any limitations that dont originate between the ears.
"I cant" is not part of my dictionary.
That said, I've discovered that if you put a file in with your airplane that has a .cfg extension on it, it will change the behaviour of the aircraft, even if there's and aircraft.cfg file in there. How far this can be taken and what he possibilities are for modeling systems is I dont know. I'm still experimenting, but three part fde's appear to be doable and worth looking into. I just wish i was more of a programmer type person..
Pam


</slightly>
 
Railrunner130 said:
I wasn't a big fan of the continuation of the SU-27 family until I happened across the deploying SU-35s from India. I saw them depart and they were quite an impressive airplane. They're probably significantly cheaper than the F-22 and much easier to work on, while being a comporable airplane when it comes to vectored manouverability. Radar capabilities I have no idea of.

I think the main bottom line IS the bottom line. Lots of countries are in economic slumps and have been for a while. As a result, the cash isn't there for the gagillion dollar supertoys.
Click to expand...

I'm honestly envious of you. that would have been a sight to see. As for cost? i have no idea. The Su-35 is the standardized version of the SU-37 with full thrust vectoring via independently rotating nozzles, no just paddles. it's an incredible plane. I however think your correct. it cant possibly be as expensive as the f-22..
 
Oh modern aircraft for FSX is a big thing on my list! Yes if you know me my first one on the list is the Buccaneer but who cares, its modern in terms it stopped flying in 93... Anyway, im agreeing with Pam on terms that its always the same old stuff recreated... I think some modelers are thinking of whats coming to their minds or what popular instead of what is either needed or hasnt been represented for ages... I would love a Eurofighter Typhoon for FSX, and a *cough* Bucc *cough*:gossip::whistle:

Trignometry is simple Pam, if thats the one i know of...
 
I hope it's ok to post a link here. This plane is already in development and is due out in 2015. It's "little" brother is already flying and is scheduled to enter service hext year or so.. http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/...hp?photo=15137

However, this is also where personal prejudice and hatred come into play. No one believes these people have the capbility of building anything more complex than a set of hopsticks, and yet, there sits one of the mos advanced aircraft designs in the world. Of course i apologize for using such a broad stroke in my statement but it gets very frustrating hat we as aircraft enthusiasts should allow out pride and politics to fog over the reality that is the aviation world.
Click to expand...

Personal prejudice and hatred have nothing to do with it; Chinese aviation has for years produced little more than enhanced copies or license-built examples of Soviet and Western designs. (Note the SU-27 in the background of the picture you posted.) Previous attempts at homegrown designs; such as the Shanghai Y-10, NAMC J-12 and XAC JH-7 were inferior to Russian and Western designs.

It looks nice enough, but the proof is in how well it does in the field, and for how long. If it does come out in 2015 as planned; what will it be up againist by then; no, the rest of the world has not stopped turning or developing new fighters. :focus:

EDIT: see http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.113/pub_detail.asp
 
Bjoern said:
UKMIL has a Buccaneer for F-...disregard that, it's a portover.
Click to expand...

Yep its a port, just the same as thwe Bucc i operate in FSX, but the Bucc im using is of DSB quality and build and looks a damn site better, i have however modified the panel to work with guages that i have installed...
 
I think there are two reasons why we don't have a modern fighter in FSX. First - some data is classified, second, more important reason is time and costs of developing high quality aircraft - take a look how long it took to make VRS Superbug.
 
Classified information is a very good reason not to have more than we do, but, I dont think it's enough to stop us. Like was said, The chinese use other aircraft, like the sukhois and Lavi so we can "guess" that some of that same design philosophy will be carried forward into newer aircraft. Withthat, we can guesstimate that the only real secret his plane has,: the internal systems: is pretty standard to current russian technology. The rest however, cant be hidden. Everything that plane is and does is spelled out precisely in every single inch of it's airframe, and just has to be deciphered back to it's number origins to be understood. Lucky me eh?? thats what i do for a hobby..
Frankly, i dont know that this thing will ever fly, but it's little brother, the J-12 is already flying and is a fine looking aircraft in it's own right, though frankly, i wouldnt be afraid to put a typhoon up against it. It looks clumsy; Cool, but clumssy.
 
empeck said:
second, more important reason is time and costs of developing high quality aircraft - take a look how long it took to make VRS Superbug.
Click to expand...

yeah, but it's such a cool little plane. Iris has a couple like that as well, and for me, well, it's not like i have any friends or a normal job or anything so yeah, i spend the greatest majority of my time researching data, I think permanent brain melt is a lifestyle anymore.. Still, when some person likes my work, it's a very special thing and makes it all worth it somehow.
 
I can identify Pam. I do freeware scenery and I'm a confirmed download number slut (my form of payment).

The reason no one is doing or begging for the latest and greatest may be as simple as lack of familiarity/emotional attachment. I've found that the probability of someone downloading a scenery seems to be directly proportional to their familiarity with the scenery area or an emotional attachment to it.

With new stuff, there's not generally much of either, and for payware I'm assuming ( I know ... ) you need lots of both.

Just an observation...

Jim
 
You know, Jim may be on to something. I know with cars, the most popular rides are often the ones that the old guys had when they were young turks. My father was a big model train buff, and that was largely based on having grown up when they were still a major form of transportation. We all gravitate to the icons and images that we formed attachments to as young 'uns, it seems. Given that, I'm sure there will be a glut of F22's on the market... in about 25 years. ;-)
 
I never thought choosing a Sim project could get so politicized! One reason I stay freeware, is so I CAN make WHATEVER I want, WHEN I want. New, old, WW2, Nam, Sci-Fi, whatever! Heck ,even the payware outfits have almost the same freedoms.
I have released planes in the past, and have gotten an earful for not releasing something else. Almost wanna make you retire....
So pick the plane you love, fire up Gmax...
 
Piglet said:
I never thought choosing a Sim project could get so politicized! One reason I stay freeware, is so I CAN make WHATEVER I want, WHEN I want. New, old, WW2, Nam, Sci-Fi, whatever! Heck ,even the payware outfits have almost the same freedoms.
I have released planes in the past, and have gotten an earful for not releasing something else. Almost wanna make you retire....
So pick the plane you love, fire up Gmax...
Click to expand...

Piglet,

The only earful you'll hear from me is that your FS2004 F-5 series is a pilot killer...or at least an OBIO killer. I have the plane installed in the sim, and have TRIED to fly it a number of times....never make it more than a mile or two from the runway before I crash and burn. Those F-5s are brutual on HARD setting. And I though the CFS2 conversion of them was tough to handle.

OBIO
 
I think "they" are going for the UAVs more - with peelows on the ground in a "sim seat" to fly the things.

A bit like FSX or CFS for the boys with the money really... (and no blackouts or redouts anymore) So modern combat planes can out-G a manned one.

So the new recruiting procedure for airforce pilots could me more like "Home many hours do you have in MSFS?" and suddenly the average pilot age will go from 27 to 57 :costumes:
 
spotlope said:
You know, Jim may be on to something. I know with cars, the most popular rides are often the ones that the old guys had when they were young turks. My father was a big model train buff, and that was largely based on having grown up when they were still a major form of transportation. We all gravitate to the icons and images that we formed attachments to as young 'uns, it seems. Given that, I'm sure there will be a glut of F22's on the market... in about 25 years. ;-)
Click to expand...


And it could be the crowd one runs with....:jump: When I first starting simming I was a fast jet flyer; if it had a prop, I steered clear. Then I started frequenting the Outhouse and suddenly props weren't that bad ! I even started flying a/c with more than one wing ! A good progression and expansion of the hangar.

The Big Cat is still king of my hangar, but there are a lot of props lined up behind the venerable Grumman.
 
Piglet said:
I never thought choosing a Sim project could get so politicized! One reason I stay freeware, is so I CAN make WHATEVER I want, WHEN I want. New, old, WW2, Nam, Sci-Fi, whatever! Heck ,even the payware outfits have almost the same freedoms.
I have released planes in the past, and have gotten an earful for not releasing something else. Almost wanna make you retire....
So pick the plane you love, fire up Gmax...
Click to expand...

Awww nahhh. I'm not trying to politicize it. Too damned old for that stuff. But like others, i have an opinion of what i would wish happened ( if for noother reason than the fact that i cant model so save my skin and i reallllllly want to program the flight model for some of these things ) annnd i guess maybe i'm whing a bit. Oh well. worlds smallest fiddle and all that. still, it's a bit disppointing to see yet another f-16 no matter how good it is, and not something thats never been made ( like this really great looking little indian produced thing i ran across ) .

Maybe i'm just ragging cuz i dont get to build the planes I like. I dont have that option. I program the planes other people like to build, and it would be nice to get lucky just once and find something hat was reallly challenging and fullfvfilling for me. :D.

Sorry i upset you. that was never the intent of thi thread. I love your work, and wouldn change one thing about what you do.
Pam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top