To: falcon3 (Falcon3 Mailing list) Reply-To: falcon3 (Falcon3 Mailing list) Errors-To: postmaster@onion.rain.com Precedence: bulk Bcc: falcon3-outgoing Subject: Falcon3 Digest V4 : I43 Falcon3 Digest Volume 4 : Issue 43 Sat Aug 28 07:53:22 PDT 1993 Compilation copyright (C) 1993 Jeff Beadles Send submissions to "falcon3@onion.rain.com" Send add/drop requests to "majordomo@onion.rain.com" Archives are available via ftp from onion.rain.com [147.28.0.161] and mirrored on cactus.org in /pub/falcon3 Today's Topics: Re: Falcon 3.02 lessons not alphabe "Pete Williams" Re: AVTR and SH contributions knutson@mcc.com (Jim Knutson) Re: Falcon 3.02 lessons not alphabe knutson@mcc.com (Jim Knutson) Is 386 enuf for Mig 29? Michael Walker Usenet Guide. Kris Ong ------------------------------------------------------------ From: "Pete Williams" Subject: Re: Falcon 3.02 lessons not alphabetical I think this problem existed in 3.01.1 as well. When I brought in new missions (Powell & Basham's stuff, Jim's SORTIE* series), they went to the bottom of the list. I haven't checked this since going to 3.02, but it's probably the same. Maybe they are ordered by the creation date, or by the date you bring them into F3......? Pete ------------------------------- From: Korhonen Tommi Subject: APEX INBOUND!! Hi all Mig owners, As the game has not yet reached the Old Continent, could someone tell us about th Apex weapons system? Is it somehow special or superior weapon from the Red Stars' arsenal? Every time (every single) that I can remeber on a campaing when a wingman announces "Apex Inbound!" I have already lost him. They can do nothing, neither can I. When I get a launch warning and locate an apex, I KNOW it is going to be gliding from here on... :( I am not too good in evasive, but still I can get decend evasion results. When it's apex, it's going to hit 90% of time! I can survive even the dreaded SA-7 most of the time. The Falcon manual is kind of abbridged on the missile... ===== How come the sa-7 reach us from 6000-10000 feet as it's range is supposed to be smaller than that? ===== I vote YES for F/A 18 Hornet add-on! As the Finnish Air Force have just bought them as our main fighter, everyone is looking for a simulator of it! And if it is done by Spetrum Holobyte... oh, boy! BTW, our air force is strictly land based... Hope it will be simulated. ===== Still I am crazy for helos. Be there AH-64! (wish,wish wish)(hint hint hint) "Stay on target!" -'Ghost' T.Korhonen *** Women are like Thorny Roses: *** k138836@cc.tut.fi ** Look beautiful, smell fine, ** Physics & Something *** a moment and then they wither away *** ------------------------------- From: knutson@mcc.com (Jim Knutson) Subject: Re: AVTR and SH contributions > Any comments? (I wished, SH would post a followup) It could still be a fixed time slice mechanism with smarts on dealing with object destruction/creation. case 1: In your flight you fly NOE. In playback, you crash. The playback continues playing the tape, notices your plane object still has data and places it back in the air. case 2: In your flight, a missile takes out a bogey. In playback, the missile misses, but the object data either disappears or crashes. The playback notices this and takes appropriate action either making the object blow up or follow the data into the ground. >From the playback point of view, fixed time slice seems the only way to go (unless you timestamp each slice). It would be very difficult to intuit just when the next slice is supposed to happen otherwise. I know there are SH employees on this list. I think it's unfortunate that they cannot or will not contribute, but in some way I can understand this. Many companies frown on employees talking about products for fear that proprietary info might leak out. I don't know if this is the case here or not. In addition, it may not be wise to let a bunch of people on this list know you work for SH. As an example, look at Jay Wilbur of Id Software. He posts regularly to csipg.action answering DOOM questions. My guess is that his mail traffic is incredible and he gets very little done because of this. One possible solution, would be to contribute through the customer relations interface (S_Holobyte@AOL.COM or the CI$ equivalent). Then replies go back to customer support rather than the contributor and the contributor can remain anonymous, address wise. Lastly, even though SH maintains an account on CI$ and AOL, it isn't clear how much they contribute there as well. Paul, can you give us a comparison of CI$ and this list and SH's involvement with each? Jim Knutson | | knutson@mcc.com --=oOo=-- cs.utexas.edu!milano!knutson + Wk: (512) 338-3362 Check Six! ------------------------------- From: knutson@mcc.com (Jim Knutson) Subject: Re: Falcon 3.02 lessons not alphabetical My guess is that the RFM files are listed in directory order with no sorting. This is the default for DOS and programs must do something special to present a different ordering. Jim ------------------------------- From: Michael Walker Subject: Is 386 enuf for Mig 29? Hi, I've been monitoring all the success stories about people flying the Mig, and I'm wondering, are most of you using 486's? Because on my 386/40, I seem to have one of three choices 1) fly in the same aggressive manor as I would in an f-16, and destoy my ordinance and flaps, often before I've even fired a shot, 2) spend all of my time staring at the g force indicator, and flying like an old lady...and getting flamed quickly, or basically disengaging, or 3) lowering the flight model to the one below complex. I HATE doing this, but even now when I can control the aircraft, it still pitches, yaw's and buffets so severely, it is literally impossible to prevent g force overloads without toning down aggressiveness radically. I find that even in simple turns, it does the same buffeting or popping up and down, just horizontally. Flying intercepts, I just attempt to descend or turn, and I've already destroyed all my ordinance. So, then trying to go to guns, I'm like a hog on ice, every move so exagerated, I try to shoot the aircraft flying straight and level on a training missions and I'm careening out of control like I was drunk. On the next lower level, suddenly there is a use for the horizontal trim controls, other than suicide. I can out manouver other aircraft, and at least trying gun shots isn't embarassing. I still tend to over roll, and all subtle adjustments are WAY overdone, but I'm competitive. I can't imagine how anyone could use this aircraft effectively on my PC, at any other level. So what's the deal, do I live with disgrace of using the wimpy flight modelling, do I finally shell out for a 486? Mike ------------------------------- From: slb512@trainserv.fastc.wpafb.af.mil (stuart butts/taai/75033) Subject: Airspeeds > From: eggenste@boole.informatik.uni-dortmund.de > Subject: IAS in MiG-29/radar mutation/strange briefings > > Please correct me if I'm wrong: > 1) MiG-29 has a switch to display 'adjusted airspeed', > which is believed to be CAS (callibrated airspeed) The switch (CTRL-A, I believe) changes the display on the HUD from true airspeed (TAS) to indicated airspeed (IAS) and back. TAS is the speed you are moving relative to the air mass. IAS is so called, because it is what you read on the airspeed guage. Calibrated airspeed (CAS) is IAS corrected for instrument error and installation effects, also known as position-error or pitot-static corrections. These corrections are very dependent on aircraft shape and where you place the pitot tube and static ports for measuring airspeed and altitude. CAS represents what your TAS would be if you were flying at sea level on a standard day. CAS is corrected for compressability effects to obtain equivalent airspeed (EAS). EAS is corrected for density (read altitude) effects to obtain TAS. > 2) in *reality*, CAS is used for dogfighting as > v_stall and corner-speed are roughly CAS constants This is essentially true, espescially for V_stall. Corner speeds however will vary a little with altitude due to the higher Mach numbers (read compressibality) effects at higher altitudes (20,000 ft and above). > 3) Your F-16 in F3.02 (w/o MiG-29) has only a TAS display > and there corner-speed is a TAS-constant (I tried both > the complex and HI-FI flight-model) Corner speed will never be a constant when measured in TAS, at least not in the real world :). I have no idea how the F3 flight model is put together, so I can't tell you want our F3 corner speed is. > Now I wonder: Does cornerspeed *in MiG-29* depend on TAS or CAS???? > If the answer is TAS: > Then what's that switch for? In the real world, it depends on TAS, since how much lift you can generate is determined by TAS. However we use IAS (or CAS in the case of aircraft with air data computers to make the required position-error corrections, like the F-16) as a guide to flying the aircraft since the imporatant values - V_stall and V_corner, are essentially constant with changes in altitude when expressed this way. > If the answer is CAS: > What happens if you do a dogfight over a modem > between a F-16 and a MiG-29? It would be very > weird if one plane had it's cornerspeed at a given > TAS while the other at a given CAS when dogfighting > at high altitudes. Why? Very few aircraft have the exact same V_corner. > And why hasn't SH included a CAS/TAS display-toggle & CAS- > governed flight-model for the F-16 in the F3.02 patch?? They say they are saving the toggle for F4. The flight model must be governed by TAS. IAS/CAS are for presentation purposes only. Stuart Butts sib512@scc.fastc.wpafb.af.mil slb512%server3@fastc-issu.wpafb.af.mil ------------------------------- From: jjsterre@acs.ucalgary.ca Subject: Ooops! \\illiam informed me afterseeing my posting from the AOL conference that the impending arrival of a patch from DI doesn't mean that we may see a Tornado patch soon - patches are sent from DI to SH fairly often for testing. I _think_ this means that we (waiting for the patch in the real world) don't know any better than before when it is coming. If I'm wrong again then \\illiam will probably do something really mean to me 8) James Sterrett jjsterre@acs.ucalgary.ca ------------------------------- From: John Asa Price Subject: using PADLOCK to land... I tried using PADLOCK view to land, as when you turn on ILS, padlock will look at the base of the runway... I found the display to be too jerky (not just when moving around the rear, either) I figured it would be real helpful in adjusting my downwind-crosswind-final turn to be lined up more correctly. It didn't seem to help me at all.... I did find that if I use the LOOK-UP on the forward view, that I could better judge this turn from Crosswind to Final. Any hints? -- John Asa Price SAS Institute, Inc. internet: sasjzp@unx.sas.com (919) 677-8000 ext 6976 compu$erve: 73232,1431 ------------------------------- From: Kris Ong Subject: Usenet Guide. [ Someone could take a copy to the local print shop and make copies for people who are interested. It's ~200 pages single-sided. I would do it if nobody else wants to. (hint hint :-) --Jeff] After seeing a lot of people asking for another format for the UGF3, I decided to give conversion a try. I thought I had it today... converting the .ps file to .epsi, turns out, that the programs I use don't support epsi, just eps. Now, if anyone out there has the software to convert the ps to eps, please help, if this works, we should have the Usenet Guide to Falcon 3 in formats like WordPerfect and MS Word. Kris. - -- krismon@quack.kfu.com An eye for an eye will make the kris.ong@rose.com whole world blind. Prodigy: GRTV13B -MLK Jr. ------------------------------- [[ End of digest Volume 4 : Issue 43 ]]