The watermark is so tiny that one can barely notice it. With the P3d menu visible it is neatly buried on the right side of the menu bar.

The watermark is irrelevant. The argument is, as p3d users we cannot use tacpack unless we buy an academic license. An utterly ridiculous state of affairs.

 

What makes it even more ridiculous is the aerosoft just released their f14 for prepar3d and it is recommended to be used with the tacpack!

 

Chris

And a fine aircraft it is. 

Indeed. The great thing is we are finally seeing these jewels - previously fsx only, now available on the p3d side. Yes their entrance might be a little clumsy or cumbersome..... but they are finally arriving! I say bring it on....

The watermark is so tiny that one can barely notice it. With the P3d menu visible it is neatly buried on the right side of the menu bar.

I also wouldn't be caught dead releasing a video with the menu bar showing.

Re P3dV3.0.....

Tac pac.... has anyone heard whether the use of tac pac will once again  be limited to the Academic version in 3.0?

Thanks.

Dave

Re P3dV3.0.....

Tac pac.... has anyone heard whether the use of tac pac will once again  be limited to the Academic version in 3.0?

Thanks.

Dave

 

According to a post in the VRS support forum, unlikely this will change. The seminal issue for VRS is that LM makes no distinction between commercial and non-commercial use of the Professional license. There is no way at this time for VRS to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial use of their product with P3D except thru the differentiation of Academic vs. Professional P3D licensing.

Although VRS will never say this publicly, they will not sell a product that undercuts P3d Pro Plus by thousands of dollars. That's what happen if they sold TacPack for the P3d Pro version.

EULA debates aside, the core issue to pay attention to is this.

 

Neither FSX nor P3D will ever be a true tactical combat simulator. Those who crave a high fidelity Hornet to fight in are much better served awaiting DSC F18c.

EULA debates aside, the core issue to pay attention to is this.

 

Neither FSX nor P3D will ever be a true tactical combat simulator. Those who crave a high fidelity Hornet to fight in are much better served awaiting DSC F18c.

I do agree with you but (you know there is always a "however"), DCS, so far is not showing any signs of simulating the complete "day in the life of" for a US Navy pilot. There is some hope with the PilotEdge/DCS integration but overall DCS simulates only about 10-15% of a real world Navy pilot's operations.

DCS has one vital thing VRS cannot ever have:  AI forces to mingle and fight alongside and with.

DCS has one vital thing VRS cannot ever have:  AI forces to mingle and fight alongside and with.

 

Again, I agree with you (here it comes) but only if you fly sim solo. If you fly with a squadron, there are other options. Probably the best thing about DCS is the AA behavior and AI bad guys, imho.

Again, I agree with you (here it comes) but only if you fly sim solo. If you fly with a squadron, there are other options. Probably the best thing about DCS is the AA behavior and AI bad guys, imho.

Yes, but the trouble with flying VRS TP Rhino online with other humans, which I have done in FSX, is that there's no data link andso no way to know who is where.

Yes, but the trouble with flying VRS TP Rhino online with other humans, which I have done in FSX, is that there's no data link andso no way to know who is where.

 

true that.

I have been nagging Varmint at VRS for a functional intership datalink for years now.  So far showing no interest to add this.  Until there is one, I wont purchase the P3D version.