Bombs on aircraft

[LAdamson 240]

>I would consider it serious dumbing-down if FS went in this>direction.I suppose I disagree! :-hah When I paid big bucks for to fly "Air Combat's - fighter pilot for a day" in Marchetti SF260's with laser gun sights; it certainly did not dumb down my pilot skills, and with out doubt enhanced them. There is a whole lot of rudder work, and strict attention to maintaining air speeds to avoid stalls. Ranks right up there with aerobatic instruction in the Pitts! :7 It's not your day to day navigation in a Cessna 172 or 767, but military aircraft and operations certainly fit within the realm of flight, and I have no problem with it. As a general rule, military sims come up short when it comes to world wide areas to sim fly.I have no problem with mixing it up.L.Adamson - North American P-51D's look great in flight simulater!

[Guest grapesh]

>I would consider it serious dumbing-down if FS went in this>direction.I disagree with that. You can dumb-down FS even now by setting everything to "Easy" and flying under the bridges and do other FAA-prohibited activities. The combat simulation can be a serious business of a meticulous recreation of the war birds flight dynamics and weaponry. I see nothing wrong in allowing people combine civilian and combat simulators. There is nothing wrong in "combining" things because everyone can get what they want. As for the media-friendly stance on weapons simulation ban - I'm absolutely certain that FS community should condemn this B.S., not support the "taboos". This is virtual world, not real, -- otherwise public should as well object to training 15-yr olds to fly jumbo-jets because such a picture can be scary. Cheers,=S.V.=

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<>:-lol That's a first for you and me.I appreciate that flying a military jet requires a lot of skill but FS has always been a civilian flight simulator - not a military one. I'm guessing that MS dumped Combat Flight Sim because it didn't sell enough copies so it would be strange if they were to incorporate a military element into FS.But I'm guessing that those who hanker after these jets don't want them for their aerobatic capabilities but simply for the number of bombs they can carry and how realistic the explosions are :(Anyway, all this is speculation until an announcement from Aces and I'm guessing that SP2 won't feature any military stuff so we're looking at FS11 at the earliest.Concorde and dogflights just don't mix ;)

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<>Fair comment. I must admit to flying a 737 under the Golden Gate bridge myself and if I'm honest I don't have a problem if people want to do that. But dropping bombs on well known buildings and watching them fall is a step too far.<>If the result allow people to drop bombs on built-up areas I don't think that's somewhere where Aces would want to go. I could be wrong but I doubt there is a passion for that in the team irrespoective of what users want.<>I don't consider it BS. I believe Microsoft has taken a responsible stance on realism in FS. They have deliberately toned down the aircraft crash effects fo just those reasons.FS has always been a civilian flight sim and I hope it remains so. I might be in a minority of one but that doesn't bother me.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Stoopy,I don't have a problem with military aircraft being added to FS. What I don't want to see happen is FS turn into a combat simulator with explosions, crashes and general destructions of ground-based objects.I hope that clears up any confusion.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Thanks Andy. Nice to know there are others who feel the same.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Matt,<

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<<.what, in the above question and topic, would possibly prevent you from simply continuing to do so regardless of what interests in the sim the OP decides to engage in??>>I agree it might not affect how I use FS but I don't believe Microsoft should go down that route and wanted to say so publicly.

[Mace 1,926]

><<.what, in the above question and topic, would possibly>prevent you from simply continuing to do so regardless of what>interests in the sim the OP decides to engage in??>>>>I agree it might not affect how I use FS but I don't believe>Microsoft should go down that route and wanted to say so>publicly.More accurately, and getting to the HEART of it, I think your concern is that you don't want ACES spending valuable development time on bombs, but rather you'd like to see them spend valuable dev time on things like wx and atc.Is this a fair characterization of the way you feel?If so, then that's a valid concern.You see, I am not philosophically opposed to combat features in FS. Some people are. But in my mind I don't want to take away any development time from the civilian aspects of the sim.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Hi Rhett,<>No, it's not because of the potential loss of development time but a real opposition to Microsoft going down that route.For over 15 years FS has consistently been amongst Microsoft's top sellers with needing to pander to the shoot 'em up fraternity. They developed Combat FS for those that wanted to go down that route. I really don't see why they need to change a winning formula.Many current and retired pilots use FS because of its realism. If you visit the Project Magenta site www.projectmagenta.com you'll see that FS is used by professional training establishments. I honestly believe the reputation of FS would be damaged if it were to become a combat simulator.There are enough violent video and computer games. I don't want FS to go down that route. I's be very surprised if Aces decided it should.Cheers.

[meerkat 86]

Just look at YouTube for the video "lament" by Lotus. It is a masterpiece of FSX video and says more than thousand words about what aviation should be for and what not...Cheers

[Guest grapesh]

><I'm absolutely certain that FS community should condemn this>B.S., not support the "taboos". This is virtual world, not>real, -- otherwise public should as well object to training>15-yr olds to fly jumbo-jets because such a picture can be>scary.>>>>I don't consider it BS. I believe Microsoft has taken a>responsible stance on realism in FS. They have deliberately>toned down the aircraft crash effects fo just those reasons.>I understand your point but I don't believe it. I'm sure you and others have debated this issue here many times before, and you probably don't want to engage in it again. I just want to say that the core of civil and combat flight simulators is essentially the same, so combat-related part can be sold as a separate add-on to the civil flight simulator. You probably won't buy it, but I will and so many others. And it can be done that rockets/bombs won't simply work in proximity of civil aircraft or big cities etc... However, I believe that many combat-related features have dual purpose: aircraft explode upon crashing in real life, but this depends on type of collision, amount of fuel on board etc., and I think it should/can be implemented as part of failure modeling. I don't think playing taboo games helps advancing our hobby further. Especially, when other games such as America's Army are being offered directly by the US government so anyone can have far more practical combat knowledge. Isn't this hypocritical? Putting black tape over explosions in FS does not constitute a solution to the violence in the world. As I said before, there are solutions to let people drop bombs and stay "responsible", we just shouldn't refuse talking about. Cheers,=S.V.=

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

<>I haven't debated this topic before. I just noticed the OP's message and responded to it. But, I've replied to several posts here now so you probably have a good feel for my views so continued debate is probably just going to end up in repetition.<>Really? I see them as totally different products. With a civilian simulator I create a flight plan, program it into my CDU, feed it to Radar Contact for realistic ATC and fly from A to B as realistic as my flying skills and ambient weather allow. My choice of aircraft will be either a Boeing 737 or Concorde.In a combat simulator I assume the purpose is to shoot down as many enemy aircraft as possible or to blow up as many ground-based objects as possible in order to achieve a high score.They couldn't be more different! Piloting skills are secondary to the score you achieve.<<...so combat-related part can be sold as a separate add-on to the civil flight simulator. You probably won't buy it, but I will and so many others.>>I don't have a problem with that but it would disappoint me if Microsoft went down that route.<>It won't be that attractive then! ;) Some hardcore users want total realism. Would you want a product to give users that option? Six years after a major atrocity I find the thought dreadful and god help Microsoft if we ever had another terrorist attack that could be linked to such a product.Back in 2001 we had idiots posting videos of aircraft flying into the WTC to show what could be achieved with something the public could buy. The media went ape over that and FS2002 had to be held back and modified if I remember correctly. Producers have to be very careful introducing violence into flight simulation products in these sensitive times.<>It's a flight simulator - not a crash simulator :-(<>I'm not refusing to talk about it. Quite the opposite actually. I'm not normally this vocal about FS things.Cheers,

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

A brilliantly put together video but oh dear, is that level of destruction now available in FSX? :-( A combat mission I assume.Do we really want to go down that route :-(

[Guest]

>Please point us to the source of this information. Or is it>just a wild guess?>>I would consider it serious dumbing-down if FS went in this>direction.Aerosoft has said: "How does a dog fighting mode sound to you? Guns and Sidewinders only, but at least you can now show you are able to shoot down all your buddies who fly the same aircraft....." VRSimulations has said:"Short of actually shooting down AI aircraft, sensor and targeting systems are simulated just as their real-world counterparts. You can lock up AI aircraft and receive feedback to the HUD, radar and early warning systems, just as if you were in an electronic military exercise."http://www.vrsimulations.com/product_FA18E.htmI think the Aerosoft A-10 will also have working weapons to be used at the target range.