Jane's LongBow Beta Test Team????
Viper
please so that I might drool over some more. I'm dying to get my hands on this
sim.
I do have some questions though.
1) Do you fly alone or w/ wingies? (can't remember if I already asked Chris this or not)
Can I control my wingies? assign them a different waypoint? divide them into small teams?
Tell them to go "weapons free or safe etc." you get the idea.
GS2000 did pretty good in this aspect. Hope Janes LB expands on this.
2) Do you have a gunner/co-pilot with you? and can
we switch role? ie. computer flies 1 mission..me gunner.
next mission me pilot, he/she gunner? If the computer can fly while I'm at
guns..I should be able to also tell it what to do...ie. "turn left/right...
hold/hover..duck..etc.."
3) How realistic is the targeting system? I noticed on discovery channel
where the gunner couldn't lock onto the target in Desert Storm due
to bad weather,no moon light and cross wind..etc.
Then the Pilot told the gunner to switch to "black hot"...
reverse the FLIR image to get a better lock? (is this in the sim?)
Also the gunner had to manually select from the CRT which tank to
target, aim then fire. I would like to have this option too. I should be able to use the
mouse to target items in the CRT kinda like USNF.
In DI's Apache, all of the targets magically get selected for me. This is too arcade (IMHO)
Is this a feature of the (real)Long Bow version only and not on the (real)AH-64?
4) How about refueling? I thought the Apache only has a flight time of about 2 hrs. b4
it must refuel? How is this implemented in the sim?
5) What about the weather? how is this implemented?
6) Are there any exploding trees??? (God, I hope not)
7) I know that the missions will be kinda canned. (bummer)
8) I know that there won't be multi play when it comes out. (another bummer)
9) Can I make my own way points?
10) Can we pretty please see a demo soon? Don't know how long I can wait. too anxious.
This sim looks like it's gonna rock.
Some of these things might not be important to other people but they are to me cuz I love
helo sims. Since I'm gonna dish out at least fifty bucks for it, I wanna throw some of my
wishes into the fountain too.
Thanx
_____
___ _____(_) _____
__ | / /__ / ________ _ _ \________
__ | / / _ / ___ __ \/ __/__ ___/
__ |/ / /_/ __ /_/ /\___/ _ /
_____/ _ .___/ /_/
/_/
TIP #652
Jaggernaut
>10) Can we pretty please see a demo soon? Don't know how long I can wait. too anxious.
> This sim looks like it's gonna rock.
>Some of these things might not be important to other people but they are to me cuz I love
>helo sims. Since I'm gonna dish out at least fifty bucks for it, I wanna throw some of my
>wishes into the fountain too.
Good wish list but I don't believe there will be a demo due to the
size of the Map files. One of the maps is something like 90mbs.
Regards/Jaggernaut
CJ Martin
>How is the test coming? Can any1 from the Beta team say something
>please so that I might drool over some more. I'm dying to get my hands on this
>sim.
You will not be disappointed.
>I do have some questions though.
[snip]
I'll let the Jane's Combat Simulation rep answer these, as I don't want to
violate the terms of my NDA. However, I will tell you that the beta is very
impressive, and the sim is *very* realistic.
> This sim looks like it's gonna rock.
It does. <g>
>Some of these things might not be important to other people but they are to me
cuz I love
>helo sims. Since I'm gonna dish out at least fifty bucks for it, I wanna throw
some of my
>wishes into the fountain too.
It will be money well spent, IMHO...
CJ Martin
Member, Apache Longbow Outside Beta Test Team
----------
CJ Martin, ex-AT2 USN | Callsign Smut on WarBirds
Former Tomcat Tweaker | XO, <Flying Pigs> squadron
Ex-Starfighter (VF-33) | "Oink! Oink! To War!"
Visit Smuts WB page at http://www.ameritel.net/lusers/smut/index.html
Viper
> Good wish list but I don't believe there will be a demo due to the
> size of the Map files. One of the maps is something like 90mbs.
>
> Regards/Jaggernaut
>
Wow...guess I can wait though. drool.drool
Viper
> I'll let the Jane's Combat Simulation rep answer these, as I don't want to
> violate the terms of my NDA. However, I will tell you that the beta is very
> impressive, and the sim is *very* realistic.
>
> > This sim looks like it's gonna rock.
>
> It does. <g>
Thanx anyway...Martin. I'll just have to wait awhile longer. Please don't hesitate to
post whatever you are allowed to say though..
> CJ Martin
> Member, Apache Longbow Outside Beta Test Team
You sir is one lucky dude...^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> ----------
> CJ Martin, ex-AT2 USN | Callsign Smut on WarBirds
> Former Tomcat Tweaker | XO, <Flying Pigs> squadron
> Ex-Starfighter (VF-33) | "Oink! Oink! To War!"
>
> Visit Smuts WB page at http://www.ameritel.net/lusers/smut/index.html
Thanx
Rod White
>CJ Martin wrote:
>> I'll let the Jane's Combat Simulation rep answer these, as I don't want to
>> violate the terms of my NDA. However, I will tell you that the beta is very
>> impressive, and the sim is *very* realistic.
>>
>> > This sim looks like it's gonna rock.
>>
>> It does. <g>
>Thanx anyway...Martin. I'll just have to wait awhile longer. Please don't hesitate to
>post whatever you are allowed to say though..
Well, we were just allowed to speak a little about JANE'S
AH64D Longbow!
The training grounds are just awesome. If you are unfamiliar, or
familiar with the AH64D Longbow, there is a lot too be learned
from the in depth training missions. The Avionics are also right on
the money. I am yet too hear anyone on the team complain or
make any negative comments about the flight model of the
Longbow. Even the last minute outside beta team consists
of very well known & serious military flight-sim lovers. I don't
think Andy could have put together a more perfect team of
serious military aviation sim lovers, for this final beta testing
team!
If you are looking for some serious rolling terrain, and some
hillsides to pop up from behind, this baby has some of the
best looking, and well implemented rolling terrain ever used
in a simulation. You will certainly be thankfull for the the
rolling terrain at times.:) Andy Hollis and Skunkworks, are dead
serious about making this the most realistic AH64D Longbow
simulation ever done. I can say this, the difference between
ATF & AH64D Longbow is huge! ATF is a fun sim, but it is far
from total realism. The approach taken with AH64D Longbow, and
the approach taken with ATF, is like comparing Nascar Racing
to The Need for Speed! Nascar is the down too the nuts-n- bolts
sim of racing one stockcar, where The Need for Speed is fun, and it
does simulate many of the cars being driven, but not on the same
level of total realism as Nascar.
AH64D Longbow has certainly earned that JANE'S label and then
some, even at this stage IMO. If you want EF2000 realisim in a
helo, this will certainly be the sim to look for.
That is all I can say for now, but I am sure others from the team
will be letting lose with thier impressions of AH64D Longbow, now
that we are allowed to speak a little.
>> CJ Martin
>> Member, Apache Longbow Outside Beta Test Team
>You sir is one lucky dude...^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> --
Rod White
PC Multimdedia & Entertainment Magazine
http://www.mortimer.com/users/pcme/pcme.htm
Voted Top 5% of all WWW sites by Central Point
Voted Top 10 Gaming Site by The Adrenaline Vault
Voted Top 5% Online Gaming Magazine by G1, The Game Masters
"Deep= This site. This is what covering the sim market is all
about. No other resource has the depth and the quality that
this site has." Quoted from the Games Masters 3/96
Viper
[sig snip]
This sounds like a real piece of work. Sims like I would not mind paying big bucks
for.What machines are you guys testing this is on? How is the frame rate?
Thanx to all for posting.
CJ Martin
>This sounds like a real piece of work. Sims like I would not mind paying big
> bucks
>for.What machines are you guys testing this is on? How is the frame rate?
>
>Thanx to all for posting.
My machine is a 486 DX4/100, w/ 16 Meg of RAM, 2xCD-ROM, ATI Graphics
Xpression, TM ACM card, FCLS, & TQS, and CH Pro pedals.
Framerate is very good, not with all details full up, but more than enough to
be breathtaking. It rocks...
CJ
-----
Member, outside beta test team
Janes Longbow (LB)
Peter Chance
:In DI's Apache, all of the targets magically get selected for me. This is too arcade (IMHO)
:Is this a feature of the (real)Long Bow version only and not on the (real)AH-64?
I think being able to use the mouse to select targets on CRT/MFD's is a must.
Like in F15SEIII.....nice co-op pilot/RIO too...too bad the game was crap :(
And in Tornado.....brilliant game but no co-op Pilot/RIO play :(:(:(:(:(
Having not played DI's Apache because it's a bunch of canned missions, can
anybody tell me if the co-op play in that was OK?
Thanks,
PC.
Andy Hollis
>:I should be able to use the
>:mouse to target items in the CRT kinda like USNF.
>:In DI's Apache, all of the targets magically get selected for me. This is too arcade (IMHO)
>:Is this a feature of the (real)Long Bow version only and not on the (real)AH-64?
>
>I think being able to use the mouse to select targets on CRT/MFD's is a must.
>
>Like in F15SEIII.....nice co-op pilot/RIO too...too bad the game was crap :(
Sorry you didn't like SEIII. I did ;-)
As for Longbow targetting: Without getting into a full dissertation,
which could take an hour, yes the real AH64D Longbow *does* allow for
point-and-click targetting. It is a function of the Longbow Fire Control
Radar, but they don't have a mouse, they have to push the cursor around
with what amounts to a mini-joystick (up-down-left-right).
The original AH64A Apache can only target via the TADS system, which is
completely different. Point-and-click does not make sense here.
Oh, and yes, that is just *one* of the ways you will be able to designate
targets in Jane's Longbow.
--Andy Hollis
Viper
> Sorry you didn't like SEIII. I did ;-)
Not me.....I love all of your work. Can't wait for this one!
> As for Longbow targetting: Without getting into a full dissertation,
> which could take an hour, yes the real AH64D Longbow *does* allow for
> point-and-click targetting. It is a function of the Longbow Fire Control
> Radar, but they don't have a mouse, they have to push the cursor around
> with what amounts to a mini-joystick (up-down-left-right).
ah ha
> The original AH64A Apache can only target via the TADS system, which is
> completely different. Point-and-click does not make sense here.
I see thanx.
> Oh, and yes, that is just *one* of the ways you will be able to designate
> targets in Jane's Longbow.
>
> --Andy Hollis
Cool!!!Very nice! Waiting to hear more....
drool....drooollll....droooooll
Keep up the good work.
ps. When can you disclose more info?
thanx
--
Buzz Hoffman
Big DITTO's to what Rod said and I'm running it on a Pentium 100 at work and
a Pentium 90 (0verclocked to 100) at home. DS 64 PCI card at work and #9GXE64
PCI card at home. Frame rate is excellent.
I don't recall seeing a helicopter sim with this much substance and this much
'eye candy' all rolled into one. First time I got ambushed I almost fell on the
floor laughing when it was over. Incoming was incoming from everywhere and I
had to work my a$$ off just to survive. My Wingie didn't make it (Aiiiieeeeeee!!!)
The FLCS/TQS works absolutely fabulously with this one too. The stickball works
superbly for selecting targets and ranges, etc, and the RNG pot works great for
switching IHADSS modes and the ANT pot changes the FLIR zoom. Really comes in
handy for surviving in this one. I haven't had to use the keyboard yet while
in flight for other than things I normally don't need - like switching HUD
brightness, etc.
My Wingie actually does what I tell him to do. Arty acts about like it does in
real life - i.e. it mostly isn't there when you REALLY need it. So you have to
use your wits with this one.
Just like they told us in combat training - if you are ambushed, DO NOT RUN,
ATTACK THE AMBUSH. For a lot of good reasons:
1. The enemy will lay an ambush out in such a manner that he will close as
many of your possible escape routes as possible.
2. This lowers your odds of picking the right direction to run.
3. The enemy will wait until the opportunities to run are nearly nonexistent
before he opens up on you.
4. You generally have superior fire power to any enemy you will encounter -
use IT instead of running.
5. Your back makes a great target.
....
I can't stop playing this thing. Andy, I'll get you for this, I have two
projects that are now behind and it's all your fault. 8)
Buzz
Viper
> I don't recall seeing a helicopter sim with this much substance and this much
> 'eye candy' all rolled into one. First time I got ambushed I almost fell on the
> floor laughing when it was over. Incoming was incoming from everywhere and I
> had to work my a$$ off just to survive. My Wingie didn't make it (Aiiiieeeeeee!!!)
Damn...I don't know how much longer I can wait. drool drool
> The FLCS/TQS works absolutely fabulously with this one too. The stickball works
> superbly for selecting targets and ranges, etc, and the RNG pot works great for
> switching IHADSS modes and the ANT pot changes the FLIR zoom. Really comes in
> handy for surviving in this one. I haven't had to use the keyboard yet while
> in flight for other than things I normally don't need - like switching HUD
> brightness, etc.
One of the reason why I recently purchased the TMS combos instead of waiting for the Pro FLCS
was the ad for this sim. I wanted to get everything ready for Janes LB.
Now all I need is a faster puter.
> I can't stop playing this thing. Andy, I'll get you for this, I have two
> projects that are now behind and it's all your fault. 8)
>
> Buzz
Thanx for posting Buzz...can I ask more?
-How are the weapons characteristics? I haven seen any1 actually modeled an "accurate" hell fire flight
characteristics yet...most hell fire missiles I've seen in sims just shoot straight for the target like
rockets. I've seen real shots of hell fire missiles actually fly upward then come down on their targets..to
hit the soft spot from above.
-Can you feel the affects of cross wind in LB?
-How's night flying?
-How hard is it to id targets at night? (have u encountered any friendly fire?)
-Are there any exploding trees? (please say no)
-Have you been able to effectively use terrain masking? Does it work? I mean are there group of trees
where you can hide behind?
-Have you tried any fancy manuevers that the LB can do?
-What's the mission planning like?
-How is the enemy AI?
sorry to ask so many questions but I'm just curious...I am not knocking this sim or anything..just
anxious to play it. Andy Hollis and his team can sure keep this one quiet cuz I've been running
around town looking for magazine reviews etc. but nothing is out there! Talk about top secret!
I feel like that robot in Short Circuit, "more input, more input." hehehe
thanx again.
Andy Hollis
>Buzz Hoffman wrote:
>
>> I can't stop playing this thing. Andy, I'll get you for this, I have two
>> projects that are now behind and it's all your fault. 8)
>>
>> Buzz
>
>
Well, ok, fine, let's get a little specific. You're asking Buzz specific
stuff that he agreed not to divulge, so I'll do it for him. (Buzz, feel
free to jump in on this, its ok).
>-How are the weapons characteristics? I haven seen any1 actually modeled an "accurate" hell fire flight
>characteristics yet...most hell fire missiles I've seen in sims just shoot straight for the target like
>rockets. I've seen real shots of hell fire missiles actually fly upward then come down on their targets..to
>hit the soft spot from above.
Very accurate. Longbow has four different flight profiles for
Lock-On-After-Launch (LOAL) vs LOBL, and Radar vs Laser. Compared to a
rocket,LOBL is similar, but with more loft in order to come down on the
target, hitting the less-armored top surfaces . LOAL is a hi-loft
profile to go over hills and allow extra "hang-time" for pop-up launches.
In this way, you can remain concealed until the last possible couple of
seconds before emerging, re-acquiring, and destruction. =8-D
The turn rates, accelerations, top speeds, and motor burns are all very
accurately modeled as well. As is their susceptibility to enemy
countermeasures.
>-Can you feel the affects of cross wind in LB?
Yes. Bad weather possibility can be enabled/disabled via Realism
settings.
>-How's night flying?
PNVS makes it appropriately eerie. TADS FLIR for targetting/acq gives
fully-textured scenes in monochrome and works the way it should
(full-scene, correct FOV).
>-How hard is it to id targets at night? (have u encountered any friendly fire?)
Depends on Reality settings. If you're a wimp, you can set it up so
your avionics id the targets perfectly (not realistic). Otherwise, with
Realism set to max, they will only help you some, and you better know
what you are doing or you'll get lots of ground forces bitching at you
(and a lousy post-mission debrief ;-)
>-Are there any exploding trees? (please say no)
Are you kidding? I am deeply hurt that you even asked. :-)
>-Have you been able to effectively use terrain masking? Does it work? I mean are there group of trees
> where you can hide behind?
This is the best part of the game, IMHO. Sneaking up on a ridge, setting
to a low hover, slowly popping up, let your radar expose long enough for
a complete sweep of the area...Shit! The ASE is going nuts! I've been
detected! Drop-down and the threat goes away. Whew! that was close.
..Paint me, will they!? Let them eat lead (or actually shape-charged
warheads)!!....
My TSD still has the threat positions in its memory, so I switch to LOAL
mode. Create a PFZ around the target group and fire off a missile at
each target. Watch the TOF count-down timer and when it gets down below
five seconds, I re-expose myself (the radar dome, I mean ;-) and I watch
the raw radars returns on the left MFD as the sweep picks up each target
again. Just then, the bad-guys have the audacity to paint me again!!
ASE tones are screaming in my ears as the missiles rain down on the enemy
instalation. Suddenly, all is quiet. The tones have gone away. Life is
good. I pop-up completely over the hill to expose the nose-mounted TADS
and I zoom in for a visual on the target area. Hmmmm....total
destruction. I'm likin' this stuff !! Oh wait, where was I? ...
TLA Glossary:
----------------
ASE- Aircraft Survivability Equipment
PFZ - Priority Fire Zone
TOF - Time of Flight
MFD - Multi-Function Display
TADS - Target Acquisition and Detection Sight
>-Have you tried any fancy manuevers that the LB can do?
Jane's Longbow will do the appropriate manuevers, in the appropriate
fashion. In fact, the game includes some of McDonnell-Douglas' promo
videos, showing the real thing doing rolls and loops. Try these in the
game, on Realistic Flight Model, and you'll find that you lose the same
altitude/speed and have to assume the same attitudes and inputs to make
them work. Its very realistic.
Now, the Army does not want you doing this and they impose an artificial
limit on the max pitch & roll you are allowed (and its *NOT* 360 degrees
;-) One of the options in Jane's Longbow that is turned on at the easier
flight model levels enforces this limit. Basically, it keeps you where
the craft is more stable. But hey, go ahead and turn it off. Just don't
complain to me when you trash your $18M Longbow! =8^)
>-What's the mission planning like?
Full mission op order text written by a guy that used to do it for living
with the Army. Really puts you there.
Full waypoint manipulation and editing.
Zooming scrolling terrain map with appropriate unit overlays, SAM
engagement circles, Flight path overlay, and more. But not *everything*.
Your intel guys are certainly not perfect, so you do not start out the
mission knowing where *everybody* is.
>-How is the enemy AI?
Geez, where do I start. Let's leave this to another day. I gotta get to
work...
>
>sorry to ask so many questions but I'm just curious...I am not knocking this sim or anything..just
>anxious to play it. Andy Hollis and his team can sure keep this one quiet cuz I've been running
We haven't got time to talk much, we're too busy getting this thing
finished. :-)
>around town looking for magazine reviews etc. but nothing is out there! Talk about top secret!
We don't call this group the Origin Skunk Works for nothin'!!
--Andy
Viper
[good stuff deleted]
> We haven't got time to talk much, we're too busy getting this thing
> finished. :-)
>
> >around town looking for magazine reviews etc. but nothing is out there! Talk about top secret!
>
> We don't call this group the Origin Skunk Works for nothin'!!
>
> --Andy
Thanx Andy for taking the time to respond to the group..Your time is greatly appreciated.
I know that you guys have a lot of work to do so I will shut up for awhile and let you
get back to business.... :)
Can't wait for the finishing product!
me...@cris.com
something kinda like:
>--Andy Hollis
>
>
Andy,
I'm a big fan from way back - I remember the kick I would get from
surpassing your high scores on all those great old MPS games.
Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
nature of canned mission type campaigns.
I've read here that Longbow will use a canned mission campaign, but
that it will still be unpredictable. Could you please elaborate in as
much depth as possible re: how the campaign will function? To many of
us, and I appear to be the leading loudmouth here on the topic of what
a campaign should be, it is a waste of a realistic flight model to
plonk it down in the midst of an unrealistically predictable war
(campaign).
Thanks,
merc
CJ Martin
Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
[snip a completely accurate portrayal of Janes Longbow]
This ain't no hype job folks...this sucker WHAILS!
I am not shitting you...
CJ
Member, Outside Beta Test Team
Jane's Longbow
Calana Software
wrote:
>This is the best part of the game, IMHO. Sneaking up on a ridge, setting
>to a low hover, slowly popping up, let your radar expose long enough for
>a complete sweep of the area...Shit! The ASE is going nuts! I've been
>detected! Drop-down and the threat goes away. Whew! that was close.
>..Paint me, will they!? Let them eat lead (or actually shape-charged
>warheads)!!....
My God, I want this. Now. Ok, when you're done, but hurry! Ok, take
your time to get it nailed. Andy, what can I say but that your legend
is deserved.
Ed Bowser
Calana Software
Product Development Mgr.
http://www.hooked.net/users/eob3/index.html
Andy Hollis
>On 14 Apr 1996 22:27:55 GMT, Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> said
>something kinda like:
>
>>--Andy Hollis
>>
>>
>Andy,
>I'm a big fan from way back - I remember the kick I would get from
>surpassing your high scores on all those great old MPS games.
Oh yeah, well come over here closer and I'll kick yer ass, buddy!!
:-)
>
>Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
>did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
>nature of canned mission type campaigns.
This is understandable.
>I've read here that Longbow will use a canned mission campaign, but
>that it will still be unpredictable. Could you please elaborate in as
>much depth as possible re: how the campaign will function? To many of
>us, and I appear to be the leading loudmouth here on the topic of what
>a campaign should be, it is a waste of a realistic flight model to
>plonk it down in the midst of an unrealistically predictable war
>(campaign).
I understand your concerns, Merc. Clearly you have been burned in the
past by such a system, and do not see entertainment value in it for
yourself. Is the Longbow campaign "canned"? Well yes and no. Like most
things in this game, we've taken a lot of the traditional concepts to a
new level. Is it like Apache or USNF or Comanche where the campaign
missions are just straight line, one after the other? No. Within a
mission, does the same thing happen everytime? No.
Within the mission, we have created an active world, where everything in
it has an AI (no, not the buildings!). Those AI's even talk amongst
themselves in coordinated ways and they react, not only to what you do,
but to what all other forces (friendly and enemy) do. And there is a
certain amount of randomness to their decisionmaking. That random
element propagates rapidly because of the interdependencies of the AI's.
Timing is also important. Stuff's going on regardless of what you are
doing. There are fire-fights breaking out, air strikes taking place,
forces moving on hills, etc, etc. This stuff is coordinated, but not
strictly scripted like everything's on rails (am I being clear? Not
sure...) Its kinda like the difference between re-enactment of a
scripted play and improvisational acting. In the improv case, you have
an idea of what you are going to do, and then it flows and reacts to what
everyone else is doing. That's what we do.
Outside of the mission itself, there are many levels of success/failure
and the results of this will determine what starting point the campaign
will move to for the next mission it generates for you. Every so often,
an animation will play showing you how the course of the overall campaign
is going. Its quite imerssive.
One other point is that the campaign is not the only way to play this
game. In addition to the highly interactive tutorial/training missions,
there are 12 painstakingly researched Historical missions where you can
fly the A-model Apache (or the Longbow, if you are a wimp), and there's
the Random Mission generator. The Randoms work the way the old
Microprose stuff did. You are working to improve your overall ranking
through promotions and to receive medals for exceptional single-mission
performance. These missions are typical of the kind a dynamic mission
generator will produce, but they are not linked into a campaign.
Infinite replayability, though. Oh yeah, and then there's Instant
Action...250+ missions, each played out differently each time.
Bottom-line here is that I would urge you not to make a judgement on
something that you have not seen. Certainly, if you have doubts about
any product, you should look to your peers for guidance before
purchasing. Your past bad experiences have made you wary, but be
comforted by the fact that the folks here on this list that have played
the game are completely engrossed by it. I guess that says something.
--Andy
Gregg Gallagher
>Viper <ke...@erols.com> wrote:
[SNIP...all sorts of good stuff....]
All I can say is WOW!........am planning on taking a week off in
May....or will that be a bit too early?
;-)
Gregg
----------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Gallagher | Opinions expressed do not
AT&T WorldNet Service | necessarily reflect those
ggall...@worldnet.att.net | of my employer.
MARK DONALDSON
>Andy Hollis wrote:
>> Sorry you didn't like SEIII. I did ;-)
>Not me.....I love all of your work. Can't wait for this one!
Seconded! (big surprise)
>
>> As for Longbow targetting: Without getting into a full dissertation,
>> which could take an hour, yes the real AH64D Longbow *does* allow for
>> point-and-click targetting. It is a function of the Longbow Fire Control
>> Radar, but they don't have a mouse, they have to push the cursor around
>> with what amounts to a mini-joystick (up-down-left-right).
Mouse control would be great, especially if the "pilot" is using a TQS with
the little mouse control.
Corsair
__________________________________________________________
Web CAG of The Unofficial "Jolly Rogers" Site
http://www-home.calumet.yorku.ca/mdonalds/www/home.htm
__________________________________________________________
CAG of the "VF-84 Jolly Rogers" Simulation Squadron
__________________________________________________________
99 "Knights of the Air"
in super high-tech jet fighters
- "99 Red Balloons"
__________________________________________________________
CJ Martin
[snip]
>I've read here that Longbow will use a canned mission campaign, but
>that it will still be unpredictable. Could you please elaborate in as
>much depth as possible re: how the campaign will function? To many of
>us, and I appear to be the leading loudmouth here on the topic of what
>a campaign should be, it is a waste of a realistic flight model to
>plonk it down in the midst of an unrealistically predictable war
>(campaign).
>
>Thanks,
>merc
I'm not Andy, and thus I can't answer in the detail he can, but I think I can
tell you that some of us outside testers have been comparing campaign notes,
and we are *definately* seeing different stuff. The build up is very, very
well done, and so far every mission I've flown has been very believeable...
Buzz Hoffman
>Thanx for posting Buzz...can I ask more?
>
>-How are the weapons characteristics? I haven seen any1 actually modeled an "accurate" hell fire flight
>characteristics yet...most hell fire missiles I've seen in sims just shoot straight for the target like
>rockets. I've seen real shots of hell fire missiles actually fly upward then come down on their targets..to
>hit the soft spot from above.>
Dunno', so far, when it comes time to hit something, after the thing leaves the rails, I've been busy looking
for something else to kill so I haven't watched that closely.
<>-Can you feel the affects of cross wind in LB? >
Yes.
<>-How's night flying? >
Like flying at night.
<>-How hard is it to id targets at night? (have u encountered any friendly fire?)>
With FLIR and PNVS not hard at all.
<>-Are there any exploding trees? (please say no)>
Nope.
<>-Have you been able to effectively use terrain masking? Does it work? I mean are there group of trees
> where you can hide behind?>
Can't get into specifics here, but yes, the terrain masking is great.
<>-Have you tried any fancy manuevers that the LB can do?>
No, not really.
<>-What's the mission planning like?>
I don't think I'm supposed to talk about that part yet.
<>-How is the enemy AI?>
Better than wonderful.
<>sorry to ask so many questions but I'm just curious...I am not knocking this sim or anything..just
>anxious to play it. Andy Hollis and his team can sure keep this one quiet cuz I've been running
>around town looking for magazine reviews etc. but nothing is out there! Talk about top secret!
>I feel like that robot in Short Circuit, "more input, more input." hehehe>
Well, you still don't know the half of it... 8)
Buzz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
>Buzz Hoffman wrote:
>
>> I don't recall seeing a helicopter sim with this much substance and this much
>> 'eye candy' all rolled into one. First time I got ambushed I almost fell on the
>> floor laughing when it was over. Incoming was incoming from everywhere and I
>> had to work my a$$ off just to survive. My Wingie didn't make it (Aiiiieeeeeee!!!)
>
>Damn...I don't know how much longer I can wait. drool drool
>
>> The FLCS/TQS works absolutely fabulously with this one too. The stickball works
>> superbly for selecting targets and ranges, etc, and the RNG pot works great for
>> switching IHADSS modes and the ANT pot changes the FLIR zoom. Really comes in
>> handy for surviving in this one. I haven't had to use the keyboard yet while
>> in flight for other than things I normally don't need - like switching HUD
>> brightness, etc.
>
>One of the reason why I recently purchased the TMS combos instead of waiting for the Pro FLCS
>was the ad for this sim. I wanted to get everything ready for Janes LB.
>Now all I need is a faster puter.
>
>
Buzz Hoffman
Buzz
<In article <4l0iad$3...@studio.origin.ea.com>,
Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
>...Paint me, will they!? Let them eat lead (or actually shape-charged
>warheads)!!....
>
>My TSD still has the threat positions in its memory, so I switch to LOAL
>mode. Create a PFZ around the target group and fire off a missile at
>each target. Watch the TOF count-down timer and when it gets down below
>five seconds, I re-expose myself (the radar dome, I mean ;-) and I watch
>the raw radars returns on the left MFD as the sweep picks up each target
>again. Just then, the bad-guys have the audacity to paint me again!!
>ASE tones are screaming in my ears as the missiles rain down on the enemy
>instalation. Suddenly, all is quiet. The tones have gone away. Life is
>good. I pop-up completely over the hill to expose the nose-mounted TADS
>and I zoom in for a visual on the target area. Hmmmm....total
>destruction. I'm likin' this stuff !! Oh wait, where was I? ...
>
>TLA Glossary:
>----------------
>ASE- Aircraft Survivability Equipment
>PFZ - Priority Fire Zone
>TOF - Time of Flight
>MFD - Multi-Function Display
>TADS - Target Acquisition and Detection Sight......
Andy Hollis
>Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
>
>>Viper <ke...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>All I can say is WOW!........am planning on taking a week off in
>May....or will that be a bit too early?
>
>;-)
Well, it appears that we are officially saying June 1 (on-line marketing
rep spilled the beans) for a ship date. But of course, those of you with
a calendar will note that this date falls on a Saturday. And everyone
knows, you don't ship out huge amounts of packages on Saturday (or Sunday
for that matter). So, one might think that Monday the 3rd was a logical
guess. But hey, what do I know? ;-)
--Andy
Matt Wagner
> >>-How's night flying?
> >
> >PNVS makes it appropriately eerie. TADS FLIR for targetting/acq gives
> >fully-textured scenes in monochrome and works the way it should
> >(full-scene, correct FOV).
{snip}
In regards to the FLIR image, does it display the image in terms of true
thermal variation or is it (as most most flight sim FLIRs are) simply a
change in the color pallete using various shades of green (which can
pass for a light amplification devices such as NVGs)?
I think it would be pretty great to pick AFVs out in a tree line due to
their thermal signature, or even better, be able to tell dead, burning,
and active vehicles due to their thermal characteristics.
I know that's probably asking too much but...
Matt "Wags" Wagner
Alan V Dunkin
> something that you have not seen. Certainly, if you have doubts about
> any product, you should look to your peers for guidance before
God, first time I read this I thought you wrote, "you should look to your
parents for guidance" :)
> --Andy
Heya Andy, I was wondering [hope you haven't discussed to before cause I
probably missed it] what kind of requirements the game will have and is
the minimum going to be "minimum--barely playable" type minimum? :)
--
Alan Dunkin (dunk...@utdallas.edu) WB: alan, Black Sheep squadron member
Gaming news and rumors, release dates, humor, and more on the way.
StrategyNet ... http://wwwpub.utdallas.edu/~dunk1888/index.html
steven joseph chmura
Buzz Hoffman <bu...@thrustmaster.com> wrote:
><In article <31730A...@erols.com>, Viper <ke...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>>characteristics yet...most hell fire missiles I've seen in sims just shoot straight for the target like
>>rockets. I've seen real shots of hell fire missiles actually fly upward then come down on their targets..to
>>hit the soft spot from above.>
>
>for something else to kill so I haven't watched that closely.
>
Seriously, they do have proper modeling.
Furthermore you have 10^6 views to watch the explosions.
><>-Can you feel the affects of cross wind in LB? >
>
>Yes.
>
If you trurn it on. Along with ground effects etc.
>
><>-Are there any exploding trees? (please say no)>
>
>Nope.
>
Not in the desert at least
><>-Have you been able to effectively use terrain masking? Does it work? I mean are there group of trees
>> where you can hide behind?>
>
>Can't get into specifics here, but yes, the terrain masking is great.
>
Yes, it works over hills etc.
><>-Have you tried any fancy manuevers that the LB can do?>
>
>No, not really.
>
Not without crashing :)
--
________________________________________________________________________________Steven Chmura MuDPhud4
1st Zoloft Lawndart Member "... no frame rate too high"
pap...@ix.netcom.com
>We don't call this group the Origin Skunk Works for nothin'!!
>--Andy
hehehehe Alrighty life is good. Falcon 4 on the way Longbow , Fighting
Falcon. Its good to be alive nowadays. Thanks Andy for the Brief.
PAPA DOC
Paul Campbell
> Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
> did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
> nature of canned mission type campaigns.
I'am one of the above.
>
> Thanks,
> merc
The frame rate (on the demo at least) is also very poor - a non-texture
engine should be able to go faster than this.
The fact that the frane rate is highly dependent on the detail level
points to inefficient graphics routines rather than a big
environment modelling overhead.
Paul C.
UK.
Peter Chance
: >
: Andy,
: I'm a big fan from way back - I remember the kick I would get from
: surpassing your high scores on all those great old MPS games.
Me too :).....Gunship C64 was the main reason why I never finished Uni....
pretty sad huh? What a brilliant game.....I remember one mission where
I lost an engine and didn't have enough power to stay airborne....I
jettisoned all my weapons but still couldn't stay up. I had to land and wait
till I had burned enough fuel to allow me to take off again...all the
while praying the enemy hind would sod off.
PC
Andy Hollis
>Andy Hollis (aho...@origin.ea.com) wrote:
>Heya Andy, I was wondering [hope you haven't discussed to before cause I
>probably missed it] what kind of requirements the game will have and is
>the minimum going to be "minimum--barely playable" type minimum? :)
>
Haven't discussed this in detail, yet. I'll try and bring some clarity
to it now, but we are still trying to decide what to say on the box.
Here's the issues. As everyone knows frame rate is a personal taste
thing. What's great for one guy, sucks rocks to the next. So how do you
characterize this in a consistent fashion?
Secondly, and this is the real kicker, is that cpu speed only makes a
partial contribution to frame rate. The things that make even more
difference are video card model, VESA 2.0 support (and I mean done
right), memory in the machine, OS (DOS or Win95), SMARTDRV (or equiv)
cache size, etc., etc. In SVGA games, those first three make a huge
difference, particularly if the game is programmed to take advantage of
advanced features of these cards (linear frame buffer, etc.) when
present.
So, how do we convey this to a potential customer? Some kind of weird
three-dimensional matrix? That's what it really takes to clarify it.
Problem is, most users (not you guys on this list;-) are lucky to know
the speed of their machine, much less what kind of video card, etc.
Bottom-line is that we'll just recommend a min config on which the game
should run reasonably well in VGA (320x240).
Just for example's sake, we've got the game running well on 486/66
machines in VGA. But that "well" may not be good enough for some of you.
And CJ Martin (Smut) has it running well in SVGA on a 486/100 DX4 with
16 MB . This last one really surprised me, 'cuz we have been
recommending a P90 for SVGA.
Suffice it to say, as far as expectations go, if you have less than a
486/66 local-bus, you'll have to play elsewhere. If you have a local-bus
486/66, you are in the grey zone and your performance will vary depending
on amount of memory (game runs in 8MB, 16 MB is desireable, 24 is
perfect), video card (something that does VESA 2.0 w/linear buffering is
perfect), and whether you have at least a 128K SMARTDRV.
Sorry 'bout the diatribe, but this is an important issue, and its
difficult to explain all the interdependencies in a concise fashion.
--Andy
Harald Lauer
Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> writes:
>dunk...@utdallas.edu (Alan V Dunkin) wrote:
>>Andy Hollis (aho...@origin.ea.com) wrote:
>
>>Heya Andy, I was wondering [hope you haven't discussed to before cause I
>>probably missed it] what kind of requirements the game will have and is
>>the minimum going to be "minimum--barely playable" type minimum? :)
[snip]
>Secondly, and this is the real kicker, is that cpu speed only makes a
>partial contribution to frame rate. The things that make even more
>difference are video card model, VESA 2.0 support (and I mean done
>right), memory in the machine, OS (DOS or Win95), SMARTDRV (or equiv)
[snip again]
>perfect), video card (something that does VESA 2.0 w/linear buffering is
I'm a bit concerned about the problems other people report to have
with the 800x600 resolution in ATF using a Matrox Millenium. If my
memory serves me right, these problems are due to the Matrox Vesa bios
and they won't go away with the latest bios.
Which is the maximum resolution I'll be able to use with my Matrox
Millenium in Jane's Longbow ? I really want that sim given all your
(and those from the beta test team) comments and stories about it.
Btw, maybe you have an answer for this one too: any chance that I'll
be able to use the maximum resolution in ATF with my Millenium in the
near future ? I have some money to spend :-)
>Sorry 'bout the diatribe, but this is an important issue, and its
>difficult to explain all the interdependencies in a concise fashion.
Well, your presence in this group and all your comments are most
welcome. Thank you !
Harald
--
Harald Lauer Your freedom ends
Wilhelm-Schickard Institut fuer Informatik somewhere between
Universitaet Tuebingen your fist and my nose.
URL: http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/uni/iic/Harald.Lauer.html
Rod White
>me...@cris.com wrote:
>>On 14 Apr 1996 22:27:55 GMT, Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> said
>>something kinda like:
>>
>>>--Andy Hollis
>>>
>>>
>>Andy,
>>I'm a big fan from way back - I remember the kick I would get from
>>surpassing your high scores on all those great old MPS games.
>Oh yeah, well come over here closer and I'll kick yer ass, buddy!!
>:-)
>>
>>Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
>>did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
>>nature of canned mission type campaigns.
>This is understandable.
>>I've read here that Longbow will use a canned mission campaign, but
>>that it will still be unpredictable. Could you please elaborate in as
>>much depth as possible re: how the campaign will function? To many of
>>us, and I appear to be the leading loudmouth here on the topic of what
>>a campaign should be, it is a waste of a realistic flight model to
>>plonk it down in the midst of an unrealistically predictable war
>>(campaign).
>I understand your concerns, Merc. Clearly you have been burned in the
>past by such a system, and do not see entertainment value in it for
>yourself. Is the Longbow campaign "canned"? Well yes and no. Like most
>things in this game, we've taken a lot of the traditional concepts to a
>new level. Is it like Apache or USNF or Comanche where the campaign
>missions are just straight line, one after the other? No. Within a
>mission, does the same thing happen everytime? No.
>Within the mission, we have created an active world, where everything in
>it has an AI (no, not the buildings!). Those AI's even talk amongst
>themselves in coordinated ways and they react, not only to what you do,
>but to what all other forces (friendly and enemy) do. And there is a
>certain amount of randomness to their decisionmaking. That random
>element propagates rapidly because of the interdependencies of the AI's.
At one point, I remember locking onto an AAA site. I had it locked
up, then I switched to the target view, and watched as it moved it's
turret too my dirrection! All of a sudden, it was history (VIA
my Hellfire). The turret went flying off, and the rest blew into
tiny bits.It was like that AAA had a mind of it's own.:)
The hardest thing for me too do in AH-64D Longbow, is to
listen to orders, and NOT shoot things that I saw moving around. It
is like going DOE hunting, and while out there, you see tons of
BUCK! Of course you can't shoot them, because it is illegal, but you
want to real bad. The same is true of this sim. So much is going on
around you, but you have your mission to execute. At times you
will be allowed to shoot at will, but conserving ammo is a must.:)
It is like all the enemies have minds all of thier own, and they are
always somewhere, just waiting to get into something. Then again,
there is also Allied AI out there. If I don't get the other
enimies, I am sure the Allied AI just might.:) I have caught a
few fire fights in action, between the two before.
>Timing is also important. Stuff's going on regardless of what you are
>doing. There are fire-fights breaking out, air strikes taking place,
>forces moving on hills, etc, etc. This stuff is coordinated, but not
>strictly scripted like everything's on rails (am I being clear? Not
>sure...) Its kinda like the difference between re-enactment of a
>scripted play and improvisational acting. In the improv case, you have
>an idea of what you are going to do, and then it flows and reacts to what
>everyone else is doing. That's what we do.
You can even sit back and watch the stuff happen! As you fly over
a certain area, you can find allied Tanks going at it, with enemy
troops, little soldiers running about shooting at you with small
arms, all of a sudden you have fuel leaking! It is trully insane to
watch everything else that happens around you. Too bad you
have to pay attention to what is at hand, after all you got a
mission to run! Overall I must say that I never felt more a part of
a WHOLE operation, than I do while playing this sim! It is a
constantly changing battlefield. This mission may be the same
mission, but I never found it too be the same every time.
>Outside of the mission itself, there are many levels of success/failure
>and the results of this will determine what starting point the campaign
>will move to for the next mission it generates for you. Every so often,
>an animation will play showing you how the course of the overall campaign
>is going. Its quite imerssive.
>One other point is that the campaign is not the only way to play this
>game. In addition to the highly interactive tutorial/training missions,
>there are 12 painstakingly researched Historical missions where you can
>fly the A-model Apache (or the Longbow, if you are a wimp), and there's
>the Random Mission generator. The Randoms work the way the old
>Microprose stuff did. You are working to improve your overall ranking
>through promotions and to receive medals for exceptional single-mission
>performance. These missions are typical of the kind a dynamic mission
>generator will produce, but they are not linked into a campaign.
>Infinite replayability, though. Oh yeah, and then there's Instant
>Action...250+ missions, each played out differently each time.
The Historical Missions ROCK! I have played many hours of other
helo sims, and I thought I knew a lot about the AH-64, but I learned
much more in the training missions alone of AH-64D Longbow, than I
ever did from any other helo sim out there. Keep in mind, this is
all without the manual!
>Bottom-line here is that I would urge you not to make a judgement on
>something that you have not seen. Certainly, if you have doubts about
>any product, you should look to your peers for guidance before
>purchasing. Your past bad experiences have made you wary, but be
>comforted by the fact that the folks here on this list that have played
>the game are completely engrossed by it. I guess that says something.
I am certainly ENGROSSED by JANE'S AH-64D Longbow Andy. I am
glad to be on that list!
>--Andy
Rod White
PC Multimdedia & Entertainment Magazine
http://www.mortimer.com/users/pcme/pcme.htm
Member, outside beta test team
JANE'S AH-64D Longbow
Voted Top 5% of all WWW sites by Central Point
"Deep= This site. This is what covering the sim market is all
about. No other resource has the depth and the quality that
this site has." Quoted from the Games Masters 3/96
Laurence Lindstrom
Hi fellow LongBow rumor junkies:
Please E mail Andy's original message. I want to know everything I
can about this sim.
Thanks
Larry
=======================================================================
Larry "Dragon" Lindstrom. Consultant - Unix - X Window - Comms
lar...@aracnet.com Portland, Ore. USA
me...@cris.com
something kinda like:
>>Andy,
>>I'm a big fan from way back - I remember the kick I would get from
>>surpassing your high scores on all those great old MPS games.
>
>Oh yeah, well come over here closer and I'll kick yer ass, buddy!!
>:-)
'Twould be a grand pleasure! :)
>>
>>Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
>>did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
>>nature of canned mission type campaigns.
>
>This is understandable.
>
>>I've read here that Longbow will use a canned mission campaign, but
>>that it will still be unpredictable. Could you please elaborate in as
>>much depth as possible re: how the campaign will function? To many of
>>us, and I appear to be the leading loudmouth here on the topic of what
>>a campaign should be, it is a waste of a realistic flight model to
>>plonk it down in the midst of an unrealistically predictable war
>>(campaign).
>
>I understand your concerns, Merc. Clearly you have been burned in the
>past by such a system, and do not see entertainment value in it for
Yes. Enough times that I will not be fooled again.
<great explanation of campaign structure snipped>
This sounds promising. The unpredictability is what is important. I
think what people who have never experienced combat in the air don't
understand is that the fear (which we ALL experience!) is not from the
actual threat, but from the uncertainty of what is going to be
encountered. It is, in many ways, a relief when the threat, whether
it is an enemy sortie, a SAM, or AAA, actually presents itself because
then you can put your training to use and react. It is not knowing
what and when that keeps you wiping the sweat of your visor. I get
really bored quickly in a sim when I KNOW that I will encounter a SAM
site "hidden" on the hill, a CAP NW of the target that consists of 4
Mig 27s, etc. If y'all can find a way to ensure that I don't know
what to expect as I ingress (beyond what realistic intel could brief
me with) I'll be a very happy camper.
>One other point is that the campaign is not the only way to play this
>game. In addition to the highly interactive tutorial/training missions,
>there are 12 painstakingly researched Historical missions where you can
>fly the A-model Apache (or the Longbow, if you are a wimp), and there's
>the Random Mission generator. The Randoms work the way the old
>Microprose stuff did. You are working to improve your overall ranking
>through promotions and to receive medals for exceptional single-mission
>performance. These missions are typical of the kind a dynamic mission
>generator will produce, but they are not linked into a campaign.
>Infinite replayability, though. Oh yeah, and then there's Instant
>Action...250+ missions, each played out differently each time.
>
>Bottom-line here is that I would urge you not to make a judgement on
>something that you have not seen. Certainly, if you have doubts about
>any product, you should look to your peers for guidance before
>purchasing. Your past bad experiences have made you wary, but be
>comforted by the fact that the folks here on this list that have played
>the game are completely engrossed by it. I guess that says something.
>
>--Andy
Andy, no BS, your responsiveness here as well as your past performance
gives you tremendous credibility with me. It is clear what your
philosophy on this sim is, and that is good enough for this to be the
first software in a long time that I will purchase as soon as it hits
the shelves.
regards,
Merc
Alan V Dunkin
> So, how do we convey this to a potential customer? Some kind of weird
> three-dimensional matrix? That's what it really takes to clarify it.
> Problem is, most users (not you guys on this list;-) are lucky to know
> the speed of their machine, much less what kind of video card, etc.
> Bottom-line is that we'll just recommend a min config on which the game
> should run reasonably well in VGA (320x240).
How many different modes are there? Just 320x240 and 640x480?
> Just for example's sake, we've got the game running well on 486/66
> machines in VGA. But that "well" may not be good enough for some of you.
> Suffice it to say, as far as expectations go, if you have less than a
> 486/66 local-bus, you'll have to play elsewhere. If you have a local-bus
> 486/66, you are in the grey zone and your performance will vary depending
> on amount of memory (game runs in 8MB, 16 MB is desireable, 24 is
> perfect), video card (something that does VESA 2.0 w/linear buffering is
> perfect), and whether you have at least a 128K SMARTDRV.
Only 8 megs, but we'll see what happens. With a 2 meg VLB card I
usually see a little bit better performance then what I'd expect,
so I might be slightly surprised :)
> Sorry 'bout the diatribe, but this is an important issue, and its
> difficult to explain all the interdependencies in a concise fashion.
Naw, that's okay. I understand the complexities of trying to explain
the factors on how "well" it'll run, so you don't have to apologize :)
Basically I guess I'll know arounnd the first of June... darn, that's
when Dungeon Keeper is supposed to be out. I hate you people :)
Andy Hollis
>{snip}
>
>> >>-How's night flying?
>> >
>> >PNVS makes it appropriately eerie. TADS FLIR for targetting/acq gives
>> >fully-textured scenes in monochrome and works the way it should
>> >(full-scene, correct FOV).
>
>
>In regards to the FLIR image, does it display the image in terms of true
>thermal variation or is it (as most most flight sim FLIRs are) simply a
>change in the color pallete using various shades of green (which can
>pass for a light amplification devices such as NVGs)?
>
The real TADS uses a combo of light amplification and FLIR that is all
processed. We simulate this with a combo approach as well. Yes, there's
a palette shift, but the source palette is modified first.
--Andy
sc...@tcville.es.hac.com
>>We don't call this group the Origin Skunk Works for nothin'!!
>hehehehe Alrighty life is good. Falcon 4 on the way Longbow , Fighting
>Falcon. Its good to be alive nowadays. Thanks Andy for the Brief.
Indeed !
Okay, now that I know I've got some expenses coming up in early May,...
how is ThrustMaster doing re. the pedal upgrade (toe brakes) ???
Also, since Microsoft caused such a stir with their digital joystick
(and its inherent CPU relief) is TM planning a similar conversion
to digital products ? Any timelines ???
[not that I'm biased towards ThrustMaster products, mind you...]
Thanks,
Scott
---
Hughes Aircraft Co. voice: (310) 616-1059
Image and Signal Processing Lab addr: sc...@tcville.es.hac.com
PO Box 902, EO/E01/A172, El Segundo, Ca. 90245
MARK DONALDSON
<Incredible wet-your-appetite post deleted>
I was looking forward to this before, now I think I'm becoming obsesive. I
strongly recommend that people go over to the Janes' sim site and look at the
new cockpit screenshots. It's at least a ten-fold improvement and very
impressive. Andy is right, the night-flying looks very eerie, and there is a
screenshot of it.
Hey Buzz, please tell me that the Pro FLCS will be out soon so that I can use
it when I fly this.
CJ Martin
Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
[snip]
>Just for example's sake, we've got the game running well on 486/66
>machines in VGA. But that "well" may not be good enough for some of you.
> And CJ Martin (Smut) has it running well in SVGA on a 486/100 DX4 with
>16 MB . This last one really surprised me, 'cuz we have been
>recommending a P90 for SVGA.
Those that know me, know that I will not play a "slide show" sim, no matter how
pretty or realistic it is. Longbows SVGA mode is very playable on my
machine...but not at full detail. I've toggled things down not quite halfway,
meaning that I can gain even more speed by dropped the details and effects
further. Right now I think I have found a good balance, for *me*; YMMV.
I have found that I can live with slightly less framerate in a helo sim due to
the nature of the action...I prefer to have better ground detail to provide me
visual cues as to my relative speed and altitude. Longbow provides these visual
cues in spades. NOE flying, at night, is a RUSH! The feeling of motion and
ground proximity is excellent; quite simply it is the best I have ever seen in
any sim.
Rod White
>me...@cris.com wrote:
>> Please help clear somthing up re: Longbow. There are some of us who
>> did not buy Apache because we hate the artificial and predictable
>> nature of canned mission type campaigns.
>I'am one of the above.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> merc
>The frame rate (on the demo at least) is also very poor - a non-texture
>engine should be able to go faster than this.
>The fact that the frane rate is highly dependent on the detail level
>points to inefficient graphics routines rather than a big
>environment modelling overhead.
Demo? You must be speaking of I-Magic's Apache, NOT Origin & JANE'S
AH-64D Longbow. There is no DEMO of JANE'S Longbow out there, that I
know of.
>Paul C.
>UK.
Rod White
PC Multimdedia & Entertainment Magazine
http://www.mortimer.com/users/pcme/pcme.htm
Voted Top 5% of all WWW sites by Central Point
Craig Scott Taylor
--
"The conviction had grown on him that men do not escape
from life because life is dull, but that life escapes from men
because men are little."
- Thomas Wolfe
On Friday, April 19, 1996, CJ Martin wrote...
>
> Those that know me, know that I will not play a "slide show" sim, no
matter how
> pretty or realistic it is. Longbows SVGA mode is very playable on my
> machine...but not at full detail. I've toggled things down not quite
halfway,
> meaning that I can gain even more speed by dropped the details and
effects
> further. Right now I think I have found a good balance, for *me*; YMMV.
>
> CJ
Robin Kim
>
>fashion. In fact, the game includes some of McDonnell-Douglas' promo
>videos, showing the real thing doing rolls and loops. Try these in the
>game, on Realistic Flight Model, and you'll find that you lose the same
>altitude/speed and have to assume the same attitudes and inputs to make
>them work. Its very realistic.
I had a lot of fun practicing and eventually mastering different sorts of
autorotations in IM's Apache. How well are they modeled in your sim and
will I be able to cut power manually when I want to do them?
Confined landings are also fun (for nutcases like myself :^) to try.
Hopefully there will be areas JUST big enough for a helicopter to fit
into in the training theatre.
steven joseph chmura
Robin Kim <op...@marconi.ih.att.com> wrote:
>Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
>>Viper <ke...@erols.com> wrote:
>>>-Have you tried any fancy manuevers that the LB can do?
>>
>>Jane's Longbow will do the appropriate manuevers, in the appropriate
>>fashion. In fact, the game includes some of McDonnell-Douglas' promo
>autorotations in IM's Apache. How well are they modeled in your sim and
>will I be able to cut power manually when I want to do them?
>
>Confined landings are also fun (for nutcases like myself :^) to try.
>Hopefully there will be areas JUST big enough for a helicopter to fit
>into in the training theatre.
>
There are objects everywhere and they are very well deatiled. This is an amazing part of the graphics engine - the texture mapped objects are quite detailed.
For example, you can see the doors on base camps. YOu can see the texture mapped turrets turn and track you. The missles are modeled correctly.
So yes, you will be able to land as close to a tower as you want :)
Hakan Powers
>Andy Hollis <aho...@origin.ea.com> wrote:
>
>rep spilled the beans) for a ship date. But of course, those of you with
>a calendar will note that this date falls on a Saturday. And everyone
>knows, you don't ship out huge amounts of packages on Saturday (or Sunday
>for that matter). So, one might think that Monday the 3rd was a logical
>guess. But hey, what do I know? ;-)
>
however, are you guys confident you can make it? I guess assuming it will be
delayed a couple of weeks (as it is afterall an Origin product) would be
better, then well all be pleasently surprised if it comes out during the first
week of June. I´ll be there for it thats for sure!
What specs are you recomending for minimum/preffered? Orign pruducts have a
special way of getting very memory hungry, does that go for LB aswell? will it
use vesa 2.0 or just 1.2?
>--Andy
>
>
Thanx for your participation here, everyone enjoys it
/ Hakan
Hakan Powers - Email:pow...@algonet.se - http://www.algonet.se/~powers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility
of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy.
------------- Sun Tzu, On Tactical Dispositions, The Art of War ------
CJ Martin
>What system are you running it on? Anything would be appreciated.
Sorry, meant to include that:
Zeos 486 DX4/100
16 meg of RAM
2x SCSI CD-ROM
ATI Graphics Xpression w/ 2meg DRAM
Soundblaster Pro
TM ACM card. FLCS, TQS
CH Pro Pedals
Booting to DOS from Win95, loading Univbe 5.1a
CJ
-----
Member, outside beta test team
Janes Longbow (LB)
Gandalf
DI seems to have made their sim difficult by adding ATA threats.
I gotta say that 10 planes launching radar an IR missles gets a bit
over powering considering an APache ain't built to take on multiple
air threats. It just takes all the fun out of it after a while.
Wade
Buzz Hoffman
Yep, it'll be here soon. I'm using two of the FLCS LE's (one at home
and one at work) and the really give outstanding control over Longbow.
The PFLCS will have the same gimbal and spring mechanism as the LE.
Buzz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
In <mdonalds.7...@calumet.yorku.ca> mdon...@calumet.yorku.ca
David J. Martin
tell you what target you are locked onto or do you have to visually
identify it?
I know in DI's Apache sim all targets were labelled so you instantly
knew if they were enemy or friendly. But, I remember seeing some
footage of an apache attacking some targets in Desert Storm and the
only way they knew that they were attacking enemy targets was by
comparing a list of coordinates of known friendly formations against
the coordinates of the target (In the event they actually hit
friendly M2's).
It would be nice to atleast have an option where you could specify
if you wanted the targets to be ID'ed automaticly or if you would
prefer to work them out yourself.
Cheers,
David
______________________________________________________________
/ David J. Martin | \
/ Auckland, New Zealand | "Just because your paranoid \
| Ph/FAX (649) 419 1447 | Don't mean they're not after you" |
\ dav...@kcbbs.gen.nz | Nirvana - Nevermind /
\_________________________|____________________________________/
Gandalf
>
> The Historical Missions ROCK! I have played many hours of other
> helo sims, and I thought I knew a lot about the AH-64, but I learned
> much more in the training missions alone of AH-64D Longbow, than I
> ever did from any other helo sim out there. Keep in mind, this is
> all without the manual!
I have a question about the historical missions.Maybe you can help.
When they put them together do you know whether they used intelligence
information available after the missions to put the baddies in the
same positions as they were went the mission went forward at the time?
In other words it would be nice to fly the mission on an as accurate a
model as possible IMO without any extras thrown in to spice it up.
Kinda like when they make movies and say they are based on true
stories but they only faintly resemble the reallity.
I really like the idea of Historical mission.
What are your comments?
Wade Saunders
Edward Thommes
sort of replay camera feature? Some of the playtesters have said that the
environment is so complex and dynamic that you inevitably miss a lot of the
little things that're going on during a mission. Well, that's very good!
And it would be even better if you could replay a mission, look at the action
from different perspectives, and ooh and ahh over all the cool things that
were going on while you were fighting for your life.
Anyway, my anticiation for this sim is building so fast I can practically
hear it :)
-Ed
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Edward Thommes | Choose one:
Department of Physics | a) Laugh
Queen's University | b) Cry
Kingston, Ontario | c) Run screaming into the woods
tho...@astro.queensu.ca |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Fesler
>Corsair,
>Yep, it'll be here soon. I'm using two of the FLCS LE's (one at home
>and one at work) and the really give outstanding control over Longbow.
>The PFLCS will have the same gimbal and spring mechanism as the LE.
Well now you have me depressed that I recently bought a mere FLCS.
But please tell us what the "gimbal and spring mechanism" does for the
PFLCS.
Eric Fesler
Buzz Hoffman
In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
It will also tell you how far away it is on your MFD and you can even
use your TQS cursor control to move the designator over any target on
the MFD and click to designate that target or you can simply draw a
Priority Fire Zone (PFZ) around a group of targets using the TQS cursor
control, switch to Indirect/Bobup mode/LOAL, pop up, get an updated
picture and drop down again and begin firing at targets in the PFZ
one after another and pop back up for lock on and destruction prior
to the Hellfire, etc. arriving at the targets.
LB is a truly magnificent heli sim - and make no mistake about it -
it is a sim.
Buzz
CJ Martin
dav...@kcbbs.gen.nz (David J. Martin) wrote:
>On the subject of targeting systems - does Janes Apache
>tell you what target you are locked onto or do you have to visually
>identify it?
In Janes *Longbow*, either.
>I know in DI's Apache sim all targets were labelled so you instantly
>knew if they were enemy or friendly. But, I remember seeing some
>footage of an apache attacking some targets in Desert Storm and the
>only way they knew that they were attacking enemy targets was by
>comparing a list of coordinates of known friendly formations against
>the coordinates of the target (In the event they actually hit
>friendly M2's).
>
>It would be nice to atleast have an option where you could specify
>if you wanted the targets to be ID'ed automaticly or if you would
>prefer to work them out yourself.
You have that choice.
sc...@tcville.es.hac.com
>buz...@ix.netcom.com(Buzz Hoffman) wrote:
..
>>The PFLCS will have the same gimbal and spring mechanism as the LE.
>Well now you have me depressed that I recently bought a mere FLCS.
>But please tell us what the "gimbal and spring mechanism" does for the
>PFLCS.
Also, any status on the modified Peddles (toe brakes) ???
Any hopes that TM will "go digital" in order to reduce CPU overhead ???
C.D. Jones
> Could someone comment on the air threats in longbow.
Hope you don't mind being ambushed by a couple of Hokums.<g>
Must always be aware in Longbow. You find a nice quiet place
to hover and pick a fight, next thing you know you're taking
cannon fire in the ass and your wingman is saying "Goodbye".
Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
You do have to remember to use them though.
...Chris Jones - Longbow Test Team
mik...@netaxs.com
> Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
>You do have to remember to use them though.
>
> ...Chris Jones - Longbow Test Team
Hopefully you'll let the hat on the joysticks control the camera on the rotors
instead of some arcane keyboard commands where you are leaving yourself
vunerable for several moments.
Robin Kim
<mik...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>> Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
>>You do have to remember to use them though.
>
>instead of some arcane keyboard commands where you are leaving yourself
>vunerable for several moments.
Unlike scout helicopters like the Kiowa, the AH-64D Longbow Apache has
a RADOME mounted at the top of a mast. No cameras there. The optical
and IR sensors are mounted in turrets on the nose.
BTW, if you get a CH Pro Throttle, you can program the joystick hat to send
the keyboard commands you want.
James Wall
On Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:31:28 -0400, "C.D. Jones" <cdj...@itw.com>
wrote:
> Must always be aware in Longbow. You find a nice quiet place
>to hover and pick a fight, next thing you know you're taking
>cannon fire in the ass and your wingman is saying "Goodbye".
So, how's the wingman coms and speach in the game?
a lpha66@h unterlink.n et.a u
bury your head in the sand
bury your face in your hands
.N ewcastle, A ustralia.
Gandalf
On 23 Apr 1996 22:27:02 GMT, Buzz Hoffman <bu...@thrustmaster.com>
wrote:
>In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
>control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
>what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.................................................................................................................................
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Rod White
"C.D. Jones" <cdj...@itw.com> wrote:
>> Could someone comment on the air threats in longbow.
> Hope you don't mind being ambushed by a couple of Hokums.<g>
> Must always be aware in Longbow. You find a nice quiet place
>to hover and pick a fight, next thing you know you're taking
>cannon fire in the ass and your wingman is saying "Goodbye".
> Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
>You do have to remember to use them though.
> ...Chris Jones - Longbow Test Team
You got that one right! Yet, I don't remember the Hokums though. I do
remember many Mi-28 HAVOK & Mi-24 HINDs? Maybe I just thought
they were a HIND or HAVOK? After all, when I see a brown chopper, I
shoot first and ask questions later.:)
I must admit, it appears they have the Russain choppers simulated
well. If anyone knows anything about the HIND, it has many more
chaff, than other helos. It certainly shows when you try taking them
out with Stingers sometimes.:)
Rod White
PC Multimdedia & Entertainment Magazine
http://www.mortimer.com/users/pcme/pcme.htm
Voted Top 5% of all WWW sites by Central Point
"Deep= This site. This is what covering the sim market is all
about. No other resource has the depth and the quality that
this site has." Quoted from the Games Masters 3/96
Member, outside beta test team
JANE'S AH-64D Longbow
Robin Kim
Rod White <rwh...@usaor.net> wrote:
>"C.D. Jones" <cdj...@itw.com> wrote:
>
>>> Could someone comment on the air threats in longbow.
>
>> Hope you don't mind being ambushed by a couple of Hokums.<g>
>
> remember many Mi-28 HAVOK & Mi-24 HINDs? Maybe I just thought
> they were a HIND or HAVOK? After all, when I see a brown chopper, I
> shoot first and ask questions later.:)
>
> I must admit, it appears they have the Russain choppers simulated
> well. If anyone knows anything about the HIND, it has many more
> chaff, than other helos. It certainly shows when you try taking them
> out with Stingers sometimes.:)
Must not be too effective, given Stingers use IR guidance. :^)
BTW, I read excerpts from an interesting article in
rec.aviation.military a while back on how incredibly tough the Ka-50
Hokum is. According to the author's analysis, a Stinger would have
virtually no effect unless it hit a critical part (like the cockpit).
Even a direct hit from a AIM-9 Sidewinder or Hellfire would not be
assured of a kill. The Apache's cannon is also not guaranteed to do
fatal damage.
mik...@netaxs.com
>>In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
>>control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
>>what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
>
>
>How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I have never had a sim that DIDNT do this. One would assume the military
aircraft is capable if distinguishing between differnt vehicles in on the
feild...
mik...@netaxs.com
>Unlike scout helicopters like the Kiowa, the AH-64D Longbow Apache has
>a RADOME mounted at the top of a mast. No cameras there. The optical
>and IR sensors are mounted in turrets on the nose.
>
>BTW, if you get a CH Pro Throttle, you can program the joystick hat to send
>the keyboard commands you want.
>
Ahh I always assumed on top of the mast was some sort of video camera
recording data to a visual display inside the canopy of some sort... Since no
sims have used this realistically (Apache 2000 just changed to a 360 rotating
screen) It would be interesting to see what they do here.
Craig Scott Taylor
A Hokum surviving a Hellfire hit? I thought a Hellfire could take out a
T-72 tank. Wouldn't the Hokum be easier?
--
"The conviction had grown on him that men do not escape
from life because life is dull, but that life escapes from men
because men are little."
- Thomas Wolfe
On Tuesday, April 30, 1996, Robin Kim wrote...
Andy Hollis
wsau...@ccinet.ab.ca (Gandalf) wrote:
>On 23 Apr 1996 22:27:02 GMT, Buzz Hoffman <bu...@thrustmaster.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
>>what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
>
>
>How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>
Its not realistic at all. Its a cheat and defaults to "off". You, the
player, must decide to cheat and switch the thing from the "realistic"
mode, where it shows engine rpm and some other spooge, to "cheat" mode
where it displays the target type, etc.
Some people want to play realistically, some do not. Far be it for us to
decide how you want to have your fun. Our job is to provide as many ways
as possible to appeal to the largest number of players.
--Andy
Robin Kim
<mik...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>>>In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
>>>control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
>>>what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
>>
>>How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
Su-27 Flanker does not identify ground vehicles for you.
>One would assume the military aircraft is capable if distinguishing
>between differnt vehicles in on the feild...
I would assume otherwise. I think the Longbow radar is supposed to
help with target identification, but I doubt it's perfect. In any
event, Apaches without radar have no magical way of identifying
vehicles that I know of, though I believe vehicular IFF systems may
soon become common.
Robin Kim
Craig Scott Taylor <doct...@visi.net> wrote:
>A Hokum surviving a Hellfire hit? I thought a Hellfire could take out a
>T-72 tank. Wouldn't the Hokum be easier?
The author of the article claims that the impact energy is not great enough
to ensure a kill and the reinforced composite structure of the Ka-50 is
resistant to HEAT (high-explosive anti-tank) warheads such as that used by
the Hellfire.
The Ka-50's armor and structure are different than a tank's. Any kinetic
energy penetrator that can defeat a T-72's armor will destroy a Ka-50, but,
according to the author, for HEAT rounds the Ka-50 has the advantage. I'm
sure a big enough HEAT warhead would toast even a Hokum, however.
Tom KC Basham
In article <4m7scp$i...@ssbunews.ih.att.com>, op...@marconi.ih.att.com says...
>I would assume otherwise. I think the Longbow radar is supposed to
>help with target identification, but I doubt it's perfect.
As I have gathered from recent, unclass, AH-64D information, the
millimeter-wave radar has very small resolution, making it very good at
distinguishing objects (and therefore target resolution). However, it isn't
too hard to fool it. It knows the shape of a T-72 and can identify when it
detects something matching that shape. But, it doesn't know the shape of a
T-72 with huge, irregular, randomly cut sheets of metal hanging on it.
>In any event, Apaches without radar have no magical way of identifying
>vehicles that I know of,
As evidenced by the AH-64A friendly fire episodes of the Gulf War.
--
----
Tom "KC" Basham a.k.a "Thunk" Senior Editor, PC ACE Magazine
Email: th...@cris.com Forum Admin, Remove Before Flight
Remove Before Flight - Flight Simulation Forum
http://happypuppy.com/flight/index.html
Tom KC Basham
>I have never had a sim that DIDNT do this. One would assume the military
>feild...
Actually, that's one of the MOST difficult aspects of combat. There were
several blue-on-blue engagements in the Gulf War, including AH-64A's
engaging friendlies. In fairness, there was far lower "friendly fire" events
in the Gulf than in any other US conflict, but that's probably small
consolation to the persons involved in said incidents. At any rate, there
are not a lot of target identification systems out there (at least, not in
the "white world"). F-15Cs reportedly have incredible target detection and
identification using high-freq radar which identifies the target aircraft's
engines, but apparantly it doesn't work well with helicopters. The new
AH-64Ds have millimeter wave radar that apparantly works very well to
identify targets, but can easily be fooled just by hanging enough junk on
the target.
At any rate, Falcon 3.0 and Su-27 never ID'd ground targets for you. I don't
ever remember Tornado, Fleet Defender ID'ing ground targets. Many sims *do*
provide target identification, but this is a playability aid which helps
offset the limited video resolution. I-Magic's Apache models the AH-64D (I
think, can't recall for sure), giving some justification for it identifing
targets. I think, though, that Apache is overly optimisitic about how well
the system works.
mdonalds
In article <4m3lvk$k...@news-2.ccinet.ab.ca>
wsau...@ccinet.ab.ca (Gandalf) writes:
> On 23 Apr 1996 22:27:02 GMT, Buzz Hoffman <bu...@thrustmaster.com>
> wrote:
> >In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
> >control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
> >what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
>
> How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
According to another tester you have the option of turning this feature
off. I believe that was said.
CJ Martin
In article <4m1uku$8...@itw.com>, "C.D. Jones" <cdj...@itw.com> wrote:
>> Could someone comment on the air threats in longbow.
>
> Hope you don't mind being ambushed by a couple of Hokums.<g>
>
>to hover and pick a fight, next thing you know you're taking
>cannon fire in the ass and your wingman is saying "Goodbye".
>
> Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
>You do have to remember to use them though.
>
> ...Chris Jones - Longbow Test Team
And those 'eyes' are not a cheat. The real AH-64D's radar has a 360 degree air
to air radar mode. So does Janes Longbow...
CJ
Member, Outside Beta Test Team
Jane's AH-64D Longbow
http://www.ea.com/janes/ah-64d_longbow/index.html
CJ Martin
In article <4m8s3f$4...@tribune.concentric.net>,
th...@cris.com (Tom "KC" Basham) wrote:
>>I have never had a sim that DIDNT do this. One would assume the military
>>aircraft is capable if distinguishing between differnt vehicles in on the
>>feild...
>
>Actually, that's one of the MOST difficult aspects of combat. There were
Agreed 100%
>several blue-on-blue engagements in the Gulf War, including AH-64A's
>engaging friendlies. In fairness, there was far lower "friendly fire" events
>in the Gulf than in any other US conflict, but that's probably small
>consolation to the persons involved in said incidents. At any rate, there
>are not a lot of target identification systems out there (at least, not in
>the "white world"). F-15Cs reportedly have incredible target detection and
>identification using high-freq radar which identifies the target aircraft's
>engines, but apparantly it doesn't work well with helicopters. The new
Ditto for the F-14D, and the F/A-18A/B/C/D/E/F. Probably the F-16C too. It's
not foolproof, but it can provide some cues. There are also IFF
interrogators on the F-14, F-15, and soon the F-16 and F/A-18, which provide
coded info. Another excellent sensor that only the F-14 has is TCS, and IRST
on the F-14D. Most FLIR pods have a AtA capability as well, but gimbal limits
and airframe obstructions prevent full effectiveness.
>AH-64Ds have millimeter wave radar that apparantly works very well to
>identify targets, but can easily be fooled just by hanging enough junk on
>the target.
Ahhh...not so sure about that, at least in the case of a *moving* ground
target. The extent of target ID in this case would be limited to
distinguishing between tracked and wheeled vehicles. Ground vehicle IFF
systems are in work, and were available in a very crude form during the Gulf
War.
>At any rate, Falcon 3.0 and Su-27 never ID'd ground targets for you. I don't
>ever remember Tornado, Fleet Defender ID'ing ground targets. Many sims *do*
Don't think so either.
>provide target identification, but this is a playability aid which helps
>offset the limited video resolution. I-Magic's Apache models the AH-64D (I
>think, can't recall for sure), giving some justification for it identifing
>targets. I think, though, that Apache is overly optimisitic about how well
>the system works.
Janes Longbow has the same ability, but by default it is off. It can be
toggled on/off inflight. I consider it a cheat, and rarely use it. It's not
really needed...the FLIR/DVO/DTV sensors of the TADS system are excellently
modeled. Study those Janes references!
mdonalds
In article <4m5tr4$q...@netaxs.com>
mik...@netaxs.com writes:
> >>In LB, when you target something, it will tell you on the upfront
> >>control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
> >>what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
> >How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I have never had a sim that DIDNT do this. One would assume the military
> aircraft is capable if distinguishing between differnt vehicles in on the
> feild...
I believe that when the LANTIRN project was started, one of the things
it was supposed to do is have some target recognition ability. I've
never read anything about them succeeding in that regard. It seems that
the Mark I is still the target recognition "device" of choice. There
was a nasty friendly fire incident in the Gulf that likely would not
have happened if there had been a display saying "Bradley." Sims do
recognition a lot, I haven't heard much about it in real life.
Hakan Powers
In article <4m45fh$1...@news.usaor.net>, rwh...@usaor.net wrote:
> well. If anyone knows anything about the HIND, it has many more
> chaff, than other helos. It certainly shows when you try taking them
> out with Stingers sometimes.:)
I hope that was a mistake on your part, otherwise the enemy pilot AI isn't
worth my money..
Hakan Powers - Email:pow...@algonet.se - http://www.algonet.se/~powers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility
of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy.
------------- Sun Tzu, On Tactical Dispositions, The Art of War ------
Matt Wagner
CJ Martin wrote:
>
> In article <4m1uku$8...@itw.com>, "C.D. Jones" <cdj...@itw.com> wrote:
> >> Could someone comment on the air threats in longbow.
> >
> > Hope you don't mind being ambushed by a couple of Hokums.<g>
> >
> > Must always be aware in Longbow. You find a nice quiet place
> >to hover and pick a fight, next thing you know you're taking
> >cannon fire in the ass and your wingman is saying "Goodbye".
> >
> > Luckily the Longbow does have eyes in the back of it's head.
> >You do have to remember to use them though.
> >
> > ...Chris Jones - Longbow Test Team
>
> And those 'eyes' are not a cheat. The real AH-64D's radar has a 360 degree air
> to air radar mode. So does Janes Longbow...
>
>
> Member, Outside Beta Test Team
> Jane's AH-64D Longbow
> http://www.ea.com/janes/ah-64d_longbow/index.html
Hmmm, according to Janes, of all places, the LB radar has a blind spot
around the six o'clock area due to the tail rotor assembly blocking the
beam.
Wags
Andy Hollis
mdon...@130.63.231.100 (mdonalds) wrote:
>In article <4m3lvk$k...@news-2.ccinet.ab.ca>
>wsau...@ccinet.ab.ca (Gandalf) writes:
>
>> On 23 Apr 1996 22:27:02 GMT, Buzz Hoffman <bu...@thrustmaster.com>
>> wrote:
>> >control not only if it is a friendly target, or an enemy target, but
>> >what exactly it is you have targeted (i.e. T-72, SAM, AAA, Radar, etc.)
>>
>> How realistic is this?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>off. I believe that was said.
>
Like I said before, its a "cheat". Its for those casual gamers that need
the crutch. I would not expect anyone on this list to use such a cheat
(or admitting to such use ;-). Just don't turn it on! Same way you
wouldn't turn on "Unlimited Ammo" or "Invulnerability" now would you? ;-)
There is some very realistic Aircraft Survivability Equipment (ASE) that
does do some limited target recognition, but its all passive reception.
There's a Radar Warning Receiver and a Radio Frequency Interferometer
that both contribute input to the ASE page you can display on one of your
MFDs. This will show off positions (and track/launch) states of certain
kinds of SAMS and other emitters. This is very realistic and very
useful.
The Longbow radar itself can do limited recognition, but its more of a
classification (building vs armor vs wheeled non-armor vs aircraft) than
a full-blown recognition.
--Andy
Jussi Saari
On 30 Apr 1996, Craig Scott Taylor wrote:
> A Hokum surviving a Hellfire hit? I thought a Hellfire could take out a
> T-72 tank. Wouldn't the Hokum be easier?
Not necessarily. It depends entirely on where the Hellfire hits, and
I'd say that a Hokum would have a lot more "Hellfire-survivable" parts in
it than a T-72. It is true that a T-72 is far more heavily armored, but
since the Hellfire can still penetrate, it doesn't matter much. What
matters is that after penetrating the T-72, the HEAT jet usually causes
the main gun ammo to explode which in turn totally demolishes the tank.
(Not that the HEAT warhead alone wouldn't make a total mess out of the
turret interior...) The Ka-50 on the other hand doesn't have lots of
highly vulnerable 125mm ammo and crewmembers inside it, but instead a lot of
parts that can be destroyed without making the aircraft totally unflyable.
The entire tailboom can be blown off for example, and as long as the pilot,
one of the engines and the main rotor along with its transmission
remain in one piece, the helicopter should be able to limp home.
Jussi
CJ Martin
In article <4mam6t$c...@epimetheus.algonet.se>, pow...@algonet.se (Hakan Powers) wrote:
>In article <4m45fh$1...@news.usaor.net>, rwh...@usaor.net wrote:
>> well. If anyone knows anything about the HIND, it has many more
>> chaff, than other helos. It certainly shows when you try taking them
>> out with Stingers sometimes.:)
>
>I hope that was a mistake on your part, otherwise the enemy pilot AI isn't
>worth my money..
He meant *flares*. The enemy AI uses various countermeasures very well. Helos
are a very tough nut...you can't "wish 'em dead".
CJ
-----
Member, outside beta test team
Janes AH-64D Longbow (LB)
http://www.ea.com/janes/ah-64d_longbow/index.html
CJ Martin
You seem to have forgotten the shear kinetic energy of the Hellfire missle
airframe, plus the effects of any unspent rocket motor fuel.
try to ask the Hellfire guy on Monday to see if I can get a better answer.
it can. IMHO, it would swat any helo it hit from the sky...but remember, t
is just my non-expert opinion. I'll try to ask the Hellfire guy on Monday to
see if I can get a better answer.
enzo
Matt Wagner wrote:
> Hmmm, according to Janes, of all places, the LB radar has a blind spot
> around the six o'clock area due to the tail rotor assembly blocking the
> beam.
Considering the size of the tail rotor assembly, I'd hazard a guess that
the size of the blind spot would probably be minimal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Mouneimne | "The Apples are coming! The Apples are coming!
en...@outwest.com | No, wait. They're going away again."
|
---CS-Anime-Bab5-SegaAM-Mtn_Bikes-RPGs-Newton-Ducatis-Hk-Glock-Rally--
Berlinsky
Jussi wrote:
>Not necessarily. It depends entirely on where the Hellfire hits,
>"Hellfire-survivable" parts in it then a T-72.
Snip
I personally believe a Hellfire would down a Hokum if it hit it
ANYWHERE. Knocking the tail boom off sets up an unrecoverable
center of gravity problem where the pilot would lose control of
the helicopter. You also forget the flight profile of the
Hellfire..its gonna come down through the rotors (nice of them to
give you two sets to double the odds of hitting something). Then
Boris gets to try out his ejection seat.
Steve
U.S Cavalry Retired
Robin Kim
Berlinsky <72531...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>I personally believe a Hellfire would down a Hokum if it hit it
>ANYWHERE. Knocking the tail boom off sets up an unrecoverable
>center of gravity problem where the pilot would lose control of
>the helicopter.
I'm not sure it's talking about the same thing, but here's a quote from
the article:
In firing test against the Hokum, the Kamov design Bureau states that
the Hokum has withstood 12.7mm, 14.5mm, 23mm HEI, 20mm HEI rounds fired
at a hovering Hokum. The only damage sustained was that the composite
tail cone was shot off. Since the Hokum does not have a tail rotor the
tail cone is not required for flight. The Hokum flew back to its base
without incurring cyclic loadings sufficient for any further
unrepairable damage.
>You also forget the flight profile of the
>Hellfire..its gonna come down through the rotors (nice of them to
>give you two sets to double the odds of hitting something). Then
>Boris gets to try out his ejection seat.
I didn't think of that! What angle does it normally come down at?
Jan Johansson
>I personally believe a Hellfire would down a Hokum if it hit it
>ANYWHERE. Knocking the tail boom off sets up an unrecoverable
>center of gravity problem where the pilot would lose control of
>the helicopter. You also forget the flight profile of the
>Hellfire..its gonna come down through the rotors (nice of them to
>give you two sets to double the odds of hitting something). Then
>Boris gets to try out his ejection seat.
Yeah, i have to agree with that, teh warhead shod definitly knock the
Hokum out... The only thing is, doenst the hellfire has a shaped
charge? I mean, the hokum COULD stay airborne, but only just! :)
Edward Thommes
Bill Sarvis Pierpont (six...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
:
: I wonder who the poor soul was that had to sit in a hoover while they
: shot at it. ------
Yeah, that would certainly suck. A pretty tight squeeze, too...and I
can't help wondering if they at least let him take out the bag before he
got in :-)
Bryan Walker
> >You also forget the flight profile of the
> >Hellfire..its gonna come down through the rotors (nice of them to
> >give you two sets to double the odds of hitting something). Then
> >Boris gets to try out his ejection seat.
>
>
Around 35 degrees, depending upon the range of the engagement,
and the selected delivery mode of the missile.
Regardless, a 100-pound missile carrying 22 pounds of HE
striking a relatively unarmored target at just over mach 1 would knock
any small aircraft into next week.
Bryan Walker
Simulations Producer
Domark Software
Buzz Hoffman
Yep, that's true - I was just responding to a question as to if you
COULD tell in the upfront control - and you can - IF you want it to.
Of course, then when you tell someone you can you get - "How realistic
IS this?..." Heh, heh, heh. Maybe just 'makin' conversation?
Buzz
<In article <4m9ee3$f...@sunburst.ccs.yorku.ca>,
Robin Kim
Bryan Walker <br...@domark.com> wrote:
>> >You also forget the flight profile of the
>> >Hellfire..its gonna come down through the rotors (nice of them to
>> >give you two sets to double the odds of hitting something). Then
>> >Boris gets to try out his ejection seat.
>>
>> I didn't think of that! What angle does it normally come down at?
>
> Around 35 degrees, depending upon the range of the engagement,
>and the selected delivery mode of the missile.
Thanks for the info.
> Regardless, a 100-pound missile carrying 22 pounds of HE
>striking a relatively unarmored target at just over mach 1 would knock
>any small aircraft into next week.
It occurred to me that the author of the article might not have taken
into account the kinetic energy of the missile into his calculations.
I checked, and this does seem to have been the case. While this may
have some validity for other types of missiles with blast-fragmentation
warheads and proximity fuses, it certainly does not for a Hellfire with
a HEAT warhead that most probably either scores a direct hit or a clean
miss.
C. D. Jones
Buzz Hoffman wrote:
>
> Yep, that's true - I was just responding to a question as to if you
> COULD tell in the upfront control - and you can - IF you want it to.
> Of course, then when you tell someone you can you get - "How realistic
> IS this?..." Heh, heh, heh. Maybe just 'makin' conversation?
Just another realism option really. Just happens to be TDC on the panel.
Getting mail from a few people that are bothered by this. Don't see why.
Like anything else, "change the channel" is my attitude. Don't want it,
don't take it. Guess some guys can't trust themselves not to peek ;).
...Chris Jones
Andy Hollis
What's more, you could also cheat by going to an outside view like
"target view" or "reverse target view" and see the damn thing all zoomed
up and pretty. In fact, are *any* outside views realistic? Of course
not. Not for you the pilot. You can't suddenly teleport your presence
somewhere else ( or at least I have personally be unable to accomplish
this. If you have, please contact me ;-).
Its like playing solitaire. Sure, you can look, but only if you want to.
Why should we tell each of you exactly how to have your fun? Have it
the way you want it...
--Andy
JOHN MCFARLIN
C. D. Jones (cdj...@itw.com) wrote:
:
: Just another realism option really. Just happens to be TDC on the panel.
: Getting mail from a few people that are bothered by this. Don't see why.
: Like anything else, "change the channel" is my attitude. Don't want it,
: don't take it. Guess some guys can't trust themselves not to peek ;).
I guess some people are squeamish about the possibility of Blue on Blue,
and others are callous about it. I'd go with the not knowing, because
really, how COULD a remote sensing system know what kind of unit you were
looking at? You'd have to use the ol' MK1 on the FLIR or DTV to make a
guess, which would mean good resolution graphics so that you could put
some of those details on the little screens in the cockpit.
To be blunt, I get beyond the FLOT, I just whack about anything that
moves along my flightpath. If in doubt, I wait until I get aggressed.
Until now, though, and this has been the case since the old C64 GUNSHIP
days, I've been accustomed to being told. There will be weaning pains
but so what? If I want the "more realer thing" I'll put up with them...
John