Link 16 things you want in the next update
-
Please do not waste time on other flyable aircraft. This is a F-16 simulator! I pisses me off when people want more than what the focus of a simulator is. Then they complain because it is not up to standard of what has improved on the actual aircraft the sim is supposed to be. Same thing in Arma3 That is an infantry simulation. The tanks and helis and airplanes were supposed to be AI components to increase the infantry immersion.
It really pisses me off when some try to tell others how to enjoy said sims. You can fly and do whatever you want in BMS or ARMA. You do you and let them do them.
-
I would like to be able to command the AI, eg. my AI wingman or AI element, to ground refuel if we have landed at a forward air base. Like we are able to do using the Ground ATC menu page when in a taxi zone
+1
-
Please do not waste time on other flyable aircraft. This is a F-16 simulator! I pisses me off when people want more than what the focus of a simulator is. Then they complain because it is not up to standard of what has improved on the actual aircraft the sim is supposed to be. Same thing in Arma3 That is an infantry simulation. The tanks and helis and airplanes were supposed to be AI components to increase the infantry immersion.
I mean, BMS has already evolved into something much more then the original Falcon 4 game which yes was only focused on the F16. But like I said, BMS evolved into so much more, I don’t see why it can’t evolve into something that focuses on other aircraft besides the F16. The viper will always be the highlight of the show, but that doesn’t mean BMS has to only be a viper sim. I enjoy the extra flight models and appreciate the people that offered their free time to make them for my enjoyment. I don’t think “waste of time” are appropriate words to use as people put a lot of effort and hard work to make those models, and they did it on their own time for FREE! You do you, if you would only like to fly the viper that’s you but me personally I’m gonna go fly the other planes as well as a Viper.
-
Well said. Personally, I couldn’t agree here more.
Let’s put Falcon to its limits, instead… and after, let’s go even beyond to set more challenging goals.
My one cent.
With best regards to all.
-
As always, anything is possible!
Now the team priority is elsewhere and I am sure that 99% of you guys will like it…
So let’s see later if we have the time / energy to tackle other avionics and planes.Meanwhile, I see a lot of wishes already answered (that’s all I’ll say!)
Cheers
-
Hope the engine data is/can be updated on the Danish F-16 MLU’s. The PW200 has been replaced by the PW220 for years now.
-
improving 3d models is not a waste of time IMO. Adding new models improves the realism. I think the Team at the moment is focused on terrain engine anyway.
I’d rephrase to: “the team is focused anyway”.
Sent from my MI 5 using Tapatalk
-
would like a cruise missile that could be intercepted.
a block 70 F-16
SDB 53 that can be used by the F-16 -
Okay so I have some (i think) realistic things I would like to be implemented in a near-future version of BMS:
1. Greatly expand the radius from the runway that you can switch from Ground to Tower freq. Switching to tower at a reasonable time, especially if you’re holding in the EOR with multiple flights makes life a lot easier in MP LFE.
2. Hostile aircraft that are splashed (and burning wrecks tumbling towards the ground) more often than not continue to SPIKE your RWR. After having an AMRAAM explode your flogger into tiny pieces should have at least a higher chance of knocking out the radar than it does currently. -
@DUSTOFF17:
Okay so I have some (i think) realistic things I would like to be implemented in a near-future version of BMS:
1. Greatly expand the radius from the runway that you can switch from Ground to Tower freq. Switching to tower at a reasonable time, especially if you’re holding in the EOR with multiple flights makes life a lot easier in MP LFE.
2. Hostile aircraft that are splashed (and burning wrecks tumbling towards the ground) more often than not continue to SPIKE your RWR. After having an AMRAAM explode your flogger into tiny pieces should have at least a higher chance of knocking out the radar than it does currently.Destroyed aircrafts spiking rwr has been fixed in 4.35!, please provide a reliable TE repro case if you still see that bug
-
Destroyed aircrafts spiking rwr has been fixed in 4.35!, please provide a reliable TE repro case if you still see that bug
this bug is still present in 4.35.1. will a screenshot suffice??
-
this bug is still present in 4.35.1. will a screenshot suffice??
No, we need a 100% reproductable case
-
this bug is still present in 4.35.1. will a screenshot suffice??
A repro case.
And yeah I got it too.
-
@DUSTOFF17:
Okay so I have some (i think) realistic things I would like to be implemented in a near-future version of BMS:
1. Greatly expand the radius from the runway that you can switch from Ground to Tower freq. Switching to tower at a reasonable time, especially if you’re holding in the EOR with multiple flights makes life a lot easier in MP LFE.
+1
and / or
maybe add a small line in recorded ATC voice to say “fly heading xyz and hold 10k radial abc” then after holding you may resume own navigation -
@Bad:
No, we need a 100% reproductable case
aye aye captain… m on it
-
+1
and / or
maybe add a small line in recorded ATC voice to say “fly heading xyz and hold 10k radial abc” then after holding you may resume own navigation“resume own navigation” is a bit of a misnomer - its not something you hear after takeoff.
Its used by ATC to return your responsibility for navigation after they have suspended it by issuing vectors.
“Falcon four, for separation turn left heading 320” Turn left heading 320, Falcon four"
“Falcon four, resume own navigation - track direct WOLFF then flight planned route” “own navigation, direct WOLFF then as filed, Falcon four”
What you’d expect to hear after takeoff would normally be “contact departures on …” but typically fighters switch to departures on the runway.
“viper three, contact departures airborne, runway 36 cleared for takeoff” “departures, runway 36 cleared for takeoff viper 3”
Issuing a control instruction as part of a departure clearance is not typically “automatic” but depends on the operational needs… both of the unit and by ATC.
-
“resume own navigation” is a bit of a misnomer - its not something you hear after takeoff.
Its used by ATC to return your responsibility for navigation after they have suspended it by issuing vectors.
“Falcon four, for separation turn left heading 320” Turn left heading 320, Falcon four"
“Falcon four, resume own navigation” “own navigation, Falcon four”
What you’d expect to hear after takeoff would normally be “contact departures on …” but typically fighters switch to departures on the runway.
“viper three, contact departures airborne, runway 36 cleared for takeoff” “departures, runway 36 cleared for takeoff viper 3”
Issuing a control instruction as part of a departure clearance is not typically “automatic” but depends on the operational needs… both of the unit and by ATC.
You do have a « contact departure » after airborne !!! Don’t you have the patience or wait for it?
I deliberately made the choice to not ask switch to departure on runway because in that cause you would not hear tower instructing to accelerate take off in case someone is in final
-
I’m not saying there isn’t such an instruction, more responding to the request regarding “resume own navigation”.
I’m fairly happy with the current state of BMS’ ATC code - sure, it’s not perfect, but further improvement would be fairly difficult and I expect many users might dislike it.
I suppose I hadn’t really considered the possibility of people sitting on the runway in a fighter jet. Seems like a bit of a waste of fuel…!
-
but typically fighters switch to departures on the runway.
As always, it depends. I have heard such an early switch to Departure once on a Dutch QRA audio excerpt, but AFAIK, in the Belgian Air Force, you only switch to Departure once safely above a certain altitude. I think it may even be after the whole flight is properly airborne.
What is weird and IMO needs changing, however, is the “Fly heading …, resume own navigation” you get by departure. It has to be one or the other. You can’t have both in one transmission.
-
In my experience, the “Fly heading” call is often (always?) towards steerpoint #2, so in that sense it is your own navigation.