Iff you could have one thing in the next update it would be. (Archive)
-
One can dream!
-
-
If they end up implementing other AC like the harrier that is under development… there might be a modular system after all… implementing different variations of f-16 for example… Selecting blk30 will give you green monochrome mfd’s and vhf datalink… blk 52’s would give you color mfd’s and link 16 (or whatever) along with the thrust variation due to engine model/manufacturer… that would ve awesome
For your information all engines are correctly modeled in 4.32 !!!
-
I am no expert on numbers but I have seen differences in performance too… thanks for the heads up…
-
For your information all engines are correctly modeled in 4.32 !!!
at least from a thrust variation point of view. Would be nice to have correct cockpit panels depending on the engine installed, too.
-
AI flying correct Departures and Approaches would be cool
-
Flight takeoff times in the air tasking order like in Falcon4 Allied Force.
-
If they end up implementing other AC like the harrier that is under development… there might be a modular system after all… implementing different variations of f-16 for example… Selecting blk30 will give you green monochrome mfd’s and vhf datalink… blk 52’s would give you color mfd’s and link 16 (or whatever) along with the thrust variation due to engine model/manufacturer… that would ve awesome
Even a falcon that implement all the blocks variants whould be for me awsome! For example an ADF version with apg 66. that would make BMS a total F-16 simulator!
-
A new type/or switch for the particle system:
A particle that is only drawn when the night vision goggles is on. -
why we shouldn’t experience high detailed airport( not graphical I mean, I mean every inch of taxi way have his own code like alpha , echo , delta … and it own number) and complex taxi and take off and landing procedures like reality , as for example, “cowboy 11 with flight number 14355, take off runway 23L from taxi way alpha 130L zulu 02 alpha 11 charlie 30L echo 25R” .
you know , I mean some thing like flight simulator X and even more advance. these are simple thing compare to graphical issues or moving from DX 9 to 11, and give us more fell of reality.
and wish to have even more professional and complex ramp start checklist , some thing beyond engine testings & other checklist that we do in BMS . Yeah fell lack of profession inside of my self. :lol: -
… you can add the professionalism you want … most of the realism is in your hands.
-
why we shouldn’t experience high detailed airport( not graphical I mean, I mean every inch of taxi way have his own code like alpha , echo , delta … and it own number) and complex taxi and take off and landing procedures like reality , as for example, “cowboy 11 with flight number 14355, take off runway 23L from taxi way alpha 130L zulu 02 alpha 11 charlie 30L echo 25R” .
you know , I mean some thing like flight simulator X and even more advance. these are simple thing compare to graphical issues or moving from DX 9 to 11, and give us more fell of reality.
and wish to have even more professional and complex ramp start checklist , some thing beyond engine testings & other checklist that we do in BMS . Yeah fell lack of profession inside of my self. :lol:exactly what else did you want to add to the ramp start checklist? red dogs one is very close to the real ones Ive read. A few switches set differently, and some NYI (Not Yet Implemented) panels left out.
Id love to see more detailed ground operations in BMS, but part of the issue would be giving users the flexibility in what they wanted to simulate. Lots of airfields have specific ground procedures. Ive been reading about RL ground ops at Kunsan. Yes, a lot more complex than BMS uses. But Id think it would be a lot of work to specify things for airfields so that every airport had its own correct ground procedures that could be set according to reality.
Id say, probably at least as much work as improving vast areas of graphics.
… you can add the professionalism you want … most of the realism is in your hands.
as far as that goes, it would be rather cool if there was a way to spawn a player into the tower a la FSX, and something similar for AWACS/GCI.
-
This post is deleted! -
exactly what else did you want to add to the ramp start checklist? red dogs one is very close to the real ones Ive read. A few switches set differently, and some NYI (Not Yet Implemented) panels left out.
Id love to see more detailed ground operations in BMS, but part of the issue would be giving users the flexibility in what they wanted to simulate. Lots of airfields have specific ground procedures. Ive been reading about RL ground ops at Kunsan. Yes, a lot more complex than BMS uses. But Id think it would be a lot of work to specify things for airfields so that every airport had its own correct ground procedures that could be set according to reality.
Id say, probably at least as much work as improving vast areas of graphics.
as far as that goes, it would be rather cool if there was a way to spawn a player into the tower a la FSX, and something similar for AWACS/GCI.
Yeah , I agree with you and in fact I have the same point of view as you, if you be Remember , in Aliedforce we had some thing basic to be as ground radar room operators , especially when we joined the camp from AWACS or JStar squadron. it was basic compare to real situation but full of fun. YEAH
-
I am sure i read that new update is possibley going to be in 4 weeks is this correct?.
If so woooooooot just got to get my pc fixed as I have been away for ages and the pc im using now wont run it
-
I am sure i read that new update is possibley going to be in 4 weeks is this correct?.
If so woooooooot just got to get my pc fixed as I have been away for ages and the pc im using now wont run it
At the moment, there is serious question over whether 4 weeks actually means 4 weeks… 3 to 4 weeks usually means whenever its done - i.e. NOT 3 to 4 actual weeks. Given the proximity to a certain holiday celebration however, there is at least a chance that 4 weeks might actually mean 4 weeks.
-
Cockpit out of focus when using NGV.
-
write four week & read four year
Just kidding :lol: -
Agree.
It would be “perfect” (much better) if we have separated freq for the:
- Tower (Taxi, takeoff, landing clearance)
and for the:
- “Approach” (GCA vectors at arrival, departures)
… same story for AWACS: would be good to have a:
- “Check In” freq (sort of limited broadcast for all packages, only limited to comm’s related to check in and check out procedures)
and the:
- “Tactical” freq filtering only your package and where only the tactical comm’s should takes place (without hearing the Intra Flight comm’s of others flight of the your package concerning only the flight internal management: fuel check, formation … etc …)
Seems from the Kunsan Rules pdf off the epublishing website that tower at kunsan has a separate frequency for clearance delivery.
As long as we are on the wishlist, Id love some way to be able to specify aircraft movements as an air traffic controller. pie in the sky type dreams, but it would be pretty cool if the ATO listed aircraft to spawn for flights, and a ground controller could control what aircraft spawned where, assign them ground movement clearances, etc… hand that off to another human acting as tower controller (and presumably approaches/departures, SOF, etc)… probably never happen though.
We can dream
.
-
was hoping it would come out this december or jan!!