Internet security programs are, for the most part, an excellent way to damage your computer’s security.
Security in IT comes from secure operating practices, not installing some software then operating insecurely.
would be nice to get a version with a map and nav data waypoints, for radar approach control (human ATC potential)
I know it is possible, but without an SDK or published guides it is hard to say what exactly is possible.
You dont need an SDK to make 3D models, and there are published guides on this very forum!
Or, well. There were. I guess Im not sure if they survived the great Purge.
weapon effects is probably one of the lesser developed parts of BMS. Should be able to pull up hitpoints and damage data with the BMS editor.
mono does not, but you can use winetricks to install native SAPI5. I’ve been working with that to try get a System.Speech method working (in vatSys, an air traffic control client for Vatsim).
As regards the keypress stuff, I’m not entirely sure sorry.
If you’re up for the beta testing, I’ll add you to the distribution and send you a download link. Currently requires 64 bit windows with .net 4.7 or higher installed.
I mean, Im currently running software which requires 64 bit and .net 4.7.2 or higher… on linux. So it might not be so hard and fast as you might assume.
What licence is this under? If no choice has been made yet, may I suggest GPLv3?
No idea if this is true, but my logic says that empty fuel tank can be reused. Either at AAR during flight (can you refuel your fuel tanks midair???) or back at home base. It’s a piece of equipment that you don’t need to replace with new one.
Yes, it is possible to refuel the fuel tanks midair, provided they are depressurised.
Why would that matter? You’re saying “keep the fuel tanks, the airplane will go that fast with them.” Doesn’t matter, more drag, more fuel burn, less fuel margin.
Those last three lines are the key bit - in general, the fuel gained by keeping the tanks tends to outweigh the potential fuel savings by ditching the tanks.
Exceptions obviously exist, Operation Opera for example.
Spooky, distinguishing between the “concept” and the “idea” is not meaningful in English - perhaps this is something that has been lost in translation?
available to the public eye
At least in theory, this is what should limit all such discussions on this forum, from a rules perspective.
Most Air to ground stores are limited to 1.2 mach and 600 knots for the store, which limits your ability to do 1.5 mach 150 foot penetration runs with ground stores. The TERs (when loaded) are limited to 550 knots or 0.95 mach (600 and 1.6 when empty - 700 knots in some configs). After dropping bombs, the remaining suspension gear (if no TER used) is limited to 700 and 1.6, and the tanks suspension gear, to 750 and 1.6.
The fuel tanks on the other hand are 600 and 1.6, so Im not seeing why the fuel tanks are the issue with a high speed low level penetration?
Okay, the funnel doesnt show the projected path of the shells. Thats the misconception.
The Firing Evaluation Display System (FEDS) shows the projected path of shells fired, and is used in level II (no lock). In level III and up, the Bullets At Target Range (BATR) symbol is used instead to show where bullets passed the target.
In level II and III, the funnel works very similarly to with LCOS. It does NOT show where the bullets will travel. In levels II and III, it shows a range of valid solutions for the current normal acceleration (G) in plane, with the wingspan currently selected being used as the gap between the lines of the funnel. In level IV and V, the funnel is in the targets plane of motion (POM) rather than your POM.
Thing is, your target isnt maneuvering, so picking their plane of motion is a bit of a crapshoot.
I guess Id suggest having another look at the EEGS symbology levels explanations, particularly the explanation of how the funnel works? The short version is that the funnel isnt showing you where the bullets will go, its showing you how much lead you need - and once you have a radar lock, it starts showing you the lead in the plane of motion of the target - which is VERY useful for figuring out how much lead you need to pull when you are not in the targets POM, such as for snapshots.
For abnormal situations, one useful thing you can do real world is point out your needs to ATC: Seoul Tower, Falcon 1 requires RWY 01 due heavyweight.
I guess that could be a neat improvement to have for the ATC code at some stage, although Id imagine this would have a little complexity to the arrivals process.