ZachariasX

The forum is. At least on my iPad…

Your friggin‘ matches haunt me in my sleep…

There was that thing I had been harping on for years now…

Happy New Year everyone!

Were you drawing and printing them on decal paper? Anyway… amazing work, as always!

Interesting Interview. I think Nick went a bit ahead of himself discounting the planes featured in MSFS as wholesale "they dont fly as real aircraft" while "ours do". Especially coming from a company that is rather uptight on info how they are actually modelling the FM. "We do CFD and stuff..." doesn't mean anything there. Same as "ours feel better". They are programers. Hence rational answers would be possible.

Godzilla Minus One has some grand CGI effects. That whole movie cost about half than an average episode of She-Hulk. You can make great effects with little costs if you know what you are doing and it shows how broken of a shop Hollywood has become. I think the tools have just gotten so powerful that absolutely mediocre tradesmen can pull off some colorful whatever. And mediocre staff is (at least in the sourcing) cheaper than talented staff. What also CGI does, it simply allows you to easily arrange your actors in a way that is most convenient for your camera work. This means not only your CGI artists can be mediocre, also your camera work can be mediocre as most problems can be arranged away. But having actors in the wrong places always shows and makes the whole scene somewhat uncanny, even tough you are getting a shot full of action. Having no idea about (or not really caring) how things really looked doesn't help either. Also, mediocre CGI artists love to copy from other movies instead of real world looks. A decade of doing super hero movies where nothong matters at all as long as there are big-badda-boms probably degenerated the trade even more. Same as Hollywood script writing has gone the way of the Dodo in the age of just slushing out content. Looking at the trailer, I think they could have done worse and I look forward to watching it. Without expecting too much though, but giving the producers the benefit of the doubt. Track record counts for me.

Looking great! Very much looking forward to this! The models look beautiful and it will be great having a scenery with an atol that really looks like one. Much appreciated Jason!

Different poeple have different flying styles. I consider first hand anectotes highly circumstancial. Also, we (or I) do not know if that flying style was intentional or not. (I'd yaw to help me looking over my shoulder, I don't have an owl's neck...) Some of these fighter aircraft exhibit rather strong trim changes in yaw across the speed range that has to be comensated for by the pilot. In a tight turn, the aircraft bleeds speed a lot and gets out of trim unless the pilot insinctively does the right footwork (and this is really you pumping iron!), else the plane will progressively yaw during the turn. It takes an experienced pilot to deal with such under difficult conditions. The IJN had extremely trained aircrew in te first year of the war and I am rather sure that those folks knew how to handle their aircraft. Yet with untrained ones, especially in a situation where the pilot is not looking over the nose (but much rather over his shoulder) to straighten out the aircraft, I find it plausible that the plane gets out of trim when the pilot is a lesser calibre. Trim changes are really something prominent that differ these vintage aircraft from todays more balanced propositions. GBut going sideways puts very undesireable loads on an airframe form a design point of view, hence for "balanced" controls, the rudder is always kept with heavyer input loads than pitch or roll. The Mustang for instance got his tail fillet as it would yaw too easily. Yaw combined with pull loads changes the structural strenght on g loads negatively. This is a reason why you generally don't really flick roll vintage aircraft, unless they are rather slow and strong built ones (like an AT-6). But even with aerobatic trainers like a Bücker131 biplane, flick rolls are frowned upon, as these loads can stress and damage an airframe in a way that is not repairable, despite keeping nominal g loads well within limits.

I guess I have seen about all of the Godzilla movies, even those at times weird Japanese movies. Especially the better crafted and newer movies are ok, but they are true popcorn movies, while the first one is not. I find it impressive that Toho studios dared to make such a graphic movie just after what Japan had brought onto itself back then. Pointing the finger at themselves like that sure took balls of steel. Seeing the original movie as a kid, I never understood why the ending was on such a sad note. But even that version was slightly cut, but less so than the American version, devoid of much of the movies rationale. It is something I really appreciate about good fantasy or sci-fi movies, when they can package mankinds existential problems in a different story, and elaborate on that free from conventions or (sometimes) censorship.

I am soooooooooooo looking for this I never really liked any of the sequels. For me it was nothing but the uncut 1954 version. As the Kaijū became that popular, it somehow had to become one of the good guys. Hard to stomach when it originally has been nothing but the mirror image of human failure. Shin Godzilla was a nice try, maninly because it put human failings into a new perspectice. Making the movie somewhat comical was not unwelcome, as it was done with respect toward the main caracter, the Kaijū.

The USN Pacific Submarine Campaign: Ep. 1, The USN Pacific Submarine Campaign - The Dark Year (Dec'41 - Dec'42) Ep. 2: The USN Pacific Submarine Campaign - The Struggle is Real (Jan'43 - Jun'43) Ep.3: The USN Pacific Submarine Campaign - Hey, the torpedoes are working now! (Jul'43 - Dec'43)

I'd hate it to be on Steam. If it is not possible otherwise to code a functional MP game otherwise, then that would raise some fundamental questions on the venture as a whole. But I am aware that today, we look at programmers generally as not being able to do their job properly. ("It's a software problem, we can't do anything about that.") Just for those who think Steam being a cheap way for distribution, a laucher and anticheat. Given jason had to pay like 30% of his revenue, how would be the cost structure of a game be when the launcher is >10% of the work of a flight simulator? Or maybe you could just start the effin game and do things there?? But yes, why not do both given there are some who can't do without. As for me, really just give me a friggin game that I can install on a partition that I can play and maintain with user priviledges. Spare me rootkits.

They really are setting the bar high.. at least for the looks.

Flying the Wildcat, I sure would have hated if my wingman had other plans than staying with me. At 18000 ft. in a Corsair or P38, I could understand that folks would have been more relaxed in scoring just by themselves.

Iteresting. In the ETO, that would have you grounded pretty quickly. Losing your leader is essentially what got Clostermann banished from flying Mk.IX over the Channel to flying old Mk.V over the arctic.

I really hope the they get the systems modelling right. A2A really set the bar high with their module. But I would definitely buy that module.

I think A2A has a great implementation of tasking multi crew copilots. On one side, he does the basic systems setup to have the aircraft ready for you „just to fly it“, on the other hand you can set his designated power settings that he will try to maintain. PMDG have an automated autopilot as well, but it lacks the ability to set your copilot besides standard flight regimes. Thus, he will absolutely try to kill you as soon as any occurring issue requires special care of a certain system, making the concept moot in case of a high prevalence of system issues (like gun damage). Ideally, I would envision a notepad, where I can assign both standard tasks as well as specific settings. For a B-17 for instance, there should be a basic selection of flight regimes that I can assign to my copilot, like startup, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent and in range approach/landing. For a B-29, this would be vital unless you make it a WT kind of B-29. In addition to that, the pilot needs an overriding authority on the power settings the copilot sets with respective phases of the flight. (Click point cockpit is great for that.) As opposed to the PMDG copilot, the player needs to set exact power variations required for things like formation flight or milking the last mile from your aircraft. Navigation (given the often horrible environment) is the main task to be performed right in order to survive. Aircraft that have a single cockpit, but also a navigator in the back, should have two kinds of autopilots beyond the in-aircraft systems: a level flight assist as well as what corresponds a HDG mode with ALT hold. The Wildcat for instance has a pull out kneeboard with a map on it, such that the pilot can navigate by dead reckoning but with the aid of the map. If this kneepad is pulled out, it is clear that a wing level assist woukd be needed to use that chart in any useful way. As a cheat, you could even use the GPS position on that map. A multi crew aircraft shoukd have a HDG autopilot, as you should absolutely be able to tell your copilot to fly given course maintaining current altitude. Also, it would be cool if you could draw point and click style on that map and you get your course and distances. It should be obvious that this map is the ideal interface for anything MSFS aircraft use the „ipad“ for. In a bomber, such a navigation chart should be on the navigators station by switching positions in the aircraft. The bomber aircrafts Sperry AP (where available) should be able to be hooked to the Norden sight such that the bombardier can actually direct the aircraft, as he did it back then. It would also be nice that as soon as the crew is tasked with manning guns, those positions are not available otherwise. This means the player needs a practical interface for crew communication. Like a page on the ipad to assign stations and tasks, individually or clollectively. The „chat“ is cumbersome for such, although it would be nice to hear the respective commands, we all know hiw irritating unmutable radios can become. During normal phases of flight, they should be where the manual tells them to be (because you, the pilot announces that), as in case of manning guns they cannot do what they could do otherwise. For instance lowering gears manually in a B-17 is a task for the crew, the pilot (PIC) cannot do that. The „ipad“ would be an interface to get a report in detected damage as well as a place where crew could be instructed to do things, like winding down a gear. Or throw everything overboard to save weight when power gets an issue. It is obvious that one four engine aircraft alone merits its own expansion of the game, but it certainly would be worth it. Two or three crew aircraft would be simpler. In order to switch to a navigator station in the Beaufighter, you really need an AP that can fly where you want it, in order to deal with the map, drawing your course, estimating distances and flight time. Anyone familiar with a sextant? The navigator has one and it would be so cool if the sky would actually be the way it should be. Also here, one could make an interface to use a sextant (like the bombsight we have in GB, where you see what you need to see next to an ituitive interface using the controls). Easy mode could be implemented that selecting the sextant (if stars are visible) directly plots your position on the navigator chat. Given this way there would be a flight plan, „jumping forward to waypoint“ as it exists in MSFS could be a way to deal with excessive single player mission times. It also would enable to exit the skipping prematurely, once the flightpath leads over enemy action or when there‘s other issues, like any kind of systems deviation (engine hot, no more fuel, etc.) Quite seriously, if I had to fly such a mission back then, the Zeroes would have been the least of my worries and I doubt they were anwhere near responsible for most crew death. Anyone has numbers of how many died in the 4 years of war in the PTO vs. total number of dead aircrew there?

With that many fronts, sounds you are surrounded. 😬

I especially like the „electronic door“.

The Mandalorian - Spaghetti Western Trailer

Ask ChatGPT: Q: Does the A6m Zero fighters engine cut out during negative g maneuvers? ChatGPT: Yes, the A6M Zero fighter's engine could cut out during negative g maneuvers. The aircraft's carburetor was not equipped with a float chamber, which meant that during negative g maneuvers, fuel flow to the engine could be disrupted and cause the engine to stall. This was a significant disadvantage for the Zero compared to other aircraft of its time. 😆

Eric Brown flew that Zero and he doesn't mention any carb cutting out and he had his fun with that plane. But the carb cutting out is mentioned in other places as well, but I find those sources more doubious. The Zero was one of Browns most enjoyabe rides, despite some shortcomins in control like shifting trim over the speed range and relatively poor ailerons. But 4500 ft./min climb is respectable in 1941...

Just to add some more deatil, I looked up Eric Browns account of the Zero and he states the landing speed to be 81 mph on an US-fitted ASI. Given above I calculated 82 mph for clean stall, having that speed for landing all down makes sense. Even tough the math is done somewhat over the thumb, it works out.