Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4
#1389313 - 09/30/03 02:37 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by FlyXwire:
How many combat flight simulations, or general flight sims for that matter were released in the past year or two that included 50 flyable aircraft, let alone 100!!!

No, let me ask the question another way..........

Would you be willing to pay $200.00 up front for Aspect Simulations (and their producer/distributor) to recover their time and capital investment to design 100 high-fidelity WWI aircraft for KOE?

Now let me ask if you would be willing to wait twice as long (say yet another year), perhaps till Q4 2005 for this sim to finally be ready for release?

Has anyone cared to explore the Aspect Simulation's design team........how many people at present are working on KOE?

Now, if Microsoft, or Infogrames, or Ubi Soft, with vastly greater resources can only distribute sims with what 34(CFS3-including variants), 24(FS2004), 14(Strike Fighters), 31(IL2-including variants), +30(IL2FB-including variants)respectively, during these past few years, is it reasonable to demand 100 aircraft of KOE.........or we'll condemn Aspect's effort (sight unseen) to be worthy of only "a game" status???

It's time for a Reality Check here!!!
Goodness, such negativity! Calm down for a minute and let's discuss this a bit more rationally.

First, I realize that Mr. Helton is quite enthusiastic. If you're talking about German rotaries or three-winged aircraft, he's obsessive and a bit on the fringe. But a lot of the points that he's making are valid for game play. They shouldn't be dismissed so quickly.

As for 100 aircraft, let me share with you some of my experience. As you may know, I was on the now-defunct 17 Hours project. We discussed this issue obviously. As part of my research to get an answer on how many plane types should be done, I did check to see how many aircraft types (just the major types, not subtypes) saw either front line or training service during the war. The Western Front and North Sea/English Channel alone saw nearly 500 aircraft types, and this doesn't count zeppelins. Add in aircraft from other fronts, and I estimated that you would be looking at somewhere between 600 and 700 aircraft types. This would be all types which saw some type of active duty status, from the beginning to the end of the war.

How do you narrow it down? First, you divide up WWI into fronts, or theaters. The Western Front is an obvious division, but you should have the seaplanes in the Atlantic/North Sea/English Channel as another front. I also saw the Austro-Italian front, the German-Russian front, and a Med. front including the Balkans, Greece and Palestine. By concentrating on the first two fronts that I mentioned, you narrow down your plane needs.

Next, you narrow down by time. The early months of the war don't see a lot of combat, so really there shouldn't be much done at all with 1914 or early 1915. Personally, I would prefer to see a WWI sim start in July of 1915. While most of 1915 would be somewhat quiet, you do have some interesting aircraft and combat situations. However, if you want to eliminate such aircraft as the Bristol Scout or the early B series German aircraft, start in 1916.

Next, narrow down the list by including only those that saw service in significant numbers. How do you define significant? I first used a threshold of at least 5 of one type that saw service, and then 10 of one type. The 5 of one type is better for seaplanes, as they had much smaller batches completed relevant to the land-based aircraft. This narrows down the number of aircraft to around 200 types.

At that point, you then have to make judgement calls. Do you include some of the large R planes, that only had one or two of type made? I said yes you should. Then you have to ask if you can combine some of the types where there was little difference between the two. Finally, are there some aircraft that simply aren't interesting, didn't serve much use or gain much infamy, and can be cut with little lost? Yes, obviously, there are such aircraft. This allows you to get a good list down to about 100 aircraft types, not mentioning subtypes.

So, 100 types isn't really that outrageous when you look at all types seeing service during the war. Its a worthy goal in terms of the variety seen during the war. The question is, how does the company making a sim reach that goal.

There are a number of differnet possible paths. One, the company makes everything in-house. 100 aircraft models sounds like a huge undertaking. However, I will tell you that 17 Hours already had 100 different models done roughly. Obviously a lot of other work would need to be done, but its not impossible. However, a different company might not be so interested in this path.

This leaves us in the realm of addons. Again, there are multiple approaches to the problem. The company making the sim could do addons itself and sell them as they're made. This keeps all creativity and proprietary work within the corporate structure. However, you don't know how quickly, or even if, such addons will come out.

Next path is to ask the sim community to contribute. You could, for example, ask the community to create the 3D models and submit them to the company. The company could make the FMs and then issue the patch. Or, the company could choose a group from the community, give them the tools to make the FM, DM, and 3D models, and then let the community release a patch.

Any of these methods are valid, and each has advantages and disadvantages. However, all of them rely on the main game being flexible enough to accept the addons.

To me, this is the crux of the whole discussion. Will this new sim allow for someone, whether its the company or the community, to add on patches? Will it allow for new planes, new fronts, and other new items to be inserted into the game? This is one of the fatal flaws of Red Baron. The Western Front Patch, and FCJ, work around the lack of expandability in RB in creative ways. However, its not a perfect system and it does have limitations.

In my opinion, this game should allow for expansion. How much? Shoot for the stars. Allow for the possibility of having ALL of the aces included, ALL of the units, ALL of the active duty plane types, for ALL of the war, in ALL fronts. Maybe even allow for fantasy planes, or fantasy fronts. They don't HAVE to be in the first release, just leave enough flexibility in the game for such things to be added later.

I could definately accept a game which starts with 50 aircraft, provided that it allows for a lot of aircraft expansion slots for future additions. I honestly think that a minimum of 1000 aircraft type slots should be available. This may sound like a lot, but if a group wants to be able to make all of the types that I've mentioned then this should accomodate everyone's wishes. The FM and DM are different stories and I don't know how that will be resolved, but I'm sure that something can be figured out.

In other words, its not impossible to accomplish the goal of 100 or more aircraft types for single play or multiplay.

Droops

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#1389314 - 10/01/03 12:25 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
Quote:
VonHelton stated post one of this thread:

Now that we've heard from the peanut gallery.........
Sorry, but the peanut gallery here has repeatedly sited evidence from published works to refute many of VonHelton's assumptions, while request for his substantiating sources have remained unaswered!

Quote:
Then we've had further pronouncements from VonHelton in this thread to this effect:

That sounds defeatest to me.

RB had 50 planes, and it wasn't enough.........FOR A SIM.

......For a GAME, I guess 4 planes is plenty.


Again a statement which has no validity whatsoever! What GAME is he talking about that is only going to have "4 planes"?

Furthermore, VonHelton is entitled to his opinion, but to set forth a pronouncement that he will decide what Knights Over Europe will be based on his criteria only, is a bit out there.

Quote:

Now Droops you state:

Goodness, such negativity! Calm down for a minute and let's discuss this a bit more rationally.
Well Droops, many of us here have been discussing issues here rationally for quite some time now, despite the unsubstantiated claims that continued to be presented!

Additionally, and to the contrary we have been very positive about what Aspect has officially released for us to see and read about KOE.

I have confidence that the design team behind KOE knows what it's doing, and that they probably have a sharp sim under development here, despite your judgement that the sim needs 100 plane types in order to be validated!

Looking forward to reading your posting in more depth here, but we are discussing what we would like to see in the next generation of WWI sims afterall........not what we're personally demanding!

#1389315 - 10/01/03 06:11 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


FlyX, I think you've misread my statements here. First, who says that I haven't had reasonable discussions about flight sims and what's needed in a WWI sim for some time? Maybe I haven't had the discussions where you've been, but I've been around for a long time as well. I'm a bit offended by that tone.

Second, whether I think 100 planes will validate the sim or not isn't the point. I think it would be a good goal to shoot for, for the reasons that I've outlined.

Maybe you should read my post before shooting your mouth off.

Droops

#1389316 - 10/01/03 10:17 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
LORD BYRON Offline
Member
LORD BYRON  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
Medfield MA USA
FxW,

Atthe risk of placing my head into the jaws of the lion, may I suggest that we all take a five minute time-out to collect ourselves. Droops is an old time RB guy (head absolutely screwed on correctly with proper thread rotation and everything), who has been around for years and years and really is highly committed to WW1 flight sims. I don't think for a moment that he had any intention of dumping on the KOE development project.

LB out, and running for cover ....


Quote:

Now Droops you state:

Goodness, such negativity! Calm down for a minute and let's discuss this a bit more rationally.
Well Droops, many of us here have been discussing issues here rationally for quite some time now, despite the unsubstantiated claims that continued to be presented!

Additionally, and to the contrary we have been very positive about what Aspect has officially released for us to see and read about KOE.

I have confidence that the design team behind KOE knows what it's doing, and that they probably have a sharp sim under development here, despite your judgement that the sim needs 100 plane types in order to be validated!

Looking forward to reading your posting in more depth here, but we are discussing what we would like to see in the next generation of WWI sims afterall........not what we're personally demanding! [/QB][/QUOTE]

#1389317 - 10/01/03 10:25 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
No Droops, you need to read my post more clearly:

Quote:
Well Droops, many of us here have been discussing issues here rationally for quite some time now, despite the unsubstantiated claims that continued to be presented!
Here, is this forum Droops, and many of us have been patiently, and courteously discussing ideas and history here on this forum for many months now!

If you wish to join VonHelton in his claims about rotary aircraft myths, or Allied prejudice, or the fact that he will judge on his criteria what the gaming world will accept as a Game or a Sim based on the number of aircraft a WWI project contains........then you have taken a position!

So please support VonHelton's assertions, but go back to the beginning of this KOE board, and do some catching up reading first on your new task, cause there's plenty of material you're now going to have to defend!!!

#1389318 - 10/01/03 10:31 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
LORD BYRON................he over reacted to a statement that wasn't even directed at him, however, if he is choosing to align himself now with VonHelton claims, so be it!

#1389319 - 10/01/03 11:22 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
LORD BYRON Offline
Member
LORD BYRON  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
Medfield MA USA
FxW,

LB iscarefully peering over the lip of my foxhole ...... showing flag of truce ..... now walking slowly with both hands in clear view. I don't think Droops is REALLY lined up with VH. Droops and I just have had a REALLY long history with VH over at the Delphi RB2 Forum, replete with all manner of high drama. I am not trying to speak for Droops here; I'm just trying to keep the peace between two good guys.


LB

Quote:
Originally posted by FlyXwire:
LORD BYRON................he over reacted to a statement that wasn't even directed at him, however, if he is choosing to align himself now with VonHelton claims, so be it!

#1389320 - 10/01/03 11:24 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
Quote:

Droops said:
Maybe you should read my post before shooting your mouth off.
Droops, pettiness was never present in these discussions until old animosities from the Red Baron community arrived.

KOE is a new sim altogether, give it the chance it deserves!

#1389321 - 10/02/03 01:59 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
I totally understand LB, and I thank you for your generous words and efforts!

I do not belong to that "old school" from which you speak of, but I have been a miniatures wargamer, designer, and judge for over thirty years, a WW2 reenactor for over ten years, been a PC gamer/simmer for the last decade, and a WWI aircraft skinner for the last three years, and like a lot of the guys that frequent these sim forums around this hobby world of ours, I've aquired a bit of knowledge and experience along the way.

The first thing I assume is that other guys on these forums, just like me, also have excellent ideas and knowledge to add to the conversations that go on here, as well as elsewhere. However, what really motivates me is that respect remains a top priority in all conversations I engage in!!! Sorry if I'm old fashioned, but if someone joins into an ongoing discussion, and stakes his claim to all knowing, and all seeing preeminence (and of course I'm not talking about Droops here, never have been), well that just aint right!

Now on top of that, if an individual is pushing what I consider propaganda, myths, or plain ole disinformation, well call me old fashioned again, but we've got just a bit too much of that going around nowadays anyway, and as a trained historian I'm not going to let it go unchallenged (nor will others thank goodness)!!!

Sure, try to be polite (I demand that)! State those facts and figures (we should expect that)! Ask the guy for his sources, but in the end if there's nothing there to back up the claims, then I want to know what the person's agenda is!

Did the individual come to a forum to help, or to hurt?

Did the individual come to the forum to make suggestions for a sim's development, or to make demands that if he doesn't have it his way, that the sim will never be worthy of being called anything but a "game"?

Finally, does the individual actually know what he's doing himself?

Well all this is neither here nor there, but it only takes one rotten apple to spoil the pie!

I've engaged in conversations at length on one RB forum before, and the lack of civility, respect for documentation, and general mean-spiritedness was awful! I call this kind of in-fighting the "von-Sniping" syndrome.

Well luckily Knights Over Europe is not Red Baron, nor do we have to bring the culture of pettiness and bickering over here to this forum either, because KOE is a new beginning, and offers new possibilites for friendship and entertainment.

Sorry if I sound highbrow at times, or dig in my heels when I feel someone is taking advantage of the community, or attempts to malign a product that's never even been released!

Some people want "Pie in the Sky"!

In the end maybe we'll get our cake, and get a chance to eat it too!

Still, it's all about KOE, and we'll be that much more luckier when it's finally released.

BE THERE!!!

#1389322 - 10/02/03 06:12 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 385
Robey Price Offline
Member
Robey Price  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 385
Shoreview MN
Ummm, if I might butt in...FlyXwire bud sincerely I don't think Droops was aligning himself with VH, nor do I think he was tryin' to be confrontational. He had previously complimented you, me, and LB for our contributions.

Can we all just go "weapons tight" (cease fire) on this?

Not taking side, just agreeing with LB that you just mis-read the intent of Droops' posts.

Robey

#1389323 - 10/02/03 08:21 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Folks, we are truely at a crossroads here, and many of the lurkers probably don't realize it.

Me and Droops hate each other with a passion, and our "intense moments of fellowship" are LEGENDARY........

For both of us to agree that the number of aircaft in a SIM (key word) needs to be around 100 is an unprecedented milestone in the RB Community, and may never happen again, so whip out those cameras & take pictures!

The fact that we agree that seaplanes played a significant role in hostilities is another milestone!

\:D \:D \:D

.

Either we're about to see "Peace on Earth", the return of the Gods (or Messiah, if you prefer), or the Earth is DOOMED!

:p

.

#1389324 - 10/02/03 08:35 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by SimHQ Tom Cofield:
You know, I partially agree with you Von Helton, but I am somewhat of a realist.

I do think that all of the major aircraft, including significant subtypes should be modeled in the game. If this is somewhere between 50-100 aircraft fine. If the developers have time to include lesser known, possibly less sucessful aircraft all well and good but I do think there is only so much time and effort that can be placed in one simulation, especially one that sells for 40-50 dollars.

I myself am willing to pay the 40-50 bucks for the base game and another 40-50 bucks for an 'add on' that adds every aircraft that saw any real service over the Western Front. I do honestly think that modeling (even as AI aircraft) some of the more obscure aircraft is just not feasable in a 40 dollar game.
And I agree with you sir!

I have publically stated that I am ready, willing, and able to help Aspect get the planes out, in exchange for 2 finished copies of the game.

.......That's not only a fair offer, I actually come out a loser on the deal!

Of course, I will need access to the tools & supplies to accomplish this.

All Aspect would have to do is upload those tools & a few 3DS files to their website for download by me, and then I FTP the planes to their website for inspection.

I have NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that I can crank out enough aircraft to field many of the planes we'd want to see show up.



.

#1389325 - 10/02/03 09:51 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Droops:
It must be a sign of the apocalypse because I agree with you completely on this point. I want to see well-done models, but I personally want to see more planes in the game. I think that shooting for 100 (including seaplanes) is a reasonable figure for a WWI sim. Let's face it, there were a lot of planes that saw service in WWI. To be an accurate sim, you're going to have to do a lot of work to portray a lot of aircraft.

Droops
A: We cant divulge all the specific airplanes, just yet, but players can expect to fly planes in KOE, which heretofore have only been seen as computer controlled targets in other WWI simulations.

- KOE Interview

\:D \:D \:D

.

#1389326 - 10/02/03 10:19 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
OK forum members............VH is all yours, I'm tired of arguing with the guy!

#1389327 - 10/02/03 03:16 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
LORD BYRON Offline
Member
LORD BYRON  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 229
Medfield MA USA
FxW,

Believe me when I tell you that you have just joined a very large and distinguished community with that statement.....;-] !


LB

Quote:
Originally posted by FlyXwire:
OK forum members............VH is all yours, I'm tired of arguing with the guy!

#1389328 - 10/02/03 10:32 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Some people never can be satisfied...

I waited for years to get my hands on an WWI sim with a good campaign engine and now I found out that such a game is about to be made.

Too bad half of the posts here are from some whiners who seem to think they are the Projectleader of this game. While I think critism and userinput is important, some of the demands and behaviour here is simply rude and offensive.

100 planes? Tell me one game which offers that from the box! Maybe some unnamed persons here want to program their own sim. That or contiune to play Bug Baron II until you grow rotary engins out of your ears.

#1389329 - 10/02/03 10:37 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Galland22:
100 planes? Tell me one game which offers that from the box! Maybe some unnamed persons here want to program their own sim. That or contiune to play Bug Baron II until you grow rotary engins out of your ears.
If you go into a fancy resteraunt, but all you ask for is green tea, that is all you'll ever get until you ask for something different.

#1389330 - 10/02/03 10:46 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
Quote:
Droops said:

Excellent posts by SunScream, RobeyPrice and Lord Byron. Great information, well researched and well considered, and excellent approaches to the issues at hand.
For the record Robey. ;\)

#1389331 - 10/03/03 07:02 PM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Obviously there's a lot of misunderstanding going on here.

Let me try to clear some things up.

First, as has been stated, I've been around in WWI sims for a few years. I've also been around on The Aerodrome forum, and subscribe to Over the Front and Cross and Cockade. I have a modest but still good library on WWI aviation and WWI fighting in general. I was also involved in the ill-fated 17 Hours project. While I don't have the experience that some have, I do have a bit more than the average person on the street on this issue.

A few observations.

FlyX, I agree that the RB forums have had a lot of venom in the past. So have most flight sim boards. It seems to go with the territory. Also, as for aligning myself with BvH, I don't think you've read all of my posts closely. I agree with him that 100 planes is a very worthy goal. I do NOT agree that there is an 'Allied conspiracy,' that the German rotaries are kings of the sky, or that the Dr.1 was porked in RB, or any of that.

I apologize for being snippy.

Getting back to the 100 planes, if you look at my post closely, I indicate that 50 is a good start but that some provision should be made to get to 100, and that that should be a GOAL to reach. I've also indicated that the game should be expandable to put in as many plane types as anyone would want or care to make. Do I expect 100 in the first release? No I don't. But as I also said, WWI is unique for all of the plane types that did see service. WWII doesn't come nearly as close, and subsequent wars see a smaller and smaller number of aircraft types involved. So, if you are going to model a WWI sim accuratly, IMO you must be prepared to model (or have room for addons to model) a lot more aircraft.

Finally, I have been monitoring a lot of the WWI sims in development. . . .quietly. Most of the time I don't post. Please do not believe that my silence means ignorance, or a lack of interest. Conversely, don't take my sudden posting to mean that I'm picking fights or trying to muscle my way into something. I'm trying to contribute my insight, thoughts, knowledge and experience (such as it is) to this project. If I didn't think it was a good project I wouldn't waste my time or yours.

Hopefully this clears things up a bit. Thanks for reading.

Droops

#1389332 - 10/04/03 12:25 AM Re: No Rotary engines for the Germans?  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
FlyXwire Offline
Member
FlyXwire  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,080
St.Charles, Missouri U.S.A.
Well then Droops, you now understand that I was not being negative when I posted this reply to VonHelton..........

Quote:
How many combat flight simulations, or general flight sims for that matter were released in the past year or two that included 50 flyable aircraft, let alone 100!!!

No, let me ask the question another way..........

Would you be willing to pay $200.00 up front for Aspect Simulations (and their producer/distributor) to recover their time and capital investment to design 100 high-fidelity WWI aircraft for KOE?

Now let me ask if you would be willing to wait twice as long (say yet another year), perhaps till Q4 2005 for this sim to finally be ready for release?

Has anyone cared to explore the Aspect Simulation's design team........how many people at present are working on KOE?

Now, if Microsoft, or Infogrames, or Ubi Soft, with vastly greater resources can only distribute sims with what 34(CFS3-including variants), 24(FS2004), 14(Strike Fighters), 31(IL2-including variants), +30(IL2FB-including variants)respectively, during these past few years, is it reasonable to demand 100 aircraft of KOE.........or we'll condemn Aspect's effort (sight unseen) to be worthy of only "a game" status???

It's time for a Reality Check here!!!
...........only realistic!

I totally agree with you on the need for KOE to have open access so that the fan community can invest into it's future! IL-2 was built with this concept in mind, Strike Fighters embraced this enlightened approach, the FS & CFS series allowed for aircraft builds and graphic enhancements, but perhaps SDOE: Fighter Squadron, Screamin' Demons Over Europe has taken the concept to it's greatest height yet!

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............".....Over Europe" where have I heard that recently? ;\)

Seriously, I've spent over four years now as a member of the WWI mod community which has worked together to build FS-WWI, the credible and certainly beautiful Great War add-on to SDOE, and without the open concept that was rolled into this WWII sim, it would never have been possible to do so!

I certainly agree that user aircraft, vehicles, and skins should be importable into KOE, as easily as the limits of online compatibility and quality of build will allow. Heck, as an amateur texturer I can't wait to start skinning for KOE.

So let me just say Droops, that we can all work together for KOE's future, but we must also have faith that the guys behind Aspect Sims did their homework too!

What we really need is another Press Release, or interview that gives us a picture of KOE's build philosophy, included plane-set, and approach to modability!

Tom.............??? ;\)

Anyway, good to see the air is clearing here a bit! \:\)

Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Harrier Pilot "Sharkey" Ward was 80
by F4UDash4. 05/19/24 11:01 PM
Autographs
by F4UDash4. 05/18/24 06:34 PM
Boxing fans
by RossUK. 05/18/24 03:11 PM
Bud Anderson was 102
by F4UDash4. 05/18/24 01:14 PM
The guy in War Games passes at 92
by NoFlyBoy. 05/18/24 02:28 AM
V-22 (all variants) wings clipped.
by Blade_RJ. 05/17/24 11:33 PM
Unusual climate conditions during WWI.
by RedToo. 05/17/24 04:52 PM
WW2 allied railroad effort after D-Day
by oldgrognard. 05/16/24 12:06 AM
New Viper Demo team livery
by RossUK. 05/15/24 03:48 PM
Beate Uhse-Rotermund.
by RedToo. 05/14/24 03:47 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0