http://www.aspectsimulations.com/Prod_KOE_Gallery.htm

I have definitely not seen all of those before.

I agree-looks good.

New Screenies. Check out that artillery.

Nice to see some new ones. Nice to see some more types make an appearance. new ones that I had not seen before were the Snipe, Fokker D.VII, N17, Gotha, HP, and N28.

The following comments are made with the full knowledge that a. it's still early and b. I am speculating without any real knowledge.

Hope the skins are modifyable. Just MHO but I really don't like the look of the skins as they are now. Not a big deal as long as they are editable.

Wild speculation follows: looks like this sim will center around mid 1917 to 1918. Why? The planes. Fokker DRI and DVII, Camel, Snipe, DH4, Halberstadt CLII, N28, etc. are all from this era. The earliest that I see are the N-17, SPAD VII, and Alb DV, and maybe the Gotha, but all of these served into 1917-1918 too. Hope they get the Pfalz D.III in there.

Agreed about the time period... I would speculate mid to late war judging by the aircraft types in the screenies.

Regarding the skins, they do look a bit "fresh" but I do like the factory details. Just need a bit of weathering!

It's alive!!!!!!!!!!!

Better than email

The sky, clouds, and sun effects look nice.

I wonder if the clouds are 3D or mats.........hard to tell by the screenshots?

Nice sun glare!!!

I noticed that. Different types of artillery and machine guns too. Very cool. I hope that they model a couple of types for each side, though it wouldn't be a huge deal. I also noticed that some artillery is well embedded in the trenches, and some is out in the open field. Will this mean moving front lines?

The screenshot of the mission was also interesting. One pilot had grenades as part of his armament. It also looks like various aerodromes are marked differently. Terrain is also marked out on that map.

All in all some very interesting stuff!

Droops

"The Snipe was ordered into pre-production at the beginning of 1918. Only about 200 were produced before the war's end and fewer than 100 actually reached France. They did arrive in time to equip three RFC squadrons. In operational use the fighter showed itself to be extremely maneuverable and tough, with an excellent rate of climb."

Well, if we're gonna allow experimental aircraft, which is what the Snipe was, then there should be no arguement with allowing the german rotaries.

Maybe they just haven't worked on those yet. Think I saw one screenshot with a few tiny darker grey clouds looking similar to SDOE 3D clouds.

I like the close-up of the Handley-Page and crew. Nice to see the gunners turning to face their target. I'm really looking forward to being a gunner!

That damage model on the Tripe

Impressive.

Ahhh the Snipe.

Some real clouds would be nice. Perhaps some screenshots of an aircraft flying through them?

Don't forget the earlier interviews. They said there would be a game that is open ended. So if it goes beyond 11/11/18, expect Snipes to replace Camels.

But will they taste the same? Or better? What will Joe Camel say?

On 27 October 1918, Canadian ace William Barker made the Sopwith Snipe famous in a single-handed battle with more than 60 enemy aircraft that earned him the Victoria Cross.

With 7 confirmed victories, Australian Elwyn King scored more victories with the Snipe than any other ace.

Not too shabby for an experimental aircraft.

Salute Everyone!
Can anyone see a Camel in the pictures.
It wouldn`t be the same without the Camel And DR1 both in the game. But my favorite is the N28 which will be enough for me, plus that heavy bomber. HOOOO RAAAA!
Can`t wait to see all you fliers this fall when this game comes out.
US95 Kicking Mules have officially opened up there squad to take recruits for this up coming flight simm. If you join now you can get in on some WW1 practice flying RB3D till this KOE is out. Plus we fly IL2 FB to for any WW2 fliers!
Its always funnier to fly with PALS
Come check out are website. You can sign up there!
We are one of the oldest RB3D Squads around.
We welcome all fliers from Roockies to OLD Veterans like my self.
http://us95.wbdesigns.com/
Take Care!
US95 Maj.Rooster
Public Relations Officer

The Snipe.
Designed as an improved Camel with better performance and visibility from the cockpit.
6 prototypes ordered in autumn 1917 and after modifications went into production in spring 1918.
Initial contracts were for 1700 Snipes. Due to serious industrial action by the workers, the Snipe was badly delayed. By 30th September 160 Snipes had been delivered and became operational with 43 sqdrn RAF that month, with 208 sqdrn RAF and 4 sdrn RAFC in October. The RN had 2 on 31st October, by which point the RAF had taken delivery of a further 97.
(Munson World Aircraft - Fighters 1914 - 1919 Blandford Press ISBN 0 7137 0483 7)

Hardly experimental, just badly delayed.
Presumably if the word "Experimental" is the crucial one here then we have to lose the BEs, REs and SEs from the inventory too.

If the September date is too late to meet the cutoff then we can also wave goodbye to the Fok DVIII among others.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by US95th Capt Rooster:
Can anyone see a Camel in the pictures.

Screenie number 7. The Snipe is Will Barker's.
cheers,
shredward

A Hp 400! Glad to see heavy bombers are on the way. I'll have to seset my internet cache now and then since it seems to revert to older thumbnails.

I like the development shots of the HP. From the looks of it that is 3d Studio Max default grey interface in the background. I hope so because most 3D programs have an export for that format.

I wonder if they will have mechanical deficiencies in the sim. If they model the RE8, would anyone actually go up in the thing?

S!

some encouraging shots.
terrain still looks poor though..and whats with the unmanned artillery?.

Looks nice! Thanks for the heads up, I had given up checking their site.

Seems now all we need are little brown, blue, and fledgrau soldiers to man all those guns. The ghost machineguns look especially weird.

Gotta love that Gotha though.

Just noticed that the development screenshots section has been updated as well.

Looks like a Handley Page 0/400, a Camel, and a really drab-looking German (?) truck were addded.

I was wondering where you saw the Gotha and the ground stuff but now I cleared my cache fully and see all the other pictures available. What a treat!

The picture of the D7 skimming the aerodrome is awesome.

Bullet trail integrated in the game thank goodness. How about some shots of the Buckingham in action eh developers? I saw in the mission list that there were rockets and "standard" ammo selected. Interesting that picture with the dr1 firing off some bullets. It looks like there is some sort or riccochet where the frame is reacting to the bullets. Very nice.

The interactive maps look detailed.

I hope that the flak is white/black as per side as well. It would be interesting if it was adopted for alerting aircraft or pinpointing enemy. Could be used very dynamically.

Anyone else find the level of detail in the machine gun nest interesting? Makews me wonder what happens if one lands an aircraft. A little run to the friendlies maybe?

S!

Work in progress looking good indeed !

I have to say it is exciting to see a screenshot from the user interface. That's the sort of thing that gets me excited, as it really gives me sense the sim is now something tangible. I agree the textures are not as impressive as I had hoped, but perhaps they are not final yet.

Ok, I'm relaxed now

Re: guncrews&infantry

Poly issues and/or German legislation&rating system could mean they will be left out

Or then they will be zombies bleeding green blood :rolleyes:

Strike Fighters handled it pretty well I think. You get a single AAA crewman (and a nice looking one at that) per gun, but he disappears when the gun blows up (i.e. no blood).

Of course I'd prefer the full treatment with complete gun and machinegun crews, HORSES, and waves of INFANTRY, but the Strike Fighters solution works as a compromise and at least makes it look less like War Of the Machines.

But if Aspect Sim won't put humans in (and to be fair we have absolutely no idea yet), maybe they can at least make it easy for modders to do so? Given the current state of graphics and hardware this will be a BIG immersion issue for the next generation of sims, IMHO. The time has come.

Nupe 28!!!

I saw my Nupe 28!!! The best of the paint jobs for it, too!

I wonder how the DM and FM are going to be handled, vis a vis Eddie Rickenbacker's book. I've a few ideas how the plane could fly with the fabric ripped off it's top wing due to stress and a manufacturing error... But there's no denying that the pilot himself gave numerous examples of the event!

I'm pumped about the rest of the aircraft, too, including particularly the heavies.

But the Nupe 28!!! Ahhhhh....

with extra cheese....

You want fries with that?

No, just extra cheese!

I LIKE cheese!

I really like the self-shadowing .

I'll have to get my "The Blue Max" DVD out and start getting myself into proper character in order to play this game.

Ah, so I'll be getting my Junkers D.I then?

If it takes a year to build one plane, don't expect people to be eager to mod these aircraft.

You mean PRE-production........

Actual production of the Snipe didn't occur until after the war. I have plenty of referances on this one.

post them.

screen shot #19

preflight(?)

spads have individual #

loadout includes grenades




~
kail

The Snipe did fairly well kill-wise for an aircraft whose production "didn't occur until after the war".

"Additional contracts brought total Snipe orders to four thousand five hundred and fifteen, but there were heavy cancellations after the Armistice and little more than one third of these were actually completed before Snipe production ceased in March 1919."
Munson again.

I have no problem in excising the Snipe from the game (note: it becomes a game by vH criteria) if we institute a cutoff date for new aircraft of say Aug/Sep 1918.

My main gripe was the "experimental" appellation,
which is unjustified. It went into service in september and it's development was certainly no more protracted than, as an example, the SS DIV.

Screen #19: Patroling woods and forests looking for enemy balloons sounds like fun to me!

The best looking trees I have seen lately are in Call Of Duty. You can see every branch, leaf, and twig on the trees in that game. It is amazing to me how much detail is begining to appear on these computer games.

Very perceptive! I see they have different options for bullets as well.

Spare me, please........

I've seen it said many times that the SSW was experimental, the Fokker Razor was experimental, the Pfalz D8 was experimental, und so weiter.

.......What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

......And if you believe that, I got a bridge I want to sell you!

64bit CPU anyone?

I'll say it here, none of the three planes that you mentioned seem to be 'experimental' as far as I can see. All three showed well in the various fighter competitions, all of them were given production orders, and all did some service before the war ended.

The problem is numbers and impact. Let's look at the Pfalz D.VIII for starters. As I posted in the 'Relax' thread, it (or the Pfalz D.VII more precisely) won the competition for rotaries at the same time that the Fokker D.VII won for inlines. Fantastic rate of climb for the Pfalz. Both the Pfalz D.VIII and the Fokker D.VII were blessed with production orders.

But look at the results. The Fokker D.VII went on to massive production runs and acclaim as the best fighter of the war. The Pfalz D.VIII eventually had a production order of 40 aircraft. It partially equipped three Jastas very late in the war, with (as far as I can see) no record on its combat effectiveness. Problems with the engine seemed to delay it, the same engine that doomed the Pfalz Dr.I to a production run of only ten aircraft.

The late war rotaries for the Germans simply didn't become the great fighters that maybe they should have become. For whatever reason they didn't get large production runs and didn't have a big impact on the war. Those are facts. I'd love to see them added into this sim at some point, but I don't think that they should be included in the first release.

OTOH, the Snipe had more aircraft produced before the end of the war than the Pfalz D.VIII. It equipped three squadrons, has a recorded combat history, and was involved in a very famous combat that is well documented.

I agree that for the end of the war, the Snipe is fairly marginal in terms of production. Had Barker not flown it in such a famous fight, it probably wouldn't have been included in Red Baron. But he did, and it was included. *shrug*

Droops

So Barker didn't engage those aircraft?

So King wasn't the top scoring Snipe pilot?

Still waiting for your non exsistent proof that the Snipe was an experimental aircraft.

No, the Snipe was simply just beginning to replace the Camel in October 1918. So it only appeared in limited numbers, primarily to the Australian squadron.

However, if there is a dynamic game that goes beyond 11/11/18, then expect more Snipe/DVII encounters.

Erm... sorry to interupt the cat fight with a comment on the screen shots, but...

Hmmm. No personnel on the ground yet(?).

Not that I know anything much about WW1, but isn't it likely that quite a few missions will involve strafing or bombing of trenches, emplacements etc. Where be the soldiers? They can't all duck and cover that well surely?

Are we up against some sort of censorship/rating issue where its "not acceptable" to depict human or animal targets, as with il2FB?

It seems that, due to (AFAIK) WW1 combat being much more up-close and personal, not having troops in those trenches is going to really retract from the immersion. (or if we're talking WW1,trenches and mud, perhaps 'emulsion' is a more appropriate word )

But... that said, I am aware that screenies depict WIP. Looking forward to seeing some troops and the smoke of war wafting over the trenches in future screenies.

Sorry for the interuption - back to the fight now boys.

Edit: Oh damn - I just checked screenshot 16 again. Lewes gun firing against an air-target - operated by a mysteron

PLEASE Mr ASPECT! Can we have an adults only version (if necessary to appease the censors) that has crew modelled on the guns?

Blasted game ratings

It might be a frame rate issue. It seems that the game will be processor dependant as it is.

" Hmmm. No personnel on the ground yet(?).

Are we up against some sort of censorship/rating issue where its "not acceptable" to depict human or animal targets, as with il2For animal targets, as with il2FB?"

Huh? Never heard of a censorship like that. It's okay to kill a man in a plane but not on the ground? I don't get it. What about games like Call Of Duty? How does that get buy the censors? There are dead cows and everything in that game.

Are you sure about this censorship business? First I have heard of such a thing. Censoring killing of human targets in a war sim? WTF? It is okay to send a man to his death in a firey crate from 2 thousand feet but not okay to shoot him in a trench? Just doesn't stand to reason...

It's a frame rate issue. IL2 has guys scrambling out of trucks when they are getting strafed and there's nothing to stop you from shooting the helpless pilot in his parachute.

"On 27 October 1918, Canadian ace William Barker made the Sopwith Snipe famous in a single-handed battle with more than 60 enemy aircraft that earned him the Victoria Cross."

Woah nelly! That sounds like a yarn to me! Are you sure that number is not 600 instead of 60? I mean why not? It is no less believable.

I can see Bill back at the areodome. "Hey guys I just had a little scrape. Yea, there was 60 of them if there was a dozen! But hey, this little Snipe and I made short work of 'em. They all must have been good men who loved their families, cause after I killed 7 or 8 of 'em the rest turned tail and headed for home!

It's great that some news finally got through.
I just wish they'd used some better PC, to make the screenshots.
Many of the new screenies seem to be made on 800x600, with no FSAA.
The older images are much better.

But all in all...it's alive!

S! I recall discussions when il2 was first released regarding reasons for horse drawn carts etc. not being included as targets. I'm absolutely certain I remember 'reputable sources' talking about violence rating categories affecting potential sales. I remember because I recall thinking to myself, "That's BS! What about FPS games?"

If you want me to quote sources, sorry. Its just my recollection.

I concede that animated figures would probably cost some additional CPU power, but, in view of all the possible alternatives to a Lewis Gun firing by itself (not to mention the difference in visual target profile if you are attacking), I would happily settle for a less-cpu hungry compromise.

Anyway the screenies are WIP eh?

BTW: really looking forward to this Sim!

btw a closer look at #1, the pilot looks less an well....

Hopefully, they will have some sort of animation or other indicator of pilot death. For the game rating, perhaps something intially disabled / user enabled. Wasnt it PAW that had the disabled rear gunner graphic?

One thing I'm not seeing and has me somewhat concerned is the lack of clouds in the screen shots

from "hostile skies - a combat history of the AAS in WWI"

"...a half score of German single-seaters were roaring down out of a nearby cloud to attack the 148th's bottom or decoy flight..."

"..Suddenly, a dozen Fokker D-7's dropped from a low-hanging cloud into the middle of Spring's Flight."

"...they were jumped by several other Fokker formations which slid through a rift in the clouds with guns blazing."

I still remember a fight in RB1(lol) were I was attacking a 2-seater(I think) with a few mates when a flight of spad 13's jumped into the fight. We were at the edge of that big old cloud and I about rammed a spad that suddenly appeared in front of me.

they had nice clouds in crimson skies(that I remember)

S!
kail

http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/canada/barker.html

Barker, VC
The Classic Story of a Legendary First World War Hero; Wayne Ralph / Softcover / Grub Street 1999

A good book and the writer does question the actual number of fokkers present in Barker's last battle as well as his refusal to discuss the matter in later years.

Voss engaged far less, and everyone knows what happened to him.

.......This is nothing but an elaborate yarn.

Just goes to prove who was better.

Voss died. Barker didn't.

And of course you will provide proof of that?

Blast. Forgot who I am talking too.

.......I can't believe you'd say something like that. Oh wait, yes I can.

Have any proof?

By this point, even if you provided any actual source, it would be suspect.

BTW Barker got four in his famous fight. And is credited with 50 in total.

How many did Voss get in his most famous fight?
ZERO. And is cedited with 48.

History triumphs again.

Well yes, but . . . .

The British system for crediting kills was VERY loose. Without knowing Barker's kill record in depth, I wouldn't put too much stock in that 50 number unless you researched it carefully. Any OOCs, discount right off the bat. Voss's number is a lot more likely to be accurate.

Voss shot the hell out of two planes from 60 squadron, and two from 56 squadron. He also put bullets in every SE in the fight. At least two of those planes crashed on landing and it was a miracle that no one was actually killed.

So, while you're technically right, some qualifiers are in order IMO.

Droops

the british way of claiming kills was no less dodgy than the axis...McCudden may have claimed more but didnt...as many others may have done.

richtoven claimed McCudden as one of his early victims...but all he did was spin out and run.

so to be objective there are descrepencies on both sides.

it has been said by many historians that mvr was a powerful propagander weapon and his number of victories were almost certainly exaggerated.

True enough Droops. The offical records claim he engaged 60. He says 15. I doubt he had time to count them either way.

From what I remeber, he stumbled into it the fight.

OOC would be the equivalent of a probable in WW2.

Then there is 'forced to land'.

Albert Ball had several ftls in his accepted score of 47 victories. It is something like 23 destroyed, 2 ooc, 21 ftl, plus 1 ballon. By their method, it counts.

I think the other problem could be that most air combat happened over the Hun side of the lines. So it would be easier for a Hun pilot to get confirmation, if for no other reason than he can obtain physical evidence.

(Fighter vs Fighter by Norman Franks, page 31.)

But even gun camera film is no sure way to a credited kill. There is a film somewhere of a Me109 on fire after being shot. The pilot was given a victory. I forget the book I read it in. maybe Horrido!

Actually, the 109's drop tank was burning. The pilot dropped it, and flew home.

IIRC, even in that war, the losses don't agree. The Germans, for example, would award the kill to the unit score, even if no clear cut victor could be determined. And they would only count a plane as lost if the pilot was lost.

All any of us can go by is the offical histories. Otherwise, Fonck's score would be in the hundreds, according to him anyway

But I suspect that if it was Voss who engaged 60 aircraft, it would not be an elaborate yarn

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Droops:


The British system for crediting kills was VERY loose. Without knowing Barker's kill record in depth, I wouldn't put too much stock in that 50 number unless you researched it carefully. Any OOCs, discount right off the bat.

As a general statement, I would prolly agree with you; Allied claims of necessity were hard to verify - there are reasons for it, but there it is. However, Barker is an exception - his claims are nearly all rock solid, beyond dispute. Why? Because he was such a deadly shot: all but four or five of his victims either disintegrated in the air, or burned to a crisp before they hit the ground. As mentioned elsewhere, read the excellent bio by Wayne Ralph. But this is way OT - what the hell was the topic - oh yeah, back to your originally scheduled programming.
cheers,
shredward

Droops has a point though. There are always qualifiers.

In recent years, some of the scores of the Japanese pilots of WW2 have been changed.

For example. Nishizawa has for many years was credited with 104 kills. More recent lists have it at 87.

I think even Pappy Boyington has had some disallowed in recent years.

I am sorry but I cannot believe any fighter pilot, allied or German, could take on 60 enemy planes and be victorious.

Think about it: That would be 10 WAVES of V formations of six planes each or something equivalent. There is no way that fight ever happened, unless only one or two of the 60 ever even saw him. He didn't fight 60 planes is my point. No way.

I wonder if fighting against 60 planes is that much more difficult/suicidal than fighting against ten? The 60 planes can't all attack you at the same time without getting in each other's way.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Toadvine:
[QB] I am sorry but I cannot believe any fighter pilot, allied or German, could take on 60 enemy planes and be victorious.

That sixty aeroplane thing was something dreamed up by the 1918 equivalent of the National Enquirer - unfortunately, it's one of those myths that come to be accepted as fact because of constant uninformed repetition. It was more like three flights, though it will never be known for a certainty: as Guderian points out, sixty or six makes no difference; there's only so much airspace in which to maneouvre. The fact remains - it was an incredible feat, watched by thousands of troops on both sides of the lines, and it deservedly won the Victoria Cross. Probably the difference in outcome between that fight and the very similar one on 23 September '17 was the numbers and discipline of the opponents. The seven a/c of 56RFC set up a perimeter ring, and boxed their opponent in, taking shots at him as opportunities presented themselves. They were a disciplined, crack flight of veterans and even brilliant airmen. Nevertheless, Voss forced two a/c out of the fight, caused another two to be written off, and was almost more than the rest could handle. Barker, an equally gifted pilot, faced more a/c, but they were not coordinated in their attacks, nor as well handled - so he lived to tell the tale, though just barely. The fact that it wasn't sixty a/c does not diminish the accomplishment, nor the bravery.
cheers,
shredward

answered my own question.

From a review of Under the guns of the Red Baron:

"In the eleven combat reports included for March 1918, von Richtofen confuses DH4s with Bristols, DH4s with Breguets, Camels with SE 5as, FK8s with Bristols and Dolphins with Bristols. It also appears that in five cases von Richtofen filed claims which were confirmed, even though no allied plane was shot down.

Kills 15, 21, 22 and 54 were confirmed despite no wreckage being found. The authors have traced the combat reports of allied pilots who were attacked in ways that correspond to von Richtofen's combat report to prove as far as possible what did happen in these cases. In the case of kill nine, the problem is different. The lost allied crew is identified, but two German pilots were awarded credit and only one allied pilot was shot down."

4 kills confirmed with no wreckage ever found. And 1 kill given to two pilots.

German rules for awarding kills in world war one were pretty strict, but IIRC Richthofen as the poster boy of the German war effort received relaxed "special" rules. I don't think he needed the usual wreck or independent witness. His own word sufficed.

While on the subject it's quite possible that Réne Fonck was actually the highest scorer of the war. He had 75 official kills, and on top of that he had a lot of unconfirmed ones that he scored on "lone hunter" missions. Unlike Richthofen I don't think he received any special rules.

I do not agree with this assessment. Richthofen certainly had some false claims, but they were not allowed just because he was Richthofen. Other German pilots also had some false claims under similar conditions. While most German combat took place over German territory, all did not. When it did not the Germans had the same issues with inaccuracy as the Allies generally suffered from. Sometimes a machine that was shot about (or even thought to be shot about) got home, and was claimed regardless.

Also, do not take as gospel comments like "went down in flames" and "broke apart in the air". Pilots were not always completely accurate in their assessment .

Richthofen's claims are probably the most scrutinized in air combat history. They are not perfect, but they stand up remarkably well. I seriously doubt that Fonck's confirmed victories (nevermind his claims) could withstand similar scrutiny.

Fonck may very well be the top scorer of WWI, or his actual total may be 2/3rds of what he is credited with. Nobody will ever know. Nobody doubts that he was a superb combat pilot who shot down alot of planes, but determining exactly what he did is impossible due to time, the difficulties of combat assessment, and Fonck's own penchant for claiming everything he saw. The problem with Fonck is that he was a braggart of the first order. His personal credibility is about nil. One is largely left with either believing his claims or not.

Would be a big design mistake not to have volumetric clouds that hide craft from other pilots' view

Hear Hear!!!
shredward

I would like clouds like the ones seen in the RB3D movie when the game first loads and the Red Baron is shown on his last mission chasing down that Camel...

But they will also have to cast shawdows over the terrain. Can't have puffy clouds that don't block sunlight and cast shadows!

They would also need to be in the exact same XYZ position for all in multiplay and they would have to cut AI's line of sight, too.

Otherwise they are eyecandy of dubious value.

And break padlock.

And I hope it doesn't have the glitch where look forward with padlock allows you to avoid the break.

Well, my first love in flight sims is/was WW1.
So I really want this sim to succeed.
I am worried though by the lack of "progress" input from the developers-
I can only say that it is sad that a thread, such as is run in SimHQ about a promising WW1 sim, is full of guys squabbling about miniscule details. Reminds me of the chaps who took up fishing and finished up only in heated debates about the best and most satisfying way to catch lobworms off lawns at midnight. :rolleyes:
I'll believe this sim exists when is see it in the shops; and I hope it will be as modern in terms of terrain graphics, FM and DM as to "transport" me to France.
Flying Corps Gold in State of the Art graphics will be more than good enough for me.
But I am not so sure those screenies promise that when compared with Falcon 4 updated with Twaeltis tiles; or Strikefighters with Euro terrain, for example.
Just my hopeful two cents

LOL!

Well flying and fighting in the air was all about "miniscule details", and designing a simulation about that has got to be about the little details too!

Of course we could always go fishing, and sit around waiting for something good to happen........thru luck alone!