Spitfire for FSX

[Xilon_x]

this is last product A2A for FSX.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P-7e3RN5_Q&feature=player_embedded#at=26


you loock whit actenction dimension and proportions of the pilot in the cokpit

[Ploughman]

Wow, that is simply fantastic.

[Immermann]

For FSX though. Not so fantastic...

[Xilon_x]

loock the screenshot here:http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=23592

http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum_picts/accusim_spitfire/spitmkIa_12.jpg

[ckolonko]

This is a great aeroplane. Simply unbelievable.

[Xilon_x]

because A2A simulation not work whit 1C?
IF A2A simulation work whit 1C UNITED in future prepare and developed all airplane of ww2.FANTASTIC

[Sutts]

Very nice job they've done there. I see they've done their MK1 research properly. Hope they can get involved with COD. I'd die for those features in a proper combat environment.

[Immermann]

because A2A simulation not work whit 1C?
IF A2A simulation work whit 1C UNITED in future prepare and developed all airplane of ww2.FANTASTIC

No, because it's for FSX. A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

--EDIT--

Sure I wouldn't mind if they made planes for CoD (whatever the series should be called) in the future.

[I/ZG52_Gaga]

loock the screenshot here:http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=23592

http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum_picts/accusim_spitfire/spitmkIa_12.jpg

You know.. it really bugs me the fact that they have zillions of polygons for the Aircraft and the bloody mechanics look like potato sacks with body parts extruding ....

[Xilon_x]

and is indeed a great job.
But it seems a wasted work for FSX.
and 'a hot potato wheel.

[Blackdog_kt]

Immerman, there's no reason to diss the add-on if you haven't tried it just because it's for a sim you don't like.

You're free not to like FSX and it does have it's drawbacks (many of them serious), but having spent time with it on a friend's PC (i don't own a copy myself) and getting to grips with some payware add-ons like this one, my personal experience was that

a) well done payware models like this one are in a completely different league compared to the stock aircraft in FSX so i can't really judge them by saying "stock FSX is bad so this will be too" and

b) products like this one gave me a much more fulfilled sense of operating the aircraft in the way a real pilot would than any combat sim around, even IL2.


I didn't say "fly" or "fight" for which IL2 is great, i said "operate" because let's be honest, in reality the plane doesn't operate itself just like it doesn't fly itself ;)

I've tried a couple of birds made by these guys and i can honestly say it's the closest i've ever felt to piloting a real aircraft and yes, just because the FM/DM is better and i can shoot the guns in IL2 doesn't mean it comes any closer than this add-on to flying the real thing. I think they are just different sides of the same coin modeling a different part of the whole experience.


It's this realisation of the distinction between actual flying and the rest of what a pilot does that struck the first few times flying warbirds in FSX which explains the reason most online flying in IL2 is nothing like the way they used to really do it back then: the pilot couldn't just point and shoot, he had to waste time fiddling with other controls too.

This necessitated having pre-planned as much of the combat sequence as possible, including contingencies in the event of things going bad, that's why in most memoirs you'll read it's usually a case of "see, decide if i have the advantage or not-->engage and then run away/disengage altogether". The workload was a bitch and none of our combat sims (apart from modern/jet titles like Falcon4 and DCS) reflected that, especially if they were prop era sims...until now.

This is one of the main reasons i've been advocating improved engine/systems management and pilot workload for CoD and i'm very happy we'll be getting it, because it has a very real tactical impact. There's far too many people thinking that if one flies combat sims then he has nothing to learn from civilian ones. I know because i used to think the same.

However, that can't be further from the truth really. I've learned an enormous amount of stuff on navigation and engines just from flying FSX add-ons when visiting that buddy of mine and i can't wait to see how it will affect my combat simming and tactics to have to fly in an environment where these things actually matter for a change :grin:

[fireflyerz]

From what I can hear it has a very nice sound package as well....oh well.

[Mango]

I remember long before Rise of Flight was released, the developers did an FSX model for the Dr1 and released it for free, sort of a preview of what was to come.

I think A2A did a fine job on their spitfire, and they're showing they have the talent to make some superb add-ons for IL-2. I bet we'll be seeing some excellent work from them for IL-2: ?????? in the future. :D

[Ploughman]

We can hope, that sort of fidelity with added bababoom would really be something. The engine model they refer sounds like it could add another dimension to combat simming. Imagine a campaign where you manage and maintain the aircraft on the ground and in the air as well as fly and fight it with the sort of accuracy of systems and equipment simulation that A2A are able to acheive?

[Therion_Prime]

Well said Blackdog!

What I don't get is that some people here are complaining when they see a wrong rivet on a CoD plane because they "want it to be as real as possible" then, on the other hand, press the "I" key and slam the throttle forward because a real startup procedure is too complicated and a waste of time.....

Do you want the real thing or not?

Back OT: I would love to see A2A making (fully simulated) addon planes for CoD in the future if possible.
Even their AccuSim Technology would be a great addon for existing CoD planes.

[Oktoberfest]

Sarcastic mode on :

Héhé, then comes the downgrade : no realistic sounds, 8bit synthetizer is better & airframe is to detailled, get less poly.

Sarcastic mod off :

I hope this will be possible & I hope they do a Dewoitine 520 so we can reenact the Battle of France :)

[Xilon_x]

DEWOITNE 520 not is a stupid airplane but have a good power of fire italians
when they captured one they were amazed by its firepower.

this is the historic project of all nation:
http://f.imagehost.org/0697/Programs_Modern_fighter.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0557/FW190_D520.jpg
this is POWER OF FIRE
http://i.imagehost.org/0087/Poder_de_Fuego.jpg
this is listTYPE OF ARMY:
http://i.imagehost.org/0215/Comparazione_cannoni_I.jpg
http://i.imagehost.org/0403/D520_Firepower.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0414/Bf_Guns.jpg

[Old_Canuck]

No, because it's for FSX. A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

--EDIT--

Sure I wouldn't mind if they made planes for CoD (whatever the series should be called) in the future.

Classic! Another quote from years gone by in UBI forum: "paint a turd purple and it's still a turd."

Very detailed work by A2A. Too bad they don't have a decent simulator for their model.

[Mysticpuma]

Nicely put Canuck. It begs the question: Would A2A consider making models available to 1C for use in CoD? It would only be the rame as paying for extra aircraft as in RoF? Cheers MP

[KG26_Alpha]

I'm just guessing but..............

That Spits poly count would probably make 5 IL21946 aircraft if not more.

Bung a few of those into the air, hmmmmm 12 v 12 and say good bye to your frame rates slide show time.




.

[Seeker]

I'm just guessing but..............

That Spits poly count would probably make 5 IL21946 aircraft if not more.

Bung a few of those into the air, hmmmmm 12 v 12 and say good bye to your frame rates slide show time.

.

FSX has multi play. Never tried it, but there's some impressive Team aerobatic films on youtube, so I don't see why the FSX ply count should be a barrier.

Of course, it's a newer engine than IL-2, but then so is CoD fish.

[kristorf]

Beautiful

[Immermann]

Immerman, there's no reason to diss the add-on if you haven't tried it just because it's for a sim you don't like.

I didn't diss the add-on, it's the lipstick :) . FSX is the pig it's painted on.

[Xilon_x]

bravo IMMERMANN a real simulplayers can appreciate any type of simulators and is not based only on a simulator.
I always said:
that there are too many childrens(16 or 14 years old) who can only appreciate the values of the game and not gaming tactics and techniques.


PLEASE this children return to play to PAC-MAN or SPACE-INVADERS OR GTA ARCADE GAME TANK YOU

[KG26_Alpha]

FSX has multi play. Never tried it, but there's some impressive Team aerobatic films on youtube, so I don't see why the FSX ply count should be a barrier.

Of course, it's a newer engine than IL-2, but then so is CoD fish.

Have you seen FSX multi player................its a mess at the best of times, planes juddering around and warping all over the place.

Some expert here might tell us exactly what effect high poly's have on online flying.

IIRC it causes lag when in visual range.

But not 100% sure.




.

[Sutts]

I don't think it's the poly count that everyone's appreciating here. It's the detail they put into the systems and behaviour that makes you feel like you're operating a real aircraft. I don't think Oleg's Spit models will need much improving, inside or outside. I would like to see a faithful reproduction of the systems though and some real sampled sound might be nice too.:grin:

I've already sent a request to A2A regarding future integration with COD....haven't had any reply though. Wouldn't harm if some of you guys did the same so they know there's real interest:

support@a2asimulations.com

[Blackdog_kt]

I'm just guessing but..............

That Spits poly count would probably make 5 IL21946 aircraft if not more.

Bung a few of those into the air, hmmmmm 12 v 12 and say good bye to your frame rates slide show time.




.

I'm guessing you are probably right. However, they don't have to do the 3d modeling since team Maddox is more than capable of that.

What they could do for CoD in the long run if they got some kind of contract or a deal with Oleg's team is to code/transfer their accusim module to the CoD engine if CoD will benefit from it, or simply work as a subcontractor on specific items and sub-systems if CoD already has something similar to accusim. For example, we've been told we'll have every single system in the aircraft working as it should in CoD, just with an automatic start-up/shutdown. Maybe A2A could work on optional patches for each aircraft that make a fully manual procedure available for those who want it.

I somehow got the impression from what we've been told in the weekly updates and from people who attended the Moscow and Kiev gaming expos and gave us feedback on CoD that what we're getting is already very similar to the accusim engine model, so i don't know if and how useful A2A's contribution could be on that front.

However they are still a team who knows their stuff, they have a lot of knowledge on the intricate mechanics of operating vastly different aircraft (from dead simple piper cubs to P47s and four engined propeller airliners of the 50s), plus they have access to some very good sound recordings done on real aircraft. They seem to have a certain kind of reach in the aviation community and it's easy for them to get access to real aircraft for their projects, so even if they were there simply to provide Oleg's team with accurate sound recordings it would be a beneficial partnership.

[Ploughman]

Well the FSX Spit doesn't have a DM so porting it to CloD is pointless regardless of how crippling it's poly count may or may not be, I can already not shoot stuff down in FSX, I don't need that in CloD. What would be nice would be bespoke models by A2A or adaptions of the CloD models to incorporate what A2A can offer in this realm that are designed for the CloD engine.

[Sokol1]

http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum_picts/accusim_spitfire/spitmkIa_12.jpg

Better if A2A guys have modeled Margaret Horton to hold this Spit tail. ;)

Sokol1

[Old_Canuck]

Even at my age it would be a treat to see Spit Girl with a short skirt holding down that tail section :cool:

[WTE_Galway]

Well BoB addons for FSX seem rather popular at present.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvvpCYc7ps0


I have never quite understood why - on those rare occasions that I do fly FSX myself (it runs like a dog on my PC) I tend to fly things I have flown in real life over the years like Skyfox Gazelles, C152/C172 and Piper Warriors.


They do look mighty prurty though ....

http://www.justflight.com/img/screenshots/2010064212034ZWP6W-L.jpg

http://www.justflight.com/img/screenshots/2010064212740O6Y7D-L.jpg

[Mysticpuma]

Nice sky and clouds in that video......wonder if Oleg plans to show us some Atmospheric shots any time soon rather than the fluffy cotton ball IL2 ones we keep seeing?

Cheers, MP

[=WF=RAW]

i like the sounds of plane in this video %)

[Ploughman]

Nice sky and clouds in that video......wonder if Oleg plans to show us some Atmospheric shots any time soon rather than the fluffy cotton ball IL2 ones we keep seeing?

Cheers, MP

As you know, OM and Luthier have said that the 'weather' simulation they'd been developing for CloD was too clunky at this point for CLoD but would be available as part of the FMB in a 'use at your own risk' offering, apparrently it my work on some people's rigs on some small maps. Once they've refined the 'weather' it'll become part of the sim proper. Untill then we're stuck with fluffy clouds and monodirectional map wide wind.

Given that I think showing shots of what the 'weather' is capable looking like would be misleading at this point and would sure to come back and bite them in the ass when customers complain that they've got lame fluffy clouds instead of the towering storm fronts they saw in some screenies.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

First: You cannot compare FSX and IL-2 ... simply two completely different concepts.
Second: If you have to concentrate on producing only one plane and do not need to care for any limits, you can do wonder - no matter what.
Third: Bf109E's never carried a desert scheme over England - well done, Just Flight! XD

... and maybe as Fourth: Ever anyone been able to fly a Hs129 anywhere else? :)

[choctaw111]

I am wondering though, when A2A said that there are elements to their Spitfire which has never before been modeled, I am imagining that they are referring to a released product.
I am hoping that they are only able to say this as Cliffs of Dover hasn't yet been released.

Also, comparing Cliffs of Dover to FSX is apples and oranges, as the saying goes.
FSX does a decent job in giving you the impression of flying anywhere in world you want, however, Cliffs of Dover and even Il2, do a far superior job in giving the impression and feel of aerial combat.

[Therion_Prime]

I am wondering though, when A2A said that there are elements to their Spitfire which has never before been modeled, I am imagining that they are referring to a released product.
I am hoping that they are only able to say this as Cliffs of Dover hasn't yet been released.



I dare say that A2As accusim probably does a superior job in simulating engine internals, but I'm in for a positive surprise when CoD is released.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I am wondering though, when A2A said that there are elements to their Spitfire which has never before been modeled.

Did they list the elements that had never been modeled before or was it in a general statement?

If it was a general statement it was probably put here by the marketing team otherwise it would be easy to quantify for them.

Cheers!

[klem]

Blackdog and a few others right on the money as usual.

I have the A2A Spitfire. Its a very nice package with interesting ageing/wear features and some more realistic engine/aircraft management needs.

I'd be happy to see those additional management features in CoD to tame some of the "tactics" we see in IL-2. I'm sure Oleg would provide 'Off' switches for those who just want to wall the throttle for half an hour.

Mind you those features and the tactics they lead to will be wasted if we can't create decent size on-line campaigns to benefit from them. 128 players is a reasonable start but 256 would be better. I know there are kit and connection issues with that but Oleg shouldn't (and won't have?) held back from the best possible and if you want to use the best options you have to keep your kit and connection reasonably up to date. If you can't there are always other settings and servers you can use thanks to Oleg's tailoring.

btw I have flown A2A Spitfire on-line in loose formation but only with 8-10 players (all A2ASpifires) and a little AI. No problems apart from the odd player with a poor connection (brief warps) but my PC is quite new (i7 950 4GHz, GTX570, 6Gb RAM) and I have a 20Mb/2Mb connection.

[onlyforbrian]

No, because it's for FSX. A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

--EDIT--

Sure I wouldn't mind if they made planes for CoD (whatever the series should be called) in the future.

I like ALL flight sims, including FSX, maybe that's because I'm a licenced pilot, there's not a thing wrong with FSX, nice change of pace from IL2, but like you, I'm drooling with anticipation for Cliffs of Dover...and...ALSO..if you don't like FSX, Microsoft FINALLY has a new sim coming out FS11 !! Maybe you might like this one better. Here's a preview video inside a Beaver...looks good to me.. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gacq43JuEd0&feature=player_embedded

[Therion_Prime]

WTF? There is no FS11 .....

[SQB]

bravo IMMERMANN a real simulplayers can appreciate any type of simulators and is not based only on a simulator.
I always said:
that there are too many childrens(16 or 14 years old) who can only appreciate the values of the game and not gaming tactics and techniques.


PLEASE this children return to play to PAC-MAN or SPACE-INVADERS OR GTA ARCADE GAME TANK YOU

Hey, a little stereotyping going on there i see... :(

I am sixteen, the only games I play are simulations like DCS: A10C and a nut-ton of il2.

Cheers
Sam

[whatnot]

Got a negative response from A2A about their plans of modelling for CoD. It's an early hour ofcourse as the game nor the SDK is not released so things might change in the future as CoD gets a foothold in the market.


Hello,

we have our own Combat Flight Simulator that is still considered by many including PCGamer to be king of the Hill for offline gameplay. We currently have no plans to work on the new il-2 engine.

thanks,
Lewis - A2A

[Ploughman]

BoB 2? That's too bad, never could really bond with that sim.

Hopefully they'll change their minds, I'd pauper myself if they started producing for the new Il-2 engine.

[LukeFF]

Hey, a little stereotyping going on there i see... :(

I am sixteen, the only games I play are simulations like DCS: A10C and a nut-ton of il2.

Cheers
Sam

Don't pay Xilon much attention. He goes on these types of rants every so often.

[Ltbear]

If just Oleg would add the weather engine from FSX lol.....that is the part i realy loved...dont care aboput the weather back then, just add realtime dynamic weather like FSX...

actualy thinking about it. Let Oleg have a weather server where all the game servers get the weather...kinda like "todays weather in COD". Then he can sit at the office and look where all the whiners fly and then give them some rain or a thunderstorm....

1 time each hour the server checks weather updates and dynamicly have the fronts roling in........

[Ploughman]

1 time each hour the server checks weather updates and dynamicly have the fronts roling in........

How's the server going to connect with 1940? ;)

For multiplay that's not a bad idea.

[Ltbear]

How's the server going to connect with 1940? ;)

For multiplay that's not a bad idea.

By having a 1940 database that send the apropiate data to the game....

setup: click

Dynamic weather (requires internet conection) click

1940 weather: click

Dynamic real time weather: NO!

Update on game launch: check

Update on mission launch: NO!

exit setup

fly with dynamic weather

eeeeeassyyyyyy

lol....naaah proberbly not :)