anybody know anything about this sim?

[*DZR*Chimanov]

Originally Posted by Al Schlageter

Did someone miss history class? South America was colonized by the lily white Spain and Portugal.

Exactly, so if it was colonized by Spain and Portugal; what is an English colony doing near the shores of Argentina? Your comment, by the way, has nothing to do with what we were talking about.

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

I'm a young 54.

I didn't say any country is evil, I said that (it is my opinion that...) the leaders of the invading country on this occasion were wrong to do that, and that therefore their servicemen were fighting on the side that was in the wrong. The servicemen were perhaps unaware of that, apparently some of the ground troups expected to be received as liberators, and were surprised to be greeted as oppressors. We, however, with the benefit of hindsight, can form opinions as to who was right and who was wrong. In my opinion that was the invaders. I wouldn't want to play a game fighting for the side that in my view was in the wrong. I know there are plenty of people who don't mind fighting on the wrong side of a conflict, I don't have a problem with them doing that if they want to, but I personally do not want to do that.

With 54, true...your are young at heart

Well, its your opinion... i only have to check a world atlas and by a quick glance to Malvinas Islands geographical position its very easy to realize who are the invaders and who are not

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by *DZR*Chimanov

Exactly, so if it was colonized by Spain and Portugal; what is an English colony doing near the shores of Argentina?

Near? 400 miles is a long way, especially across the Atlantic. Twice that range would make England part of Spain, they tried, they failed.

i only have to check a world atlas and by a quick glance to Malvinas Islands geographical position its very easy to realize who are the invaders and who are not

Geography is not that important or Japan (and thus Korea) would be owned by China, Cuba and thus all of the Caribbean by the USA, Madagascar by Mozambiqe, Greenland by Iceland (or vice versa?).

[*DZR*Chimanov]

I had written a long reply; but then i found out that theres no sense to be dragged by a user who doesnt even know distances between Argentina territorial coasts and Islas Malvinas (at least check a map before posting if you want to be taken seriously)... not to mention childish comments as dividing goberments/countries between the bad ones and the good ones like you can see in any Hollywood class C movie.

This is a forum related to flight simulation, any political frustration or nationalism should be left aside.

I wish the developers of this SIM good luck and even though i don´t like Jets after Corea, i might give it a try sinking HMS's or shooting down MirageIII with a Sea Harrier.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by *DZR*Chimanov

I had written a long reply; but then i found out that theres no sense to be dragged by a user who doesnt even know distances between Argentina territorial coasts and Islas Malvinas (at least check a map before posting if you want to be taken seriously)... not to mention childish comments as dividing goberments/countries between the bad ones and the good ones like you can see in any Hollywood class C movie.

Some governments are worse than others. Which good and is which bad is a particular person's opinion, and probably depends upon that person's political views. I personally would not say any country is bad. If that reference is to my list of island countries that would be owned by other countries if proximity meant ownership, I never made any judgemental remarks about whether the countries concerned were good or bad. I merely made the observation that the island nations would lose their independence. That would be a bad thing in my opinion, and predictably but not necessarily in the opinions of the citizens of those island nations.

This is a forum related to flight simulation, any political frustration or nationalism should be left aside.

My initial remark was intended to be a comment on the apparent non-inclusion of Harriers in the flyable aircraft. I understand that they are difficult to model due to the vectorable exhausts, but in my view any complete simulation of this particular conflict would need to attempt them.

I accept that my view of who was right and wrong in the conflict is an opinion, and that other opinions may differ, however my opinion is what I will act on so far as whether or not I will purchase this game is concerned, as I would expect others to act on their own opinions.

[Antoninus]

The harrier is flyable and you can play both sides.

http://www.thunder-works.com/features.htm

Jet Thunder will feature:

- 6 flyable aircraft models, with accurate cockpits, onboard systems, weapons and performance. They're as follows:

* McDonnel Douglas A-4 Skyhawk (Argentine A-4B, A-4C and carrier-based A-4Q)
* AMD Mirage IIIEA (and israeli-built Mirage export model IAI Nesher/Dagger)
* FMA IA-58 Pucará
* BAe Sea Harrier FRS.1
* BAe Harrier Gr.3
* AMD Super Etendard
(detailed information about the aircraft types listed above will be available soon.)



- Campaign based in the historical events of 1982, with a complete Air Order of Battle featuring more than 50 different AI aircraft.



- Historically accurate Naval Order of Battle, featuring more than 40 different ship models (frigates, cruisers, aircraft carriers, container ships, LCUs, submarines...)



- Complex terrain engine enabling high quality textures for low altitude flight feeling as well as good high altitude visualization, with aprox. 70% of the argentinean Patagonia region as well as an high quality terrain mesh of the Falkland/Malvinas islands (based on accurate SRTM data).



- Land-based air operations in the following airbases:

BAM-Trelew
BAM-Comodoro Rivadavia
BAM-San Julian
BAM-Santa Cruz
BAM-Río Gallegos
BAM-Río Grande
BAM-Malvinas
BAM-Cóndor
BAM-Calderón
(detailed information about the above airbases will be available here soon.)



- Carrier-based air operations in the following aircraft carriers:

HMS Hermes
HMS Invincible
ARA 25 de Mayo
(detailed information about the above vessels will be available here soon.)





- Complex/realistic operation and limits of the onboard radar of the Sea Harrier FRS.1 (Ferranti Blue Fox, based on the Seaspray radar used by naval Lynx helicopters), also of the Agave radar of the Super Etendard, and finally, the Thomson-CSF Cyrano II of the Mirage IIIEA. The other flyables have no radar, but their equipment will be fully represented (gunsight, navigation, RWR, weapon deployment, trim, engine/fuel operation).



- Full V/STOL flight model for the Harrier/Sea Harrier, realistically based on vectored thrust vector, rotating within the limits of the real plane's nozzle system, not the augmented flap performance as seen in other flight sims.



- Range of single missions, based on historical missions, on either argentine or british side. Full Mission Editor will be available so players can make their own missions and share with other players.



- Complex Air-Sea-Battle campaign system: based in a "commanding AI" that will give orders to naval, air and ground AI units based in the current tactical situation, the player will fly in an enviroment that may change unpredicably, so, although based on historical order of battle, equipment and resources/logistics, the outcome of the campaign can be different.



- Multiplayer modes: dogfight room, cooperative, and online-campaign.


- Fully scalable realism options, for a less steeper learning curve: no stalls/spins, no crash, simple radar, unlimited weapons, no wind/turbulence, missile effectiveness slider, no cockpit, and others.


- Range of training missions for each aircraft, focused on main aspects for each plane: twin-prop flight (Pucará), V/STOL operation (Harrier), carrier operations (Super Etendard, A-4, Sea Harrier), supersonic flight (Mirage).


- Possibility of inclusion of new, accurate "in-house made" flyables, depending on interest (Vulcan bomber or Aermacchi MB-339 for example) in a later expansion pack.


- Moddability: aircraft paints can be customized, and tools will be available to create new terrains and campaigns - for example, american A-4's carrier-based in a Midway Class carrier (instead of the ARA 25 de Mayo) for a Southwest Asian campaign mod.*

* This covers the single-player aspect; we're still pondering about the best balance to avoid problems with the multiplayer aspect.

[Ctrl E]

i seem to have sparked fierce political debate here. i really just meant to say it looks like a great sim. reckon it could easily be modded for a vietnam or middle east conflict senario.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Antoninus

The harrier is flyable and you can play both sides.

Good, that does sound a lot better.

[Brain32]

I for one can't wait for the game to come out, demo is promised soon. Now how cool is that, there are waaaay to little demos theese days...

I agree playing both sides sounds better, not for the previously said reasons, but simply for variety, I personally never could understand the one side only complex.I mean OK, so I understand Brits might have a problem on Flaklands due to recent nature of that conflict, but whenever somebody throws up sillyness like that in WW2 context, especially those born 20+ years after it I can only picture them as primitive and shortsighted hillbillies.


BTW: Strictly for geographical facts:
distance Arg-Malvinas=~320miles
distance GBr-Falklands=~7620miles!!!

Personally I don't see what was it worth in strategical and economical sense to mobilize nearly entire army for a few square miles of grass and a couple of sheeps 7600 miles away from your own border. Maybe it was "Hey we want to retain the image of powerfull country regardless the cost, either material or in human lives". The vanity strikes again...

But ofcourse when Russia cleans up mess on it's own border then they are called the bad guys - now that's really weak.