Exorcet

It will either happen between May 24-26, or after June 8. Things didn't go exactly as I thought they would, but at worst, the date is just going shift. Also, DrXIII, do you have internet?

I hate to say it, but this is the wrong way to look at it. You first need to determine if it is actually possible, then you can do the engineering. Specilization exists because it's better than Jack of all trades, generally. Technology can change this though, avionics have and weapons technolgy allow fighters today to perform roles that would have had to have been split between two or more different planes in the past, but even today you can't have an air force with only one type of plane. You certainly can build something just because it's cool, there is nothing wrong with that, but it probably won't be practical. If you want to make something practical, which is typically the point of engineering, you need to start with a purpose and not an idea. I'm not saying this to discourage you, it's certainly possible that a multirole tank could be nearly as good or possibly better than current tanks, research will give you that answer. However what you need to put before anything else is the goal that you're trying to achieve. Even if this adaptive tank outperforms current specilized ground vehicles, will it outperform next generation specilized tanks? If it does not, then what is the point? I think the strength of your idea comes from its ability to ease logicistics in a combat situation, and not necessarily raw performance. But it's your concept, take it where you want. (And not to half show off, half make a point) % Breguet Range based aircraft sizing code % Imperial units % range = nm, speed = knts, TSFC = lb/lbf*h, mass/weight = lb % R = V*(L/D)/SFC*ln(m1/m2) % m1/m2 = e^(R/(V*(L/D)/SFC)) clear all CRange = [b]1200; % total range[/b] % Range = CRange*(1+(1/3)); % Accounting for off cruise condition Range = CRange*1.5; % Accounting for off cruise condition % (start up, taxi, takeoff, climb, mission, % descend, approach, land) M_cruise = .8; % cruise Mach LD = 8.84; % L/D (function of cruise mach, external payload) SFC = .72; % SFC r = Range/.000539956803; % altitude table for reference % 30,000 ft a=589.4 kt % 35,000 ft a=576.5 % 40,000 ft a=573.6 (const to 70,000 ft) a = 589.4; v = (M_cruise*a)*.514444444444444; % units SFCu = SFC*(1/3600); % units s = SFCu^-1; % Weight calculation mr = exp(r/(v*LD*s)); % total weight / empty+payload weight mf_over_m2 = mr-1; % fuel fraction / payload+empty weight disp('====FUEL FRACTION====') % Begin output % fractions ffrac = mf_over_m2*(1/mr) % F-35 = .264 (MTOW) m2frac = 1-ffrac % empty weight + payload fraction fs = .42; % structure fraction (for F-35 = .418; F-22 = .520 {both MTOW]) fpay = m2frac - fs % payload fraction % Weights payload = [b]20000; % Max payload[/b] loadedpay = 10000; % Payload that must meet range req AApay = 2000; % Air to Air payload p = payload; l = loadedpay; a = AApay; GTOW = p/fpay % Gross take off weight with full payload mf = ffrac*GTOW % fuel mass ms = fs*GTOW % empty weight % Off payload range mi = ms+mf+a; me = mi-mf; AARange = v*(LD)*s*log(mi/me)*.000539956803/1.1 AA_Combat_radius = AARange/2 % Actual number, non fraction ms = 0; % empty weight mf = 0; % fuel weight a = 0; % payload mi = ms+mf+a; me = mi-mf; AARange = v*(LD)*s*log(mi/me)*.000539956803/1.1 AA_Combat_radius = AARange/2 This code is for a project I'm doing for fun. I'm designing a fighter. This is the very first thing I did, I decided to check and see if my goals were reasonable. My goals were carrying 20,000 lbs of payload over a range of 1200 nm. I have no idea what my plane will look like, or how I'm going to carry that 20,000 lbs, but I first made sure that it was possible. Once I did, I could start the real engineering.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say equal superiority. I think the biggest benefit is the ability to quickly adapt to unanticipated situations. You could have the actual vehicle chassis standarized and deployed everywhere, but logistics would only need to move around interchangeable weapons and armor rather than ship in a whole bunch of new vehicles to your location just because you need more anti armor capability. Also, I'd point out that the trend today is to move away from tanks to lighter armored vehicles like Bradley and Striker, especially in urban combat. You should take that into account. Are you going to design an entire vehicle based on new methods of combat, an entire vehicle that fits in with current combat tactics, or just the turret? Keep at it, maybe this could become your thesis.

Small mass produced UAV's will be vulnerable to SAM's and aircraft, and an adaptable tank type thing with anti air capabiliy would be a good counter against them. Large UAV's wouldn't be any more numerous than manned fighters are right now. And those are vulnerable to SAM's anyway.

What isn't these days? A flight sim without a stick is pretty ridiculous anyway haha. If you plan on making missions download the A-10C GUI manual too, DCS A-10 mission editor uses more or less the same features as DCS World, and it's a lot more powerful than FC2's ME was.

I like the idea of quick interchangeable weapon system more than a turret full of a million guns, but both of these already sound more practical than a mech. Just make sure that everything you do has a reason behind it. What benefits does the multi gun turret have? Does it have any drawbacks? How do you get around the drawbacks? etc. You should waste of tons of hours doing CAD, even if it is CAD of ridiculous and impossible things. CAD skills are good to have.

Now you can do Vietnam war too, as DCS MiG-21 was just announced. http://forums.eagle....splay.php?f=201 I highly reccommend that anyone even remotely interested in DCS downloads DCS world http://www.digitalco...pos=135&lang=en (first 4 files) It is completely free and is for all intents and purposes a full game minus multiplayer and fully modeled cockpit. These are the best flight physics I've seen in a simulator.

DCS is not FC2, DCS is much more realistic. And you can try it for nothing, as DCS World is free. Think of it as the ultimate demo. You get the full map with all two dozen or so airbases, access to all combat units and the mission editor and can fly the Su-25T with advanced flight model, making it essentially a DCS plane without clickable cockpit. Eagle Dynamics is basically giving away a DCS module for free. Get it here: http://forums.eagle....ead.php?t=87437 More P-51, now with dogfights www.youtube.com/watch?v=yastQYz6PMk

Looking like it will be the week of the 20th or 27th. Most likely the latter week.

The last time I flew a plane and had my laptop, I took out my laptop and flew the plane I was flying in in FSX on the same route that the plane was flying. INCEPTION

DCS Mustang is here. Pre-Purchase at: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/ You can also download the manual if you're waiting for the boxxed version. Bf-109 at around 1:30 !!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFYRKKffkF8&t=90

The fast firing laser was probably LR230 Aulnee. However firing without a charge hurts accuracy, and the types of AC's that you can hit easily without charging usually have massive TE def.

KARASAWA comes out good with pretty much any tune. I actually had a few things beides Power II, but not enough to draw conclusions. If you're going to make a chart with your own Sawa's we can throw in mine to get increased numbers with less grinding. Thanks. How many HEAT piles do you have? I'd be curious to know the max damage one of those could put out lol.

Story mission 9 with dual USG-23/H. 1,027,000 credits per 20 seconds + load times. I don't really use OW's, but I imagine throwing Gats on is easier, plus you can bring hanger weapons to be leved while you grind.

AC4 servers are confirmed up and running for PS3.

RESULTS - video http://armoredcoreun...dpost__p__53054 video http://armoredcoreuniverse.net/forum/index.php?/topic/2737-ac4-2012-tournament/page__view__findpost__p__53116 http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/ACUAC4Tournament.jpg Updates and stuff Tournment Monday June 11 at 6 PM EST Rules: Standard maps (CC, PG, MF), best 2/3 10 minute time No part bans One AC per person If TM shows up, match does not start until he leaves the area. Confirmed entrants as of now: Exorcet Rogan ACDC Pendragon faust AznLibra Bracket generator: number_of_entrants = 5; n = number_of_entrants; list = zeros(n, 1); for i = 1:n if i == 1 list(i) = randi(n); else k = randi(n); while ismember(k, list) k = randi(n); end list(i) = k; end end list Current bracket (you don't know what this means unless you are Exorcet): 5 6 1 4 2 3 Old bracket 2 3 1 4 5 OLD STUFF YOU SHOULDN'T READ ANYMORE BUT THAT I DIDN'T DELETE ANYWAY: Preliminary investiagation into setting up an AC4 tournament towards the end of May. Why May? It is hot, and I won't have air conditioning until May. Hot + PS3 turned on + Air Conditioning*0 = more hot. Secondly, my future is uncertain come June. I might be sucked into an alternate dimension or something. So May it is (probably) Post here if you are interested. Also, post here if you know that status of AC4's online (up/down).

MotioninJoy + PS3 USB + Sixaxis = good controls for PC.

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk187/Exorcet/Sawachart.png Hand Type Attack Impact Reload Lock time Velocity Range Drain Base 10253 100.00% 2503 100.00% 300 100.00% 52 100.00% 1298 100.00% 245 100.00% 27000 100.00% R Power II 12139 118.39% 2923 116.78% 348 116.00% 70 134.62% 1493 115.02% 271 110.61% 33048 122.40% R Power II 11237 109.60% 2773 110.79% 391 130.33% 75 144.23% 1343 103.47% 254 103.67% 37800 140.00% R Power II 11729 114.40% 2833 113.18% 379 126.33% 68 130.77% 1486 114.48% 276 112.65% 33912 125.60% R Power II 12098 117.99% 3013 120.38% 350 116.67% 64 123.08% 1506 116.02% 281 114.69% 34344 127.20% R Power II 11934 116.40% 2803 111.99% 350 116.67% 71 136.54% 1512 116.49% 257 104.90% 32400 120.00% R Power II 11442 111.60% 3028 120.97% 408 136.00% 66 126.92% 1441 111.02% 258 105.31% 32833 121.60% R Power II 11483 112.00% 3133 125.17% 410 136.67% 62 119.23% 1389 107.01% 262 106.94% 32616 120.80% R Power II 12139 118.39% 3118 124.57% 331 110.33% 74 142.31% 1447 111.48% 271 110.61% 37152 137.60% L Power II 11565 112.80% 3148 125.77% 412 137.33% 62 119.23% 1486 114.48% 261 106.53% 33048 122.40% L Power II 11852 115.60% 3163 126.37% 403 134.33% 67 128.85% 1330 102.47% 275 112.24% 34776 128.80% L Power II 10991 107.20% 2908 116.18% 398 132.67% 70 134.62% 1476 113.71% 251 102.45% 36072 133.60% L Power II 11483 112.00% 3208 128.17% 410 136.67% 64 123.08% 1551 119.49% 264 107.76% 34992 129.60% L Power II 11278 110.00% 2893 115.58% 410 136.67% 62 119.23% 1467 113.02% 259 105.71% 34776 128.80% L Power II 11483 112.00% 2743 109.59% 376 125.33% 66 126.92% 1538 118.49% 259 105.71% 33048 122.40% L Power II 11852 115.60% 3068 122.57% 400 133.33% 68 130.77% 1434 110.48% 252 102.86% 33480 124.00% L Power II 12304 120.00% 3103 123.97% 372 124.00% 73 140.38% 1538 118.49% 280 114.29% 33696 124.80% L Power II 11606 113.20% 3103 123.97% 362 120.67% 66 126.92% 1473 113.48% 275 112.24% 36936 136.80% L Power II 11893 116.00% 2893 115.58% 415 138.33% 64 123.08% 1454 112.02% 251 102.45% 34992 129.60% L Power II 10909 106.40% 3073 122.77% 328 109.33% 62 119.23% 1499 115.49% 276 112.65% 35424 131.20% L Power II 11606 113.20% 2743 109.59% 420 140.00% 63 121.15% 1538 118.49% 263 107.35% 33696 124.80% L Power II 10868 106.00% 2998 119.78% 381 127.00% 69 132.69% 1389 107.01% 259 105.71% 35208 130.40% L Power II 11196 109.20% 2908 116.18% 357 119.00% 74 142.31% 1447 111.48% 276 112.65% 35424 131.20% L Power II 12057 117.59% 3133 125.17% 393 131.00% 73 140.38% 1532 118.03% 260 106.12% 33048 122.40% L Power II 11155 108.80% 3163 126.37% 396 132.00% 76 146.15% 1350 104.01% 268 109.39% 36936 136.80% L Power II 10991 107.20% 3178 126.97% 408 136.00% 69 132.69% 1434 110.48% 254 103.67% 34344 127.20% Average Power II 11571.6 112.86% 3002 119.94% 384.32 128.11% 67.92 130.62% 1462.12 112.64% 264.52 107.97% 34560.04 128.00% Since I had some KARASAWA's lying around I decided to post up some numbers to perhaps give an idea of what you can expect from affinity tuning. The chart shows a break down for Power II affinity, values and percentages of fully tuned SAWA's. I highlighted best and worst, but the forum didn't keep that. At the bottom is the expected tuning outcome. Some of the maximums/minimums are very clean percentages which makes me think they might be hard limits coded into the game. There are also a lot of repeat value which makes it seem like the ultimate values aren't totally random. If anyone wants to add/expand this go ahead. I might do more number crunching later if I feel like it.

I might get it just to mod Crystal Soul Spear into having a Mach 4 speed and 100 g turning capability. Would be cool if you could just edit your save too.

Balancing comes first. The first generation parts should all be as good as the second generation, so we actually have 500 parts. Then they can add more.

I'd be willing to switch to Wing 2 for training or whatever if there's space.

Viper is back in both street car and race car form, and it's going back to ALMS. Ferrari and Corvette rule no more. http://www.drivesrt.com/live/ http://stwot.motortrend.com/files/2012/04/SRT-Viper-GTS-R-race-car-front-view-1024x640.jpg http://image.motortrend.com/f/40930254+w786+ar1/2013-SRT-Viper-front-three-quarters-2.jpg The road car makes 640 hp and 600 lb ft. Weight is down to 3300 lbs, and the aerodynamics have been revised. Dodge claims a .37 drag coefficient, and I spy a promising front splitter and rear diffuser. The gearing has been improved greatly, sixth gear is now usual for high speed driving, and the car reaches 206 mph in its final gear. The frame is 50% stiffer than the old car with a lowered center of gravity and wider tires. The tire size increase was probably overkill, but this thing is going to grip the road like a race car.

I'm not suggesting that you get rid of the autogun, but use a different autogun. The UCS-17/H autogun has more total attack power and a higher damage rate. Velocity is lower, but it's still pretty accurate. The per bullet attack is less, but Mysore doesn't really do all that well vs heavy KE def targets anyway. You don't have to use KE arms, just avoid TE arms. For balanced bipde defense uses CE head and arms with KE core and legs. This will make you faster, give you slightly better offense, and provide good CE and KE def. If you're going to play mid range, Consider Accuracy tuning for Strekoza, or try Lotus battle rifles. With Power II tuning, Lotus can achieve over 600 shot velocity.

I would not use TE def arms on a Mid bipedal. Use KE or CE. TE arms are heavy and don't have great firing stability. Plus, you need a lot of def to stop the bigger TE weapons. If you want balanced def, use CE head (for stability and speed), KE core (light, low drain), and CE arms (firing stability). There is nothing wrong with only having KE def though. Strekoza is a better Podenka. Also, the Mysore auto gun doesn't seem to do much better than the smaller one that's just above it in the parts list. On FCS, I prefer Glance to Otkryt. Glance already has a big lock box, and the slow lock on of Otkryt is annoying. But if you're going for longer range, I guess Glance can be a bit hard to work with.

No nose in the photo? That inlet spike had better not have been in a crash. It probably looks less like one with the SATCOM buldge on the left nose, but the switch the AE1107 props might help the image. I kind of wish we kept jets though, figuring out the landing gear to allow the props to clear the ground is annoying.