From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games,rec.aviation.simulators,rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Power User Review: F15III
Date: 4 Jan 93 16:03:45 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

From article <1993Jan3.154301.9261@newshost.lanl.gov>, by masten@beta.lanl.gov (David A. Masten):
> In article <1993Jan3.053523.22977@netcom.com> hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
>>My configuration: 486-25SX, FCS Pro (FCS with variable tension-springs),
>>CH Virtual Pilot, WCS (version D), 17" screen, SB Pro (with big 
>>amplifier/speakers), Rudder Control System.  The reason I mentioned my
>>configuration up front is because I think my opinion differs from others
>>because of them.
> 
> "Power User" huh?!  Sorry, a 486sx25 is MARGINAL for this game.  Time to
> upgrade that computer again Hoi (and while you're at it, wanna replace
> my 386/33)?  

You can make a case that 486SX-25 is not in the Power User group, but
then again most gamers are still using 386SX-16 or even 286, hence
486-anything could conceivably be considered Power User.  But of course
I will have a 486DX-50 coming in soon (or could I use a lame excuse like
"I am waiting for 586", he, he, he).

>Sounds like you just "flew" at high altitude where
> framerate is acceptable.  Try pounding the mud from 200 feet and
> experience 5-6 fps (and THEN try the padlock). 

Different people has different sensitivity to frame rate.  I did do most
of my work in higher altitude, but did buzz whatever that-dark-color-thing
was down there a few times.  Still looks OK.  Maybe your video card is
not fast enough?  

> BTW, what happened to the 27" monitor?  

27" monitor/TV with the VGA-to-TV converter will not work on some of
the games with funny scan-rate (160x200, etc).  Actually I was eyeing
a 20" VGA monitor to replace the 27", but the wallet just couldn't get 
up to it.  17" is good enough (at least better than 14" :-)
 
>>The plane not only handles real, but also sounds real and looks real
>>(not only the plane itself but also the pilot's view).  I have not
>>flown a jet fighter, but I do fly real planes. 
> 
> Which may explain why you don't think there is something amiss with an
> F15 that can only go about 400 knots in AB at 30K feet (yes, clean and
> near empty of fuel).

OK, I will try to get the 172 to do 400 knots next time.  Thanks. 
>  
>>It should have use the rudder/padel, if not for flight maybe just
>                                ^^^^^
> 
> repeat after me: pedal, pedal, pedal (if you bought the Maxx instead of
> the RCS you'd know this :-) )

Sorry to disappoint you, but I do have TWO MAXX pedals.  Thanks for
the spelling correction.

>>There is not side-view, as far as I can tell.  Why?
> 
> There IS a side view, you have to do it by switching to Pilot view then
> scanning.  I would still like to see a normal, one key, side view.

Thanks.  But I only had it for 2 hours.  Thought I do a review while I
still feel positive since there were some negative reviews earlier.

>>Do you believe for a moment that I am going to use Virtual Pilot to
>>fly a high-performance jet fighter?  (although the VP throttle is the
>>best amongst joystick throttles) 
> 
> I'm waiting for the stick version of the VP (the Flightmaster Pro).  Any
> idea when it is coming out?

No.  I spoke to the CH guy at Comdex, and he said that the interface of
the coolie-hat will be different from the Thrustmaster.  Hope the game
makers will support it soon. 
>  
>>This plane (notice that I non-conciously used the word "plane" and not 
>>"flight sim") feels more real than the F16 flight sim.  For some reason
>>the F16 feels more like a arcade plane, while the F15III feels like a real 
>>plane (just my opinion). 
> 
> See above comments about high altitude speed.  It also can't even hold a
> 30 degree climb without bleeding speed at any altitude (yes again
> without all the ordnance weighing it down).  Just my opinion.

Humm... thanks, Mr I-flown-real-F15E-before (just a cocky way to ask if
you have flown a real F15E before).

Seriously, may be that is a bug.  They may have used the same weight
(full-loaded, fully-fueled) all the time regardless of what the configuration
is at the time.  If so, they should change it.

Or maybe the airforce would only give them data on the fully-loaded, 
fully-fueled F15E, and not other configuration.  With the cold war
over (so they say), I wonder if MPS can buy a real F15E just to check 
it out?

> But after all that, there is much to like...

I think the front/back seat is a new experience worth the money...>