Pensacola

harms · Post by **harms** » 13 Nov 2008, 23:10

Are there any future plans for adding a package to cover the NAS at Pensacola, FL?

Post by **BadPvtDan** » 13 Nov 2008, 23:33

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 13 Nov 2008, 23:52

What he means to say is not as of yet. We lack a proper AI model at this time.

harms · Post by **harms** » 14 Nov 2008, 19:55

Thanks Guys.
I understand.
Will keep a lookout on the site to see what the future holds.
Harms

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 14 Nov 2008, 20:58

Their is an AI F-18 on the way as well as a T-6 II, so we may get to it one of these days. Waiting for the models first of course.

mr.bean · Post by **mr.bean** » 14 Nov 2008, 23:21

We only have NBAI T-45 that we can put in the base Harms, and we have the HTAI C-130 that we can use as Fat Albert. Those are the only models we have.

harms · Post by **harms** » 15 Nov 2008, 01:08

Thanks again for the input. As I said, I will keep monitoring the site to see what is going on.

flyerkg · Post by **flyerkg** » 15 Nov 2008, 02:39

I played with a couple of non-AI T-34s and T-6's for traffic at NAS Pensacola, Whiting Field, and Corpus Christi a while back before the MAIW packages with T-34Cs and the results were nasty.

Felixthreeone · Post by **Felixthreeone** » 15 Nov 2008, 23:30

Well one thing that can be said though is that it will definitely be worth waiting for. With MAIW it seems...the lnger you wait, the better the end result. I remember seeing the beta screens of the T-6II and was astounded

they looked great. Of course so does the Hornet..so we must wait and see....

Jumpshot724 · Post by **Jumpshot724** » 16 Nov 2008, 00:24

I played with a couple of non-AI T-34s and T-6's for traffic at NAS Pensacola, Whiting Field, and Corpus Christi a while back before the MAIW packages with T-34Cs and the results were nasty.

I'm guessing you were flying a slideshow?? Lol

Well one thing that can be said though is that it will definitely be worth waiting for. With MAIW it seems...the lnger you wait, the better the end result. I remember seeing the beta screens of the T-6II and was astounded they looked great. Of course so does the Hornet..so we must wait and see....

Very true. MAIW could probably bang out a package in 2 months....but the results would be piss poor. Longer you wait, the better the outcome

Ford Friendly · Post by **Ford Friendly** » 16 Nov 2008, 00:41

Jumpshot724 wrote:Very true. MAIW could probably bang out a package in 2 months....but the results would be piss poor. Longer you wait, the better the outcome

I understand the statement's sentiment but would dispute the validity of its logic.

Post by **BadPvtDan** » 16 Nov 2008, 00:57

Well, we've tried to rush packages before and usually had disastrous results.

Ford Friendly · Post by **Ford Friendly** » 16 Nov 2008, 01:02

To be absolutely clear, I didn't suggest rushing anything.

What my statement related to is that speed or lack thereof doesn't necessarily correlate to quality in one's results.

Post by **BadPvtDan** » 16 Nov 2008, 01:55

Oh no I know

flyerkg · Post by **flyerkg** » 16 Nov 2008, 04:01

With my previous configuration and a ton of non-AI trainers at the CNATRA fields, you can say slideshow indeed.

And it has been said many times that anything that MAIW puts together is worth the wait. This is one reason why I never ask how long before package A or B will be done.

MACC · Post by **MACC** » 16 Nov 2008, 11:42

Ford Friendly wrote:To be absolutely clear, I didn't suggest rushing anything.

What my statement related to is that speed or lack thereof doesn't necessarily correlate to quality in one's results.

True, sometimes it does, sometimes it dosen't.
But however long MAIW need to make the packs the standard they are at now, is how long i am prepared to wait.

Macc

harms · Post by **harms** » 16 Nov 2008, 17:24

Well what ever you guys agree on and decide to do, I promise to be patient and wait to see the outcome. I am relatively new to MAIW, but everything that I have seen so far has been great.
Thanks crew.