rksl-rock

Hi Walter, I love the fact that you post a link to an opinion piece similar to your own from an Israeli newspaper as justification for your position. Especially when there are litterally thousands of other news articles out there that remain objective and don't speculate. I mean its not like they don't want to deflect the focus away from them is it? Anyway following your example I sat down last night and re-examined your evidence and all the supporting facts and came up with an alternative theory with as many facts and opinions as your own. Some Basic "Facts" The known Hamas leader was dying of terminal cancer He was in Dubai without escort or CP team (note the use of technical jargon and acronyms) Hamas have a vested interest in undermining Israel in the world community (since 1987) So here's the theory: It wasn't an Israeli operation. It was a Hamas one. He knew he was dying so he volunteered to "take one for the team". One final act of disruption against Israel. Hamas put together an "Amateur team" (a Walker approved fact) and conducted a hit all in clear view of the security cameras and left the country. Leaving plenty of evidence to implicate Mossad and Israel. Britain, France, Ireland and Germany complain loudly in the worlds media and Israel is embarrassed and damaged in the public eye. A fanciful idea indeed, except its not different than the conclusion drawn by our very own Walter here. Oh and any child can sit and watch "Mission Impossible" repeats and think they are an expert on covert operations. Yes Walter I know what it means and i didn't even have to google it. Does that mean I am educated beyond high school level? Nor do I feel the constant need to resort to obscure language in my posts to impress and undermine others. I'm quite confident in the facts and my own opinions that i dont need to present myself as something i am not. Anyway In the course of my re-examination last night I picked up on some interesting facts related to you and your credibility that directly support my argument that you are "Walting it up": Exhibit A: I'm, told this actually is you. Please take special note of the bio... "An officer in the Royal Naval Reserve," (I have a PDF copy if anyone wants one) Yet we have by your very own hand a statement here: Never shot a real gun in my life. Interesting conflict of info here. Especially since being a member of any reserve unit in the British military requires at least basic weapons training. You see others can take "facts" and statments and drawn conclusions. As I'm sure you remember from previous conversations, I know a lot of people who know you and have met you. Their opinions are not too far from my own. So please don't try to ridicule others when you have no expertise or credible basis other than your own fantasist assumptions to build from. Its not big and its not clever. Kind Regards Rock

No i don't think anything was inferred. It seems quite clear to me and others what they said. And I agree with them. A few people here have read the same thing into your posts and not just in this thread. I think its fair to say we all read your posts the same way. ie you are trying to imply some sort of insider knowledge that we all believe you do not have. You do it repeatedly in various threads on various topics. However I must agree that anyone can analyse the "evidence" and come up with a theory. However it takes someone with a penchant for fantasy to join all the dots and proclaim to all and sundry that it was "amateur" and "sloppy" all the while inferring some sort of superior knowledge/experience by his tone. In one of my previous offices we had a poster on the wall: "Instant Expert (open packet and wait, product will develop its own fertiliser in seconds)". Anyone can speculate, and it is of course their right. But not everyone presents their opinions as solid fact so readily. You present "evidence" from unconfirmed sources and blatant speculation and rumour mongering as solid fact. You want your version of events to be fact and its not. Like every good story facets of it maybe true, its basis maybe traced back to real events and the meagre supply of real info the media has been given. But the conclusion is drawn from assumptions and fantastic leaps of "logic" to a theory that has as much basis in fact as the average TV cop show e.g.: It could happen that way but the odds are its not really true and its been exaggerated for viewer suspense. As for my "attack", your suggestion that i am posting purely to attack you is, lets not resort to obscure language here, utter bollocks. Yes I think you are a Walt. But i also believe that the basis for your conclusions are based more in the realm of fiction than an understanding of real world covert operations, their limits, requirements or priorities. My own conclusion to all of this is quite simple. Its a Mossad job. They have previously carried out jobs like this and damned the consequences when they were found out. Was it "amateur", I don't know. Because outside of the occasional spy novel and some Close Protection Training many, many years ago I don't have the expertise to pass judgement. And I'm not the sort to try. But as others have previously said: they did the job and got out of the country. Anything else maybe something that their political Masters can live with. Who knows? Sure as shit its not someone posting on public forums. We don't bother raising an argument because we all know its pointless speculating. Unless of course you like running off into the realm of fantasy. But you seem to be desperate to cling to your fiction. Condemning everyone that offers a conflicting opinion. There really isn't anything else to say.

I'm with the VCB lads on this. Apart from this being the funniest thread I've seen in ages, nothing I've read here can be considered as more than childish playground speculation. All i can see is that the "facts" as presented by Walker come from various unconfirmed sources and even the BBC, Sky and CNN keep repeating "apparently", "allegedly", "we are told". Yet on here Walker repeats every new speculation as total fact. Considering that Dubai is in the top 10 cities of the world with the most privately owned security cameras it was inevitable they would be caught on camera. C'mon you can't walk through a shopping mall these days without being caught on at least 10 cameras. Now try that in one of the richest capitals in the middle east? What do you think will happen? @Walker - I really wish you would stop posting as though you are an expert on every topic you are as bad as plaintiff now. Once is funny and excusable but it happens so often now its not even worth making the "Walter Mitty" jokes anymore.

LOL not in Australia

The GR1/GR4 Tonkas are almost done. Im just unrwapping the last of them. There is still some modelling work to be done on the main gear and ejector seats but the models are now on a par with Bis' ArmA2 standards. After that its only texture and script work to be done.

LMAO its always been like that. It probably always will be. Do the brakes actually work on the RB44s now? Or do you still need 100m to break from 20mph in the wet?

I know quite a few RBs were sold off. But the last I heard of them they were being drawn down, with the best of the rest going to the RLC and TA. I know the RAF Reg had some they used to be used as crew vehicles for the GBAD lads (try fitting everyone in a 130 carrier and all the kit, never going to happen) but i thought they were all handed over to the Army when the Rapiers went?

MTVRs look nothing like the DAF!? Its s totally different design. The russian Kamaz are closer to it. Im sure Da12thMonkey will be able to confirm this but i doubt we bought the MTVR after lashing out on the 7277 MAN trucks we just bought. We did buy some OSHKOSH transporters (HET) but i dont think we've commited to any other type of support vehicle. Anyway all the current inventory is here: Vehicles and Equipment Brochure 2009

http://www.3dcenter.ru/blueprints/ford/ford-mondeo.gif Personally ive found that the russian sites have some pretty good resources. But you may want to track down a workshop manual. They sometimes have a decent set of schematics you can scan.

I wasnt particularly clear. Yes you can do it but the engine doesnt like it. You can see it struggle to render it. You get odd shading it you try. Its especially obvious with glass rvmats.

Im going to say no its not possible. I've tried each time we get a new O2 build. It seems the engine just cant cope with it. As Deadfast suggests you just have to copy and paste then flip the faces.

Off the top of my head i cant see a reason why it wouldnt work. But If you pm me a link to the model i'll take a look if you like.

OK quick test: Does buldozer start without any models loaded? If it does, how many faces and points is your model you are trying to view? O2/Buldozer has a vertex and poly limit before it becomes impossible to view the models. This varies depending on sharp/smooth edges but its about 20k. If you modle is higher than that, then you need to reduce your vert and poly counts.

The newer ArmA2 O2 has a slightly different file format i beleive. Mainly down to support for new texture formats and shaders. I dont know what effect that will have on and ArmA1 model but there are definatley differences between ArmA1 and Arma2 P3d format. But you can use the Export > P3D Old Format. so you shouldnt have a problem as long as you use the ArmA1 packers and texture formats

I dont see how you can say that?

You do realise dont you that the people that made those "VBS2" models are also the ones you are talking about? They are being ported and upgraded for public release by the people/teams that created them. You've already got some of the addons in that video and more are coming soon...:rolleyes:

Of course. Im going to leave one version withdoors and 2 guns. Then have another version setup for Afghanistan eg: No doors and 3x GMPGs. Gold is just too bling.... maybe platinum? :D Hopefully its going to look a lot like the real thing. I'm not the greatest 2D artist but im quite happy with how this is working out.

LMAO I didnt say it was "early wip", although in the grand scheme of things it is a very new model. In fact it is a totally new model. For various reasons I decided to completely rebuild the old model. Its much closer to the ArmA2 standard now than the ArmA/VBS standard the old model was. Its slightly higher poly than the old one, more accurate in places with a slightly more efficient mesh. It uses 2 textures for the external now but even with that its still only 10 sections in the first and pilot lods. But it still needs work, a lot of texture work and LoDs before it could be released.

Sneak preview... Preview #1 Preview #2 Preview #3 Preview #4 Preview #5 Preview #6 Obviously this is still very much WIP. The textures are place holders while we finish the model and features. I'll post a more detailed blog about it soon. PS WTF is going on with the forums and pics?

I have an incomplete TSR2 i started making for OFP many moons ago... It would need some serious work to get up to arma2 standard but if anyone wants the MLODs PM me. http://downloads.rkslstudios.info/community/IMG-Highpatrol.jpg http://downloads.rkslstudios.info/community/tsr2_1.jpg http://downloads.rkslstudios.info/community/tsr2_2.jpg They have been slightly "modernised" to include an FGR4 and F3 version but could eaisly be reverted.

As the man says: Seriously though im still sorting the helos. OK Mini update: The Eurofighter still needs some cockpit and texture work. BWMod is very kindly helping out on the latter. The Harrier really is a total mess and needs quite a lot of work to sort. Far more than i first thought. But The uprated Lynx and Pumas should be out very soon. The Seakings and a completely new Merlin should follow soon after. There a re few blog/updates due soon too. As Baldrick says: "I have a cunning plan!"

I take it you like being totally immune to all missiles. You know that isn't at all realistic. The RKSL System was designed to be realistic. You need to actually take evasive action when you get a launch warning. You cant just fly around and not expect to get shot at. I realise there is a certain mindset in gamers that doesn't want to get shot down but most people we asked seemed to want realism over fantasy.

I know thats the theory, but I've seen ArmA2 run like a 486DX2 on a i7 920 desktop. I'm hoping someone that has actually tried it will pop up. So far Ive heard good things about other games but we all know ArmA2 is very CPU dependant and clock speed is key.

Its been down all week mate. It is back up depending on whose DNS server you use but give it 24hrs and it should be normal service as usual.

Does anyone have any experience of ArmA2 on i7-720M based Laptops? Im in the market for a new Laptop but i still need it to run ArmA2 moderately well. Any info would be appreciated.I'm a tad concerned with the low clock speeds so im wondering if a Core2Duo @ 2.53Ghz might be better.