Jump to content

DCS F-35A


Wags

Recommended Posts

When it comes to the avionics. It doesn't matter how many line of code the real F-35 needs in it's software. It's two completely different things.

 

 

Lines of Code Simulating Lines of Code.....:megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Lines of Code Simulating Lines of Code.....:megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

 

This could open a entirely new philosophical debate in this thread.

 

It has been stipulated that as computer simulations become ever more powerful, you could extrapolate that progress until the simulation can simulate reality. Giving rise to the notion that reality is a simulation running on some computer above and beyond our realm of interaction.

 

/explodes.

 

Oh yeah sorry, F35A... erm. Seems like a good idea and I'll look forward to seeing it in action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To touch on what Skatezilla and a few others have mentioned, it's not just about having an aircraft that can dominate the air.

 

The mission designer has control.

 

Imagine a mission where there are numerous SAMs guarding a target, say a Nuke Plant. There is a large amount of enemy BARCAPs in the air.

 

Conventional AC would have a very difficult time with the setup I have in mind. The mission could be designed where the F-35s are required to get in, hit the target and get out without being detected.

 

I can see scenarios where the F-35 will be great and scenarios where it will be overkill. Don't trash the developers for poor mission design. The Devs are simply giving us tools, we decide what and how to employ them...

  • Like 1

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is after all just a Simulation based on a representation on said aircraft, doesn't have to be extremely accurate..:thumbup:

" any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back, "  W Forbes

"Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts,"  Winston Churchill

" He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," 

MSI z690MPG DDR4 || i914900k|| ddr4-64gb PC3200 || MSI RTX 4070Ti|Game1300w|Win10x64| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2|| MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Samsung||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
It does throw into question what is defined by simulator other wise DCS may as well be DCA, digital combat approximator.

 

 

I think most on this forum are happy with the A-10c, and as wags has stated it is not 100% accurate. :music_whistling:

 

Improvise adapt overcome ;)

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Yes, we are so excited by the opportunity the DCS has given us. We want to, in the future, build Taiwan and the coast of China. We are also looking forward to building a WWII game in the Pacific. F4U & Zero would be our first aircraft. I do believe its smart to build in pairs. Every David needs a Goliath...

 

Ok, so what fighter are you releasing for the F-35A's Goliath? :)

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most on this forum are happy with the A-10c, and as wags has stated it is not 100% accurate. :music_whistling:

 

Thats known for long time. It was always said that the accuracy is about 90-95%.

 

I doubt that this is possible for a public F-35 sim at the moment. (I hope I am wrong ;))


Edited by sorcer3r
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats known for long time. It was always said that the accuracy is about 90-95%.

 

I doubt that this is possible for an public F-35 sim at the moment. (I hope I am wrong ;))

 

With the information that is readily available on the F-35 project, I strongly believe that a team could get to 80%+ in realism.

 

Without knowing the technical knowledge and data access they have, they could easily get close to the 90% mark.

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is after all just a Simulation based on a representation on said aircraft, doesn't have to be extremely accurate..:thumbup:

 

Uh, yes it does. The whole point of a simulator is to represent the said aircraft to be extremely accurate, be it the FM or Avionics and looks of the aircraft. I agree with the F35 staying with hawks although these guys could pull it off the information is not out there like the older aircraft because of certain classifications. I prefer to fly an aircraft that has properly been researched than someone taking a wild guess. I don't know about you but I cant stand arcade flight games like WOWp as soon as they integrate arcade with simulators things fall apart that's what the F35 is going to do in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 pages of moans and adulations is just a wee bitty too much to stomach so forgiveness requested if this has been answered by representatives of the Dev team, but here goes:

 

On a scale of 1-10, or as a percentage of 100, just how accurately simulated will the module be?

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does throw into question what is defined by simulator other wise DCS may as well be DCA, digital combat approximator.

 

My point exactly. There are so many incredible aircraft out there that are already largely declassified that I don't see the need to model one based around speculation.

 

There might be a couple of videos of the avionics in the public domain but what about when you dig in deeper?

 

How about instantaneous/sustained turn rates? How does the degradation of one system affect another? What about increased radar cross section and induced drag from opening the weapon bay doors? How does it 'feel'? How does the fly by wire system interpret the pilots inputs? How do the autopilot modes work?

 

Even if Lockheed Martin are officially backing this, I think it's incredibly unlikely they'd want to give away data that could potentially be used to find a chink in the F-35's armour so to speak.

 

The things that makes DCS so great as a simulation is leaning about all these complex systems that interact with one another and finding a way to exploit them to your advantage and overcome their weaknesses.

 

Do you think Lockheed will want to put that information out in the open?

 

I want simulation, not approximation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer to fly an aircraft that has properly been researched than someone taking a wild guess.

Well you're not getting the second thing.

 

I don't know about you but I cant stand arcade flight games like WOWp as soon as they integrate arcade with simulators things fall apart that's what the F35 is going to do in my opinion.
Your opinion isn't very strong then.

 

Arcade game in this case is quite honestly ridiculous. Just because we don't know how many bolts are on the airframe, that doesn't turn it into an arcade game. Hide the cockpit and the airframe and take it for a flight and you'd probably never call it an arcade plane. Because it will fly like a DCS aircraft, even if it doesn't fly like the F-35 (and that's not off the table either). I also hate arcade games, which is why I don't want to see the F-35 in HAWX. I want to see it in DCS so I can enjoy it.

 

Should this go through to the end, we're getting a sim, whether people like it or not. Everyone is going to be able to ignore this sim whether they like it or not. I'll be flying missions as realistic as those for the A-10, and missions just as challenging, if not more so. It's going to be really, really hard to turn this into an arcade flyer. But it's not surprising to see the backlash, people abuse the terms 'simulator' and 'arcade' all the time.

 

What about increased radar cross section and induced drag from opening the weapon bay doors?

And the current aircraft? What happens to your RCS when you're full of holes? Or a panel comes off?

 

How does it 'feel'? How does the fly by wire system interpret the pilots inputs? How do the autopilot modes work?

Where are the people ashamed of A-10 and it's IFF and ECM?

 

Even if Lockheed Martin are officially backing this, I think it's incredibly unlikely they'd want to give away data that could potentially be used to find a chink in the F-35's armour so to speak.

I doubt any air force using a plane that's still in service feels the same.

 

The things that makes DCS so great as a simulation is leaning about all these complex systems that interact with one another and finding a way to exploit them to your advantage and overcome their weaknesses.

And I don't see why we can't do that with this plane.

 

 

 

I want simulation, not approximation.

That translates to I want an approximation, not approximation.

 

The two words are the same.


Edited by Exorcet

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the current aircraft? What happens to your RCS when you're full of holes? Or a panel comes off?

I'd say more: external stores don't affect RCS in sim.

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

 

I want simulation, not approximation.

 

I doubt there is many... if any military aircraft with 100% data available, either declassified or just available in general. They might have just as tough a time finding the technical info on the WWII birds they choose (based on availability not on being classified of course)

 

Bottom line ends up being this, all we can do is wait and see... how many of use are going to jump into a F-35A sim and say, wow... this isnt very accurate...

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If A Mission Designer Puts an A-10C And F-35A in the same mission or on opposite sides, then that mission designer needs to check out and go back to Fighters Anthology.

 

Same with the P-51, if he's Putting P-51's in Missions with F-15s or other Modern Jets Flying Wing or Opposition, Time for that Mission Designer to Call it Quits.

 

Mission Designers should keep aircraft to the proper time frame.

 

This isnt the Final Countdown, we dont need missions with F-14s splashing Zeros.

 

To touch on what Skatezilla and a few others have mentioned, it's not just about having an aircraft that can dominate the air.

 

The mission designer has control...

 

but in the mission: players have choice to stay or leave that mission if the forces on sides are not balanced

so i would not worry about it - all the players will leave that mission quickly if red side will get A-10s only and blue side will get F-35s only

sign-pic4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about you but I cant stand arcade flight games like WOWp as soon as they integrate arcade with simulators things fall apart that's what the F35 is going to do in my opinion.

 

There's really nothing for you to be concerned about. It's a 3rd party developer and if they make something which doesn't fit or is lacking sufficient fidelity then a) people probably won't buy it, b) mission designers just won't include it in the available planes and c) ED probably wouldn't even allow it to release under the DCS stable. ED need 3rd party developers to grow and get planes churned out in a reasonable time - if KI can do a solid job here then it's good for ED and all the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say more: external stores don't affect RCS in sim.

 

sad, you must change it :P honestly, you should tell this to all Alex in your company :)

 

you should implement RCS factor to all weapons, fuel tanks and pylons - and add the total loadout RCS to RCS of aircraft :thumbup:

sign-pic4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line ends up being this, all we can do is wait and see... how many of use are going to jump into a F-35A sim and say, wow... this isnt very accurate...

 

Not necessarily.

 

The third-party Dev in question can tell us NOW how accurate it is going to be. Have they done so?

 

If so, where?

 

If not why not?

 

Sure as sugar-beans they'll know at this stage how accurate it's going to be - tell us, I want to know :D

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sad, you must change it :P honestly, you should tell this to all Alex in your company :)

 

you should implement RCS factor to all weapons, fuel tanks and pylons - and add the total loadout RCS to RCS of aircraft :thumbup:

Already in the wishlist. Though you described the simplest way to implement. IRL there are lots of reflections, interference, etc.

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 pages of moans and adulations is just a wee bitty too much to stomach so forgiveness requested if this has been answered by representatives of the Dev team, but here goes:

 

On a scale of 1-10, or as a percentage of 100, just how accurately simulated will the module be?

 

Uhm... i think my project is more ahead than the F-35.... and mine isn't covered by military secret!

 

18-Connessioni-Elettriche.jpg

04-Ingranaggio-Elastico-Leva-Avviamento.jpg

15-Trasmissioni.jpg

01-Carter-Cilindro.jpg

10-Cofani-Bauletto.jpg

 

Et voilà!! The Piaggio Vespa! I'll do the 200E model!

 

Hope someone who want simulation will buy it ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...