Eye Candy - 3d Cockpit

The easiest way would proably be to have just some (easily reachable) keyboard commands under a category "voice controlled". And if someone really wants to actually talk to their plane, they could install VAC or similar software.

 

 

Actually, some people do need a keyboard alternative since they may not be able to speak freely in front of their computer. Event tho I don't have the problem nowaday, but when i was much younger and living in a tiny appartment, yes I had - I assume some are today in the same situation than i used to be.

Actually, some people do need a keyboard alternative since they may not be able to speak freely in front of their computer. Event tho I don't have the problem nowaday, but when i was much younger and living in a tiny appartment, yes I had - I assume some are today in the same situation than i used to be.

For me, I would not be able to speak freely in front of the PC as it is in the lounge beside the telly, I'm close enough to the telly that the mic responds to it and renders the likes of teamspeak useless. and no I cannot move the PC or the telly. Thank goodness business calls on Skype are during the day when the telly is off :)

Actually, some people do need a keyboard alternative since they may not be able to speak freely in front of their computer. Event tho I don't have the problem nowaday, but when i was much younger and living in a tiny appartment, yes I had - I assume some are today in the same situation than i used to be.

 

For me, I would not be able to speak freely in front of the PC as it is in the lounge beside the telly, I'm close enough to the telly that the mic responds to it and renders the likes of teamspeak useless. and no I cannot move the PC or the telly. Thank goodness business calls on Skype are during the day when the telly is off :)

 

Dont worry guys, Whatever there is a voice command for there will be keyboard commands as well, it may work slightly different but thats just the way it is :)

 

Voice implementation hasn't started yet, so we have quite alot of wiggle room on it

 

Pman

Hello together,

I have been watching these forums since some time now, in particular because of this upcoming addon aircraft. First and foremost I wish you best luck and success with this one and I really appreciate that a promising Typhoon is in the works for a good flight simulator! I have been waiting for something like this for a long time, even if the good old EF2000 from DID is still great.

 

Concerning the ongoing discussion about simulating DVI, it's surely an interedting prospect, but it shouldn't be an overriding factor IMHO. The DVI replicates other manual cockpit functions like display selections or MDEF functions anyway so it's redundant so to speak. I'm excited to see how well the avionics systems and cockpit functionality will be mirrored. Ofcourse there are severe limitations due to classification, but I believe that there is enough unclassified information available to simulate the aircraft reasonably well.

 

It would be interesting to know how much could really be simulated by the DCS engine itself. Arguably I haven't played any DCS title yet and my present PC wouldn't be up to it anyway. LOMAC ran reasonably well and I well remember the good old days of Su-27 Flanker and its successor 2.X.

 

Keep up the good work!

 

Best regards

Indeed. A Saudi trainee was killed in 2010, the back seat instructor ejected safely.

 

 

 

Only 2, today's and one in 2010. But yes, both in Spain.

 

Actually before 2006 there has been another one in Spain as well.

Both pilots ejected safely.

Hello together,

I have been watching these forums since some time now, in particular because of this upcoming addon aircraft. First and foremost I wish you best luck and success with this one and I really appreciate that a promising Typhoon is in the works for a good flight simulator! I have been waiting for something like this for a long time, even if the good old EF2000 from DID is still great.

 

Concerning the ongoing discussion about simulating DVI, it's surely an interedting prospect, but it shouldn't be an overriding factor IMHO. The DVI replicates other manual cockpit functions like display selections or MDEF functions anyway so it's redundant so to speak. I'm excited to see how well the avionics systems and cockpit functionality will be mirrored. Ofcourse there are severe limitations due to classification, but I believe that there is enough unclassified information available to simulate the aircraft reasonably well.

 

It would be interesting to know how much could really be simulated by the DCS engine itself. Arguably I haven't played any DCS title yet and my present PC wouldn't be up to it anyway. LOMAC ran reasonably well and I well remember the good old days of Su-27 Flanker and its successor 2.X.

 

Keep up the good work!

 

Best regards

 

I think you would be pleasantly surprised by how far DCS has come since LOMAC, especially in terms of having a fully clickable cockpit.

 

I agree that there should be plenty of room with DVI, how many of the more classified functions we can include will come down to our agreements with the military, something that we will never be able to discuss publicly. Likelihood is that 99% of people will not know that something is missing and those that do can go play in a real one ;)

 

As far as I am aware our vision for DVI is that it will not be editable for security reasons. But any functions that DVI uses will have a keybound counterpart.

 

Pman

That looks freakin awesome, great work!

I think you would be pleasantly surprised by how far DCS has come since LOMAC, especially in terms of having a fully clickable cockpit.

 

I agree that there should be plenty of room with DVI, how many of the more classified functions we can include will come down to our agreements with the military, something that we will never be able to discuss publicly. Likelihood is that 99% of people will not know that something is missing and those that do can go play in a real one ;)

 

As far as I am aware our vision for DVI is that it will not be editable for security reasons. But any functions that DVI uses will have a keybound counterpart.

 

Pman

 

Yes I have noticed the progress made concerning the complexity of DCS. As an old F4 simmer that's definitely appreciated and as you aren't limited as in F4 which was great for the F-16, but restrictive for everything else. I nonetheless spent much time with it and the Typhoon there deving and flying, albeit the latter fell far to short.

 

The DVI mirrors key approach is probably the most reasonable one, straigth forward, simple and not to distracting from more important things. Of course it will not allow for the more complex functions, but some of them won't be in there anyway, so you wouldn't need the related commands.

Hey Guys!

 

Any chance of seeing some cockpit shots in the near future?

Please? :D

Please :lol::music_whistling:

Hey Guys!

 

Any chance of seeing some cockpit shots in the near future?

Please? :D

 

Please :lol::music_whistling:

 

Not in the near future no, there are some elements which we have to remove from our before we can show it in public pending the redactment agreements with the military

 

Spring 2015 I would have said you will start to see some things :)

 

Pman

Thanks, Pman!

Anybody remember this? I logged countless hours on this one with the old man when it came out. It was a battle as to who was going to fly first. Hats off to the Dads who left a life long impression on their sons in the world of aviation. I owe it all to the man upstairs now.

 

Indeed, still enjoying it nowadays from time to time. Somewhat dated, but still good and most importantly stable like a rock!

Oh man, do I! I was thinking about this one recently, and yeah, my brother and dad always fought with me for stick time on the C64 or Amiga playing Gunship! or Falcon.

Regarding DVI I hear the elite dangerous does it pretty well.

 

(See what I did).

You guys definitely have my interest!

 

Finally, a 4th gen fighter w/ AFM, ASM, & Clickable cockpit!

I found one video which may be helpful.

 

That video would be of little utility. Those guys from VEAO have what ot takes to simulate the Typhoon. The limits lay where simulation engine limits and classification of information/data are.

You guys definitely have my interest!

 

Finally, a 4th gen fighter w/ AFM, ASM, & Clickable cockpit!

 

Shouldn't the Eurofighter be considered generation 4++ instead?

Yeah I think it's called a 5th gen.

Nope, it's 4.5th generation fighter like Dassault Rafale or JAS-39 Gripen.

Some people say it's still 4th gen. And I don't know why some other say that JAS-39 is 4.5th gen plane and F-16 is 4th gen plane if Block 52+ and Block 60 offer more possibilities than Gripen...

 

Anyway, they're not 5th gen fighter, just F-22, F-35, PAK FA (Su-50), J-20, F-15SE (?) .

Planes like F-16, Rafale, JAS-39, EF-2000, Super Hornet, F-15E, Su-27, Su-30 (all versions), Su-35, MiG-35 don't belong to 5th gen fighters.

 

Designation " 4 ++ " is typical for Russia. Su-35 is 4++.

Russians have got many versions of their planes.

Su-27, Su-27SM, Su-27SM2, Su-27SM3, Su-35S ( sometimes, it's only the name ) and it makes they try to strees that SM3 is better than SM2, so if SM2 was 4+, SM3 should be 4++.

 

I don't understand their buying policy. They buy everything in different versions.

Nope, it's 4.5th generation fighter like Dassault Rafale or JAS-39 Gripen.

Some people say it's still 4th gen. And I don't know why some other say that JAS-39 is 4.5th gen plane and F-16 is 4th gen plane if Block 52+ and Block 60 offer more possibilities than Gripen...

 

Anyway, they're not 5th gen fighter, just F-22, F-35, PAK FA (Su-50), J-20, F-15SE (?) .

Planes like F-16, Rafale, JAS-39, EF-2000, Super Hornet, F-15E, Su-27, Su-30 (all versions), Su-35, MiG-35 don't belong to 5th gen fighters.

 

Designation " 4 ++ " is typical for Russia. Su-35 is 4++.

Russians have got many versions of their planes.

Su-27, Su-27SM, Su-27SM2, Su-27SM3, Su-35S ( sometimes, it's only the name ) and it makes they try to strees that SM3 is better than SM2, so if SM2 was 4+, SM3 should be 4++.

 

I don't understand their buying policy. They buy everything in different versions.

 

Thanks for the insights - that's rather useful info. :)

Alright, thanks for clearing that up.

Please stop.... just stop....

 

My wallet can't stand the idea that I will buy all the future modules in next couple years.

And my schedule comes far more too filled with wishes to have time to then fly all these modules!