Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[NOT CORRECT FOR YEAR] GBU-54 for Hornet ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Swiftwin9s View Post
    I can think of a few other weapons that are [NOT CORRECT FOR YEAR] that we have in dcs anyway.
    Exactly.

    And yet we have a Hornets flying in missions that are from future, or are from the history, against enemies that are not anymore in service or use on year Hornet is claimed to model....

    Solution is simple.

    You add all the weapons to DCS. You stamp them with the fiscal year they were in service for filtering. And you add weapons to all modules that are technically capable use them.
    You make default official weapons loadouts as what has been used by the country for the task.
    And then if players do not use the year/country filter, they get access to all weapons and can make a custom loadouts with them.

    Nothing unrealistic is happening more than already now, and actually be more realistic than now argument "this module models year 2005 only".
    i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
    i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by Eldur View Post
      Then the DSMS for the A-10 is clearly wrong or, which is more likely, it is possible to put a different store type to the inventory on the DTS which makes sense if you might also carry unguided rockets at the same time so the DSMS doesn't pack them together. But it's not mandatory for the system to work at all.
      I think this is basically correct, although APKWS has some sort of MIL-STD connector that may be used to change laser codes on the fly, for what it would require some sort of minor SW upgrade in the a/c. I guess this operational delta has been given to the Charlies, albeit not being strictly neccesary

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by amalahama View Post
        I think this is basically correct, although APKWS has some sort of MIL-STD connector that may be used to change laser codes on the fly, for what it would require some sort of minor SW upgrade in the a/c.
        AFAIK the laser code is set using dials on the side of the WGU-59/B body before it is loaded into the launcher.



        It may be desirable to upgrade the system software as the WGU-59/B guidance unit adds 9lb (4.1 kg) to the missile's weight i.e. the missile may have a slightly different flight profile than standard and the SMS will need the weight to calculate weight & balance, etc.
        Last edited 09-28-2020, 02:33 PM.
        i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 32GB DDR4, RTX2070 Super 8GB, 1TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 1+1TB SSD, MSFFB2 joystick, X52 Pro Throttle, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
          Exactly.

          And yet we have a Hornets flying in missions that are from future, or are from the history, against enemies that are not anymore in service or use on year Hornet is claimed to model....

          Solution is simple.

          You add all the weapons to DCS. You stamp them with the fiscal year they were in service for filtering. And you add weapons to all modules that are technically capable use them.
          You make default official weapons loadouts as what has been used by the country for the task.
          And then if players do not use the year/country filter, they get access to all weapons and can make a custom loadouts with them.

          Nothing unrealistic is happening more than already now, and actually be more realistic than now argument "this module models year 2005 only".

          so much +1 for this

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
            Exactly.

            And yet we have a Hornets flying in missions that are from future, or are from the history, against enemies that are not anymore in service or use on year Hornet is claimed to model....

            Solution is simple.

            You add all the weapons to DCS. You stamp them with the fiscal year they were in service for filtering. And you add weapons to all modules that are technically capable use them.
            You make default official weapons loadouts as what has been used by the country for the task.
            And then if players do not use the year/country filter, they get access to all weapons and can make a custom loadouts with them.

            Nothing unrealistic is happening more than already now, and actually be more realistic than now argument "this module models year 2005 only".

            +2

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
              Exactly.

              And yet we have a Hornets flying in missions that are from future, or are from the history, against enemies that are not anymore in service or use on year Hornet is claimed to model....

              Solution is simple.

              You add all the weapons to DCS. You stamp them with the fiscal year they were in service for filtering. And you add weapons to all modules that are technically capable use them.
              You make default official weapons loadouts as what has been used by the country for the task.
              And then if players do not use the year/country filter, they get access to all weapons and can make a custom loadouts with them.

              Nothing unrealistic is happening more than already now, and actually be more realistic than now argument "this module models year 2005 only".
              +1!
              Portugal
              Col. Bruno "Fonzie" F. (on DCS)

              sigpic

              "About carrier ops: The younger pilots are still quite capable of holding their heads forward against the forces. The older ones have been doing this too long and know better; sore necks make for poor sleep.'

              PC: I7 4790K 4.5ghz | 32GB RAM | Zotac GTX 1080Ti 11Gb DDR5x | Water cooler NZXT AIO x56 | SSD´s | Valve Index.

              Comment


                #27
                No, you don't. You don't add all the weapons, and you don't add all the weapons to every plane. Why? Because it puts every plane in a never ending state of development.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by BarTzi View Post
                  No, you don't. You don't add all the weapons, and you don't add all the weapons to every plane. Why? Because it puts every plane in a never ending state of development.
                  Not all of the weapons. Just the ones that are correct for the airframe. Just dependent on mission year.

                  Nobody talks about getting a Pheonix on the Hornet. No talk down by generalizing please

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by BarTzi View Post
                    No, you don't. You don't add all the weapons, and you don't add all the weapons to every plane. Why? Because it puts every plane in a never ending state of development.
                    So, you fly Hornet in missions that is not in year 2005?
                    How about, do you fly Hornet, Warthog or Viper same time?
                    Okay, and you have a what weapons already in the Hornet?
                    i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                    i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by Andartu View Post
                      Not all of the weapons. Just the ones that are correct for the airframe. Just dependent on mission year.

                      Nobody talks about getting a Pheonix on the Hornet. No talk down by generalizing please
                      It's not generalizing. You expect any future weapon that is added to DCS to be added to each airframe that could carry it.
                      This puts some modules at a never ending state of development. It doesn't work like that. There's a point in time where you go from developing the code, to maintaining the code and that's it.

                      Comment


                        #31
                        Originally posted by BarTzi View Post
                        It's not generalizing. You expect any future weapon that is added to DCS to be added to each airframe that could carry it.
                        This puts some modules at a never ending state of development. It doesn't work like that. There's a point in time where you go from developing the code, to maintaining the code and that's it.
                        Yes when the weapon could be carried by an airframe it should be available to that certain airframe.

                        And as we know the Hornet is not yet in the state of maintaining the code, by far.

                        Also.. really, there is not an endless list of weapons per airframe, it is limited (so no Phoenix for the Hornet!).

                        But again yes, what belongs to a thing, has to be on the thing, and that is it.

                        And when it takes development time then yeah of course, it takes development time. Heck we all here are very well trained in the discipline of waiting. Even when it´s really not fun though

                        But to fully refuse something with something like "Not Correct For Year" is simply the wrong turn if you want to satisfy your costumers. Especially when a good amount of the user base likes to have a certain (and even not unrealistic) toy for a product they could have bought nearly two AAA titles for.

                        When they show us the candy on frames like the A-10C II and the Harrier that also realistically could be used by the Hornet, they cannot expect us to hold back and say "well ok".

                        And sorry, just me personally, I am not interested to buy those just to use certain toys that I could have on "My" frame. Those are completely different aircraft that I don´t want to fly.. I have the Hog (really great module, was my first), but nowadays I can´t stand it´s low speed anymore, no matter what i´ts other qualities are. So I fly exclusively the Hornet. But this is of course just me and my special quirk

                        Hell I just want the GBU-54 for the Hornet and not Ace Combat or a Death Star

                        They do not deny me in the editor to set up missions in 2015 with a legacy Hornet and a Navy paintjob in PG or Syria. And that is good.. so please don´t argue with "Not Correct For Year". It´s all mixed up anyways, in the end it´s all about imagination (Holy moly I hope i don´t set the idea to limit the year for the Hornet to 2005 now Sorry but that would be a lame way for ending the thread ).

                        As Fri13 said.. bound to mission year or even better have and just don´t use/ban it if you think it is not correct for you.

                        Everyone could be happy and have some cake and these discussions would be very much needless

                        edit: typos
                        Last edited 10-01-2020, 02:49 PM.

                        Comment


                          #32
                          Seeing as they collapsed on the viper and gave us triple rack mavericks. Then it would seem fair to have the GBU-54 on the hornet. However, I cant find anything anywhere that shows the gbu-54 to be rated on the F/A-18C of any type. I can see plenty in regards to it being a supported platform for the F/A-18E/F. Does anyone have anything that demonstrates a charlie hornet using this bomb?
                          ASUS ROG Strix X570-E MB | Ryzen 7 3800x | Gigabyte RTX 2070 | 32 GB G.Skill TridentZ 3600 MHz DDR4 | Corsair H100i GTX AIO | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB m.2 Nvme | TM Warthog HOTAS | MFG Crosswind | Track IR | Pixio PX275h 1440p |

                          Comment


                            #33
                            Originally posted by Swiftwin9s View Post
                            We are sold a mid-2000s hornet right? Yet we have SLAM which retired in 1999, and Walleye which retired in 1990s. Not to mention the AAMs, but I will ignore those.

                            I'm pretty sure the [NOT CORRECT FOR YEAR] applies to the software and not the retirement/introduction years of weapon.


                            Lot 20s from 2005 still had the logic implemented for launching SLAMs and dropping Walleyes, as these are in the documentation available publicly. Just look for the Hornet tactical pocket guide.

                            Comment


                              #34
                              Originally posted by dudeman17 View Post
                              Seeing as they collapsed on the viper and gave us triple rack mavericks. Then it would seem fair to have the GBU-54 on the hornet. However, I cant find anything anywhere that shows the gbu-54 to be rated on the F/A-18C of any type. I can see plenty in regards to it being a supported platform for the F/A-18E/F. Does anyone have anything that demonstrates a charlie hornet using this bomb?
                              After a quick google search I found those two mentions:

                              Royal Malaysian Air Force F/A-18D:

                              https://www.nst.com.my/news/exclusiv...-rmafs-hornets

                              Yes ok it is a "D" Hornet.. but still..

                              And this one:

                              http://www.seapower-digital.com/seap...ticleId1297133

                              ↑↑↑↑:

                              "JDAM and Laser JDAM are integrated with B-1B, B-2A, B-52H, AV-8B, A-10, F-15E, F/A18A+/C/C+/D/E/F, F-16C/D and F-22A aircraft. Follow-on integration efforts are under way to evaluate compatibility with the F-35A/B/C and MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle. Additionally, the Navy is on track to deliver a GBU-56, 2,000-pound JDAM penetrator with PLGS, to the fleet in 2020."


                              Correct me if I totally understand this wrong..

                              Comment


                                #35
                                Originally posted by BarTzi View Post
                                It's not generalizing. You expect any future weapon that is added to DCS to be added to each airframe that could carry it.

                                Yes... Why not?

                                If it is technically capable use it (point, most are not) then you would use it in the time of is available.

                                This puts some modules at a never ending state of development. It doesn't work like that. There's a point in time where you go from developing the code, to maintaining the code and that's it.
                                If you add the weapon to DCS, it has basically two modes AFAIK.

                                1) A 3D model hanging in the aircraft itself, easily to be modded even so, like a Mavericks or Hellfires on KA-50. AND THEN system modeling in cockpit how to use them (again, possible use something existing).

                                2) When the weapon is launched, it becomes own entity in DCS simulation and it will follow the programming of existing weapon by DCS SDK. Example a module developer AIM-9 version becomes at launch as ED AIM-9 version.

                                This is not about all weapons, all modules and everything. Because not all weapons are backward compatible. Not so weapons can be used on all our many aircrafts.
                                There are these special weapons like in real world that are backward compatible! Tested, used, done, completed....

                                This is not about "now you need to add R-27ER to MiG-19P!" or "AIM-120 on F-14B" kind arguments.

                                But argument that are:

                                1) Module is completed and will not be touched by any means...
                                2) Our module presents it only as in year 2005...

                                Are illogical and so on invalid.

                                Because software evolve and is needed to be changed all the time when it is wanted to be changed for some other reasons.
                                If you are going to sell your product, you must maintain and develop is further.

                                This doesn't mean that F/A-18C Lot 20 must be transformed as F/A-18F Lot 26 Block 3.

                                It means that weapons should be handled separately from the modules itself, as additional assets in the DCS simulator, regardless is the aircraft using it a AI-only or client Module.
                                i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                                i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                                Comment


                                  #36
                                  Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                  And yet we have a Hornets flying in missions that are from future, or are from the history, against enemies that are not anymore in service or use on year Hornet is claimed to model...
                                  Because we don't have a choice, at all. We physically can't make a mission that is set in 2005 for the Hornet, it is basically all by itself. We have to have things time travelling, or not have a peer-to-peer mission, there isn't an alternative. We don't have any true post-2000s REDFOR aircraft (nor are we likely to get any), and it's only really the Tomcat that fits the era of the other assets.

                                  DCS is all over the place, when it comes to era and there's very little consistency when you do find it. For those that are interested in missions that as far as the equipment is concerned is historically authentic, this is not a good thing.

                                  The overwhelming majority of assets are mid-to-late Cold War, Soviet-era stuff. Basically the 70s up to the very early 90s. The only peer-to-peer stuff we have is WWII, the F-86F and the MiG-15bis, the F-5E-3 and the MiG-21bis and from there it basically stops and some degree of time travelling by at least a decade has to be done from here on in, that is if you want a peer-to-peer mission of a consistent era.

                                  Most BLUFOR modules however are post-2000s, with the new A-10C it reaches into the 2010s. Meanwhile REDFOR is still stuck in the late-80s at best and that's the simplified stuff. In terms of full-fidelity fixed wing, the most modern we get is from 1972.

                                  Sometimes approximations aren't too bad where differences are insignificant (like the F-15C), but sometimes they are more significant (like arguably the F-16).

                                  But bringing up "oh but if you want to be strict about the year, you're being a hypocrite if you set it to anything else or whatever" is moot because I literally don't have a choice. I don't have an 80s/90s Hornet and I don't have 2005 REDFOR, I don't have another option. I would love an F-16A Block 15 or a C Block 25/40. And I would love a MiG-29M even if it is basically a prototype/demonstrator, but I don't, nor are any planned so I'm left with assets that in terms of era are inconsistent, at the very least a 20 year gap for the F-16 and F/A-18.

                                  Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                  Solution is simple.
                                  This isn't a solution at all, for newer weapons it makes the problem I'm describing even worse than it is. If anything we need more historical versions from the 80s to early 90s, going more modern just increases the era gap.

                                  The problem is lack of historical BLUFOR aircraft, like earlier blocks - we only really have the F-14 and the F-5E-3 here, maybe the F-4E but it seems it's on indefinite hold right now.

                                  Going further into the future with newer weapons increases the disparity not reduces it, and this is on top of it not being representative of the aircraft it's supposed to be. Again, full-fidelity REDFOR fixed-wing stops at 1972, BLUFOR is now post 2012, a 40 year gap, the same age difference as the F-4E and the F-22. Air defences in DCS stop before reaching the 90s, so a ~20 year gap, which is the same difference as the Me-262 and the F-4E.

                                  Seeing the issue?

                                  Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                  You add all the weapons to DCS. You stamp them with the fiscal year they were in service for filtering. And you add weapons to all modules that are technically capable use them.
                                  So weapons that don't mandate any kind of avionics update to be utilised, so APKWS and what else?

                                  And if we're going to field APKWS on our Hornet, that means the Hornet is for all intents and purposes a 2005 one, but has access to a 2012 weapon, but nothing else is representative so not only are the eras not consistent with other, now the aircraft aren't too...

                                  Also, how far do you take this? JASSM for the F-16C? AIM-120C-7/D, GBU-39B/B, Harpoon Block II+, AIM-9X Block II, AGM-88E? Meanwhile we don't have our current weapons implemented or present?

                                  Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                  You make default official weapons loadouts as what has been used by the country for the task.
                                  And then if players do not use the year/country filter, they get access to all weapons and can make a custom loadouts with them.
                                  A brilliant idea, especially if we could get full names and variants for our equipment i.e AIM-120C-5 for instance.

                                  Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                  Nothing unrealistic is happening more than already now, and actually be more realistic than now argument "this module models year 2005 only".
                                  Well, what we should be doing is striving for more aircraft variants, going by "well this is unrealistic, so this should be allowed to be unrealistic" shouldn't be what we're doing. And again with the year thing, we don't have a choice, and DCS should accurately represent the aircraft it's based on, for the year it's supposed to be, but let you have free reign over the scenarios - doing anything else would naturally mean getting rid of the mission editor.
                                  Last edited 10-01-2020, 07:31 PM.
                                  Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk
                                  Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

                                  System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

                                  VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

                                  Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

                                  Comment


                                    #37
                                    Originally posted by toilet2000 View Post
                                    Lot 20s from 2005 still had the logic implemented for launching SLAMs and dropping Walleyes, as these are in the documentation available publicly. Just look for the Hornet tactical pocket guide.
                                    And the same Lot 20 without modifications is capable launch APKWS when it became available as it was designed to be backward compatible weapon requiring no modifications to platform.

                                    How was GBU-54, is it technically possible be carried and used without modifications in last years of hornet service?
                                    i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                                    i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                                    Comment


                                      #38
                                      Originally posted by Northstar98 View Post
                                      But bringing up "oh but if you want to be strict about the year, you're being a hypocrite if you set it to anything else or whatever" is moot because I literally don't have a choice.
                                      It is not moot, but totally valid point, and you have a choice, you don't fly against those units unless you have an AI to fly more modern ones or you can't come up with scenario that matches those units... Be it a kazakhstan air force or some other that still operates with such aircrafts....

                                      If it makes things more difficult, then so be it... Still a valid point.

                                      I don't have an 80s/90s Hornet and I don't have 2005 REDFOR, I don't have another option.
                                      As said, make what you can with limited options, but if not realistically possible, bad thing.

                                      I would love an F-16A Block 15 or a C Block 25/40. And I would love a MiG-29M even if it is basically a prototype/demonstrator, but I don't, nor are any planned so I'm left with assets that in terms of era are inconsistent, at the very least a 20 year gap for the F-16 and F/A-18.
                                      So bending the time rules regardless is not realistic, but denying a technically compatible and usable weapons to be used for proper airframes in missions where they would be available is then a bad thing and shouldn't be allowed?

                                      This isn't a solution at all, for newer weapons it makes the problem I'm describing even worse than it is. If anything we need more historical versions from the 80s to early 90s, going more modern just increases the era gap.
                                      It doesn't make problems, you simply do not make any missions past the year the weapons are on service, you keep them disabled and they don't matter to you.

                                      The problem is lack of historical BLUFOR aircraft, like earlier blocks - we only really have the F-14 and the F-5E-3 here, maybe the F-4E but it seems it's on indefinite hold right now.
                                      F-4 will come, MiG-23MLA is coming, MiG-29A exist, A-10A is there, F-15C is old, Sea Harrier is coming... There will be more matching aircrafts in future, but it doesn't matter to modern times eras...

                                      Going further into the future with newer weapons increases the disparity not reduces it, and this is on top of it not being representative of the aircraft it's supposed to be.
                                      So, our Hornet is not same in 2020-2021 as in DCS?
                                      USN can have it out of service in boneyard, but there are countries operating that exact model even today, and next 10 years...

                                      Again, full-fidelity REDFOR fixed-wing stops at 1972, BLUFOR is now post 2012, a 40 year gap, the same age difference as the F-4E and the F-22. Air defences in DCS stop before reaching the 90s, so a ~20 year gap, which is the same difference as the Me-262 and the F-4E.

                                      Seeing the issue?
                                      Yes, the issue is that forum is full of people wanting ultra realism by denying weapons that are compatible, but are not willing to accept that they love unrealistic gameplay when it makes them feel good...

                                      So weapons that don't mandate any kind of avionics update to be utilised, so APKWS and what else?
                                      Well, future tells more... Maybe some weapons manufacturers invent new weapons and sell them to current operators in the future?

                                      And if we're going to field APKWS on our Hornet, that means the Hornet is for all intents and purposes a 2005 one, but has access to a 2012 weapon, but nothing else is representative so not only are the eras not consistent with other, now the aircraft aren't too...
                                      But it is not intended to be 2005 year... It is the variant of that era that can be flown 2005+ missions, not restricted to 2005 only as some people want to argue (and yet they don't as they think they have no choices).

                                      Also, how far do you take this? JASSM for the F-16C? AIM-120C-7/D, GBU-39B/B, Harpoon Block II+, AIM-9X Block II, AGM-88E? Meanwhile we don't have our current weapons implemented or present?
                                      How far? So far as you can technically present them to be possible....

                                      So either we deny technically anyone ever flying any module outside the mission year that module is presenting (developers pick that one year, one year only), or we accept technically capable weapons on all airframes and let the gamers decide what is their simulator....

                                      It is not about "AGM-88 to Su-27S too!"...


                                      A brilliant idea, especially if we could get full names and variants for our equipment i.e AIM-120C-5 for instance.
                                      Full technical names, years and all to be used in filters and such... Already done mostly.

                                      and DCS should accurately represent the aircraft it's based on, for the year it's supposed to be, but let you have free reign over the scenarios - doing anything else would naturally mean getting rid of the mission editor.
                                      So arguing with logic that is broken to begin with....

                                      It is 100% realistic that 2017 (IIRC) Our exact hornet flew combat missions with APKWS. No modifications, no changes, updates etc...

                                      In 2030 the same hornet is still in service on many countries. Likely without any upgrades at all, but flying with new compatible weapons.

                                      And correct if I am wrong, doesn't even today some countries operate with MiG-21Bis, even MiG-15Bis?

                                      USN retired our hornet already, but there are current operators for that same one....

                                      So either we have acceptance for realistic weapons loadouts, flexibility in the years, or we go full ahead to non-negotiable single year modules without any changes to mix or alter years, countries, branches, politics in Weapons or aircrafts.
                                      Meaning, we forget such things as "simulator".

                                      "Our dream is to offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible."

                                      As only way that dream will happen is that ED restricts everything to one year, example 1989 and nothing outside that is not allowed by any means...

                                      GBU-54 is technically not a unrealistic weapon AFAIK. APKWS defineatly ain't.

                                      Both are already in the game, programmed, modeled, textured, ready.... All that it requires is that some people stop being stubborn for realism and a fact that DCs is just a game.
                                      i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                                      i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                                      Comment


                                        #39
                                        Isn't that a bit contradictory? to Tag it as (NOT CORRECT FOR YEAR)
                                        A year ago, Wags mentioned that they don't have any data about the GBU-54 but he didn't mention that this is unrealistic.
                                        but as we see Right now They have DATA so why not now?!.
                                        Please ED make it happen!
                                        Thanks
                                        screen:
                                        Attached Files

                                        Comment


                                          #40
                                          Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                          It is not moot, but totally valid point, and you have a choice, you don't fly against those units unless you have an AI to fly more modern ones or you can't come up with scenario that matches those units... Be it a kazakhstan air force or some other that still operates with such aircrafts....

                                          If it makes things more difficult, then so be it... Still a valid point.



                                          As said, make what you can with limited options, but if not realistically possible, bad thing.



                                          So bending the time rules regardless is not realistic, but denying a technically compatible and usable weapons to be used for proper airframes in missions where they would be available is then a bad thing and shouldn't be allowed?



                                          It doesn't make problems, you simply do not make any missions past the year the weapons are on service, you keep them disabled and they don't matter to you.



                                          F-4 will come, MiG-23MLA is coming, MiG-29A exist, A-10A is there, F-15C is old, Sea Harrier is coming... There will be more matching aircrafts in future, but it doesn't matter to modern times eras...



                                          So, our Hornet is not same in 2020-2021 as in DCS?
                                          USN can have it out of service in boneyard, but there are countries operating that exact model even today, and next 10 years...



                                          Yes, the issue is that forum is full of people wanting ultra realism by denying weapons that are compatible, but are not willing to accept that they love unrealistic gameplay when it makes them feel good...



                                          Well, future tells more... Maybe some weapons manufacturers invent new weapons and sell them to current operators in the future?



                                          But it is not intended to be 2005 year... It is the variant of that era that can be flown 2005+ missions, not restricted to 2005 only as some people want to argue (and yet they don't as they think they have no choices).



                                          How far? So far as you can technically present them to be possible....

                                          So either we deny technically anyone ever flying any module outside the mission year that module is presenting (developers pick that one year, one year only), or we accept technically capable weapons on all airframes and let the gamers decide what is their simulator....

                                          It is not about "AGM-88 to Su-27S too!"...




                                          Full technical names, years and all to be used in filters and such... Already done mostly.



                                          So arguing with logic that is broken to begin with....

                                          It is 100% realistic that 2017 (IIRC) Our exact hornet flew combat missions with APKWS. No modifications, no changes, updates etc...

                                          In 2030 the same hornet is still in service on many countries. Likely without any upgrades at all, but flying with new compatible weapons.

                                          And correct if I am wrong, doesn't even today some countries operate with MiG-21Bis, even MiG-15Bis?

                                          USN retired our hornet already, but there are current operators for that same one....

                                          So either we have acceptance for realistic weapons loadouts, flexibility in the years, or we go full ahead to non-negotiable single year modules without any changes to mix or alter years, countries, branches, politics in Weapons or aircrafts.
                                          Meaning, we forget such things as "simulator".

                                          "Our dream is to offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible."

                                          As only way that dream will happen is that ED restricts everything to one year, example 1989 and nothing outside that is not allowed by any means...

                                          GBU-54 is technically not a unrealistic weapon AFAIK. APKWS defineatly ain't.

                                          Both are already in the game, programmed, modeled, textured, ready.... All that it requires is that some people stop being stubborn for realism and a fact that DCs is just a game.


                                          Thank you very much for saving me from answering all of this

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X