Typhoon Research Trip - Feb 2015 - Update

We will be able to fly in OTAN formation with mirage-2000,Typhoon and Super hornet!!

Poor Su-27 and mig29 sad time online.

day01 purchase for sure

F-15E though........

#HowLongMustWeWait ??

Thanks for the update, so this will be the third time the Typhoon will be redone! It sounds great, i think Veao is going to be hardly judged by this module so i think its the best decision to make it as realistic and high fidelity as possible, its a very very important module.

Thanks for any update on the process, after mastering the A10 at 80% and being able to finish all SP Missions, Campaigns and Training my only hope is now the Eurofighter. :)

I've got a question.

To which countries in the game you'll add this plane? ( I begin to wonder whether it is grammatically correct [To which... ? or Which .... to?]).

Will it be possible only for England or other countries ( Spain, Germany, Italy ) too?

We will texture all countries that currently fly Typhoon but we will have the base UK model and systems functionality.

Thanks for the update, so this will be the third time the Typhoon will be redone! It sounds great, i think Veao is going to be hardly judged by this module so i think its the best decision to make it as realistic and high fidelity as possible, its a very very important module.

Thanks for any update on the process, after mastering the A10 at 80% and being able to finish all SP Missions, Campaigns and Training my only hope is now the Eurofighter. :)

I have a feeling that the harshest critics of the Typhoon will be Pman and Chris. I am equally sure that this will be the most complete, accurate, and realistic Typhoon ever created, and will set standards developers on other flight sim platforms can only dream of.

Not that I'm expecting too much from VEAO, only perfection :music_whistling: :music_whistling: :music_whistling:

Does the 3rd remodelling mean that DCS Typhoon is going to be pushed into 2016?

We will texture all countries that currently fly Typhoon but we will have the base UK model and systems functionality.

As I understand it, the UK one is pretty much "fully featured" anyway. Although did they ever get around to enabling the cannon? I heard the MoD specified no gun but that would require a rewrite of the code that keeps the thing in the air due to CoG shifting so initially they just fitted the gun and ballast ammo but disabled it in software!

Does the 3rd remodelling mean that DCS Typhoon is going to be pushed into 2016?

So does this 3D remodeling push the time line out? Is 2015 release in jeopardy now?

When there is more info on a release date we will confirm it but for the time being I am going to refrain from giving an Eta :)

 

Pman

For myself I am lowering my expectations and preparing for a 2016 release.

As I understand it, the UK one is pretty much "fully featured" anyway. Although did they ever get around to enabling the cannon? I heard the MoD specified no gun but that would require a rewrite of the code that keeps the thing in the air due to CoG shifting so initially they just fitted the gun and ballast ammo but disabled it in software!

Quite unbelievable really what these agencies get up to.

I'm sure there are hundreds of snippets of collective idiocy just like it.

As I understand it, the UK one is pretty much "fully featured" anyway. Although did they ever get around to enabling the cannon? I heard the MoD specified no gun but that would require a rewrite of the code that keeps the thing in the air due to CoG shifting so initially they just fitted the gun and ballast ammo but disabled it in software!

The early block 1 examples had no gun installed at all. The UK MoD's decision was rather quickly reversed and the RAF is using the gun as do other airforces and to some exend even more. It escapes me why people still ask this question about the gun!?

Great to hear that were solidly invested on this VEAO! It's the most i'vew heard developed on any fast mover in DCS.

I know you cannot discuss systems, but from your personal points of view were there any "Passion killers" in the things you couldn't develop, did you get a feeling that this will be faithful to the DCS concept, even though it's almost inevitably going to be further from the real thing than perhaps older airframes?

Obviously we can't get answers on specific, so I just want to know how you feel about it comparatively.

For myself I am lowering my expectations and preparing for a 2016 release.

It is the only smart thing to do at this point.

The early block 1 examples had no gun installed at all. The UK MoD's decision was rather quickly reversed and the RAF is using the gun as do other airforces and to some exend even more. It escapes me why people still ask this question about the gun!?

Because I have no specific interest in the Eurofighter I don't actively research ;) Just occasionally read snippets that I remember.

For myself I am lowering my expectations and preparing for a 2016 release.

I really hope that's not the case. This game really needs a flyable modern multi-role fighter. I love the A-10C but in the words of Ricky Bobby "I want to go fast"... Lol hopes and prayers are with a 2015 release.

Well some things appear to stay regardless how obsolete they are.

Hopefully the "some systems" won't be simulated in fact means some functions won't be simulated.

Well some things appear to stay regardless how obsolete they are.

 

Hopefully the "some systems" won't be simulated in fact means some functions won't be simulated.

Realistically the only people who will know are those who serve on the real thing. Somethings will be simulated but by LAW we are not able to confirm what they are or how we will be simulating them.

You will just have to trust us :)

Pman

Great VEAO :thumbup::pilotfly:

I can just remember reading threads way back around july 2012 regarding the EF development, upon recently returning to the forum , I find it astounding that, in effect the project is just about to start!

It seems when ever I try and enquire about razbam, metal2mesh harrier, tornado dcs projects, it all gets vague, and illusive, why all the secrecy? blimey its only a game,, lives are not depending on things! All these projects have been going for quite some time now, and one would expect abundant info and screenies by now! :cry:

Realistically the only people who will know are those who serve on the real thing. Somethings will be simulated but by LAW we are not able to confirm what they are or how we will be simulating them.

 

You will just have to trust us :)

 

Pman

I'll notice if something is missing.;) But as said before it's a public sim in the first place so it's obvious that certain things will be missing. Just hope that all systems are simulated to a reasonable degree. The presence of the systems fitted to the real aircraft is publicly known what's not are certain functions and capabilities associated with them.

I'll notice if something is missing.;) But as said before it's a public sim in the first place so it's obvious that certain things will be missing. Just hope that all systems are simulated to a reasonable degree. The presence of the systems fitted to the real aircraft is publicly known what's not are certain functions and capabilities associated with them.

Exactly this and we will do our best with what we are allowed to do.

This isn't the third model re-do. To clarify we held off on the re-model until we were sure what we could and couldn't do. Now it's full speed ahead.

The team know that my deadline is 2015, Yep latter end but 2015 nonetheless.

This may delay to 2016 depending on complexity of systems.

We may release things in Beta that will be developed during Beta time or we may "slim down" things to meet the deadline and expand them during Beta.

As I said before some things will be simulated, some emulated and some using existing DCS functionality.

This is a big project but we have a great team to make it who are all passionate about making the best modules.

Thanks for your support and we'll be sure to bring you on the development journey with us.

Chris

why all the secrecy? blimey its only a game,, lives are not depending on things!

Actually they are... The mere fact VEAO, Razbam, ED etc are able to accurately reproduce ANY of the systems, functions and capabilities of current frontline military aircraft astounds me when you consider that anyone can buy a DCS module.

The team know that my deadline is 2015, Yep latter end but 2015 nonetheless.

This may delay to 2016 depending on complexity of systems.

Seriously Chris, take all the time you need on this one. I'd rather have the best virtual Typhoon possible than a not so perfect one sooner. This is as close as most of us will get to one of these, as eager as I am to learn the machine and soar through the clouds in it, I'm just as happy to sit back and let you take your time. It isn't like we'll be starved of new aircraft before next year anyway. Speaking of which, what aircraft from your list are planned to release before the Typhoon? I'm guessing a couple of them will be great training tools in preparation for the Typhoon anyway...

TBH I’m more and more confused reading VEAO members posts. One time you canceling a project because you are not allowed to make accurate systems modeling, other time you say that you going to “emulate” systems and procedures. Which one it is?

Don’t get me wrong, but Typhoon and its “classified status” seems to be very convenient for you, as a developer, since almost everything can be regarded as classified.

Now let’s look at Typhoon systems: flight dynamics, engine performance, comm suite, EW suite, radar & PIRATE, weapons, detailed system modelling may be (and probably will be) considered confidential. Personally I’m OK with “emulating” IFF or some functions of the Radar, datalink or EW suite but in Typhoon case it may be as much as 80-90% of aircraft. This begs a question whether it’s going to be DCS module or DCE (as emulator) egg shell module.

In this approach VEAO will always be able to say “it’s not a bug”: it’s a legal requirement, it’s our “educated guess”, it’s our calculation, its …. (put your idea), we can’t talk about it…

Saying “You will just have to trust us” seems like excuse since VEAO is still to show that they can make proper AFM, radar simulation etc. or even make cockpit & texturing to the current DCS standards.

For example let’s take FM into consideration and the fact that Typhoon is an unstable aircraft with FBW system to be modeled and compare it with AFM of F-15, Su-27 or simpler MiG-21. When they were released there were several bugs that were (still are) ironed, partially because community pointed them up and showed reference data. It clearly shows that having proper AFM is not only a matter of having all equations but also a matter of enormous amount of fine tuning testing and comparing with the real thing. It may also happen that your educated guess will be really close to the reality but due to military contract it will be downgraded. In case of mentioned modules it seems to be no legal entity saying “you are too close to the real thing – stop”

Maybe I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I fail to see the difference between Typhoon that VEAO is making and some theoretical and greatly fictional DCS F-22 module.

I do not expect to have answer to my Typhoon doubts, but maybe someone could explain to me VEAO Jekyll & Hyde style approach to realism.

TBH I’m more and more confused reading VEAO members posts. One time you canceling a project because you are not allowed to make accurate systems modeling, other time you say that you going to “emulate” systems and procedures. Which one it is?

 

Don’t get me wrong, but Typhoon and its “classified status” seems to be very convenient for you, as a developer, since almost everything can be regarded as classified.

 

Now let’s look at Typhoon systems: flight dynamics, engine performance, comm suite, EW suite, radar & PIRATE, weapons, detailed system modelling may be (and probably will be) considered confidential. Personally I’m OK with “emulating” IFF or some functions of the Radar, datalink or EW suite but in Typhoon case it may be as much as 80-90% of aircraft. This begs a question whether it’s going to be DCS module or DCE (as emulator) egg shell module.

 

In this approach VEAO will always be able to say “it’s not a bug”: it’s a legal requirement, it’s our “educated guess”, it’s our calculation, its …. (put your idea), we can’t talk about it…

 

Saying “You will just have to trust us” seems like excuse since VEAO is still to show that they can make proper AFM, radar simulation etc. or even make cockpit & texturing to the current DCS standards.

 

For example let’s take FM into consideration and the fact that Typhoon is an unstable aircraft with FBW system to be modeled and compare it with AFM of F-15, Su-27 or simpler MiG-21. When they were released there were several bugs that were (still are) ironed, partially because community pointed them up and showed reference data. It clearly shows that having proper AFM is not only a matter of having all equations but also a matter of enormous amount of fine tuning testing and comparing with the real thing. It may also happen that your educated guess will be really close to the reality but due to military contract it will be downgraded. In case of mentioned modules it seems to be no legal entity saying “you are too close to the real thing – stop”

 

Maybe I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I fail to see the difference between Typhoon that VEAO is making and some theoretical and greatly fictional DCS F-22 module.

 

I do not expect to have answer to my Typhoon doubts, but maybe someone could explain to me VEAO Jekyll & Hyde style approach to realism.

Assuming your referring to the Skyhawk module regarding cancelling it due to realism etc then its quite simple, without the permission from McDonnell Douglas we would have to fake everything, from the fuel system to the hyrdos to the electronics. Everything would have been emulated. This was unacceptable to us.

Now lets make a clarification.

You can simulate something without it being based on a real system. If I designed a fuel system and then we simulated it that is still a simulations, an emulation I regard as a fake output with little to no dynamic live calculation taking place.

The major difference we have with Typhoon is resources and assistance from outside parties.

Things like art that you mention, I am not going to get into that again here, that is all a matter of personal opinion and preference. As with all our module s the files will be available for people to modify how they deem fit.

One thing that has become very VERY apparent to me in devloping for DCS, especially with Typhoon is that people do use these simulators for training and we are not in the business of making peoples lives more difficult. In order for us to complete work outside of the public limelight we have to play the game and play by the rules. So where agreements are made regarding things like redactments then they will be adhered to.

Will have a number of aircraft out on AFM well before the Typhoon makes an appearance so you guys will have plenty of opportunity to judge for yourselves if you think that we are capable of making an accurate FM.

For the record, the redacted items do not make up "80-90%" of the aircraft, it is far lower.

However I ask you to respect that we have to abide by our agreements with our commercial partners, working with them we will bring you the most accurate simulation of a Typhoon you are going to fly outside of a military environment.

We do take everyone's opinions on board and welcome feedback on our work, but we can't break agreements just to prove points to the community. With those things people do have to trust us as we simply can not get into a debate about some things :)

If anyone doubts our sources, I ask you to bear in mind the first post of this thread and that people who do not have high credentials and experience with these matters do not get access to live fighter aircraft on a live RAF base

Pman

Thanks for that really detailed explanation Pman! I'm confident that you will give us the most accurate Typhoon simulation possible and that's good enough for me!