Why Christen Eagle II?

Problem is it won't work that way, if this module sells, then we are looking at the future of DCS.

 

As a Dev why spend years devolping...say..F-16 when you can make a civil aircraft in a fraction of the time, and get money from that right away, its way less risky from a business perspective. Hence right now we have a bunch of civil sims to choose from and very very few combat sims to choose from. Its all about money, and it will always be that way unfortunately for us.

I, some how, doubt that. Nothing is going to replace the satisfaction of making things explode.

And this is very risky from the perspective of a DCS third party; as many have been so very eager to point out, this is Digital Combat Simulator. The pipeline of aircraft planned indicates no such thing is happening.

F/A-18C

F-14A/B

B-105

C-101CC

F-4E

Mi-24P

JF-17

vs.

Christen Eagle II.

The evidence that civvie take over of DCS content is possible isn't very compelling. It would be outlandish to think that GA aircraft will supplant military aviation as the backbone of DCS for the foreseeable future.

That said, simpler to develop modules are definitely something that the developers look into. As ED stated themselves, the piston combat offerings are very profitable even as many complain about the disparity in era. Buying the Eagle II would help Mag 3 quite a bit, though I wouldn't endorse doing that, personally.

They made a pretty ballsy and, understandably, unpopular choice of aircraft to model. I'm hoping they get a couple of bucks from it and put out a few more fixes for the Fishbed before long.

The argument that DCS will attract more people because of more civil aircraft's is ridiculous!

1: World War 2 actually attracted more people to DCS

2: Your list is pretty much irrelevant as far as sport aerobatics competitions and demonstrations are concerned.

3: There is fun to be had in GA planes doing sight seeing and flying between the numerous small airfields populating the maps.

4: Technically slew mode could be implemented in the EFM by third party devs.

Not sure where you have been Sith but you might want to read the entire thread as this is not the only civilian title announced.. As soon as this thing was announced, PolyChop announced their foray into the civilian world with the Civ Gazelle and they have already stated they are looking at further civilian modules as well as possibly walking away and creating module for some other sim..

Also while the Yak-52 was procured for the Soviet Air Force and DOSAAF, it is still an unarmed, aerobatic trainer that fills the same niche in the sim as CE2 and has mostly civilian customers nowadays. So we have two modules of similar purpose announced in short time, neither of which seem to be in high demand.

1: World War 2 actually attracted more people to DCS

2: Your list is pretty much irrelevant as far as sport aerobatics competitions and demonstrations are concerned.

3: There is fun to be had in GA planes doing sight seeing and flying between the numerous small airfields populating the maps.

4: Technically slew mode could be implemented in the EFM by third party devs.

1 WWII is military!

2 Haven't seen any sport aerobatics competitions w existing modules!

3 You can do sight seeing in any module! vast majority aren't here for sight seeing!

4 Yet it isn't implemented!

Also while the Yak-52 was procured for the Soviet Air Force and DOSAAF, it is still an unarmed, aerobatic trainer that fills the same niche in the sim as CE2 and has mostly civilian customers nowadays. So we have two modules of similar purpose announced in short time, neither of which seem to be in high demand.

Well have you forgotten ED also does commercial and military work, it's possibly the main reason ED is even still around, ED's aircraft was one of these contracts, now we get to fly it, well if you want to.

Flight Simulator Market worth 7.54 Billion USD by 2021 (Military, Commercial)

 

The global flight simulator market is projected to reach USD 7.54 Billion by 2021, at a CAGR of 4.1% from 2016 to 2021. Factors such as increased demand for new commercial and military pilots, adoption of virtual training to ensure aviation safety, and the need for cost-cutting of pilot training are expected to drive the global flight simulator market.

 

marketsandmarkets

It all works hand in hand here for ED, to grow and survive in this small niche market.

RPS: Would ED rather work on sims for the military or the public? I get the feeling defence departments pay more and complain less.

Matt: We want to work on both! The developments are very much complementary. We have a development engine, which for want of a better term we call TFCSE (The Fighter Collection Simulation Engine). This engine is under continuous development and enhancement. Therefore the military gains an advantage of using technology that is state of the art, and the public get an entertainment title that has improved fidelity from our military experience (obviously limited to those are areas that are not classified!). We therefore can amortize our development costs across two markets, to the benefit of all. Military contracts are not a license to print money, as often they are required to be done on a “cost plus” basis, and I can assure you that they are very demanding as the simulation has to be perfect so as not to introduce “negative training”. In addition, gaining/winning military contracts is highly unpredictable, whereas for entertainment titles, we can plan a business over several years.

Interview: Matt Wagner On Black Shark

Now there can be three to amortize the development costs, if you include the Commercial contracts. DCS:Yak-52

This would also include 3rd parties and there Commercial contracts if they choose to do them and or partner with ED. Belsimtek

www.flymig21.com etc

.

I'm not against having civilian planes in DCS. No. Actually a Cessna 172 would have been an instant buy. However, the choice here to build the Eagle is inconcievable. It's as if someone decided to build a WW2 PZL fighter - that's the military equivalent of this idea.

I will buy the Yak-52, I would buy a Cessna, or a Stearman, or a Tiger Moth too. But not this, sorry. I wish you good luck though.

Well have you forgotten ED also does commercial and military work, it's possibly the main reason ED is even still around, ED's aircraft was one of these contracts, now we get to fly it, well if you want to.

Regardless of ED story behind the Yak, it's going to be another unarmed aerobatic plane for DCS that you will be able to buy in a few months, just like CE2. Not a fortunate situation for M3.

Personally my only biggest beef with this is, DCS is for combat strictly. Like it says in the name "Digital COMBAT Simulator". Maybe ED and TFC could make another game just like this called "Digital Commercial Simulator" or Digital Civil Simulator" and keep it for planes like these.

 

Current DCS is strictly for combat aircraft which is why the crowd here is for that. No hate to you guys, and I really appreciate taking the time to make this. But I really don't expect to see many people buy this. But All the best for it anyways

People have been using ED's sims strictly for aerobatics for over a decade before you joined this forum. :thumbup:

People have been using ED's sims strictly for aerobatics for over a decade before you joined this forum. :thumbup:

Yea with private mods anyway apart from 3 or 4 that use modules.already to dcs.

I'm not against having civilian planes in DCS. No. Actually a Cessna 172 would have been an instant buy. However, the choice here to build the Eagle is inconcievable. It's as if someone decided to build a WW2 PZL fighter - that's the military equivalent of this idea.

 

I will buy the Yak-52, I would buy a Cessna, or a Stearman, or a Tiger Moth too. But not this, sorry. I wish you good luck though.

I agree. They have the right idea, just the wrong aircraft choice. A Stearman or Tiger Moth would have been a much more appropriate and widely acceptable choice. Either one would have fit better in DCS as an appropriate training aircraft leading up to more advanced WWII aircraft and at the same time, be a less complicated aircraft to help Magnitude 3 develop more complicated WWII aircraft tech. Being an aerobatic aircraft, I don't seen the Eagle II being a good training platform or very friendly and forgiving to those new to flight sims and flying.

Aerobatic events in MILITARY planes not this civil useless (in this sim) biplane...and not, its not only "if you dont want it, dont buy it" this can changue in detriment the way of the developers choose the plane to make and the money they earn, divide the comunity ( just when comes 2.5 to unify us) and bring new people with no interest in COMBAT sim...theres anything worst? i really hate this move from M3...but theres nothing that we can do..sad but true

How will the community be divided by civil aircraft? Why can't people enjoy both civil and military aviation? I certainly do. We already people that don't fly DCS for the combat aspect. They'll just carry on with civil aircraft. Likewise, the military flyers will just carry on.

Military modules won't go anywhere either. As soon as devs focus on civil aviation that becomes a more competitive market than military. There will always be an incentive to make military aircraft because of this. When it comes to modern military aircraft specifically, consumer demand is more than enough to drive devs on that route. Remember WWII (and what about WWI, why aren't these the only modules in DCS?) are already simpler and established in DCS. Why do we have teen series fighters in development? If you want to claim these started before WWII took off, why is Belsimtek making the F-4?

My issue is; if you let civil aircraft in DCS, devs might put combat aircraft aside in favor of them. Especially when you sell them at 60-70 percent the price, and they are much easier to pump out. DCS is the only sim of its kind being worked on today, I don't want it polluted with a market that has plenty of avenues to explore civil aviation in other sims already.

Devs will put those combat aircraft aside along with all the money in the military module market. It would be pretty surprising to see them ignore such a vocal market. The cost of civil modules may not matter very much in the end anyway. If military modules are harder to develop, they can charge more for them. That will probably lower sales, but a modest price hike isn't going to lower profit given how much many DCS users spend as it is.

Frankly makes me angry, I'm upset enough that WW2 planes found their way in here, now we got civil aircraft to fight with on the roadmaps. Makes me feel like the aircraft that I want to fly won't make it in at all and if they do, it'll take decades.

Would limiting DCS to only a specific set of aircraft really increase your chances or seeing them added? Or would it be better to invite more module creators and then convince them to make your desired modules? There is probably a balance to be found there.

As a Dev why spend years devolping...say..F-16 when you can make a civil aircraft in a fraction of the time, and get money from that right away, its way less risky from a business perspective. Hence right now we have a bunch of civil sims to choose from and very very few combat sims to choose from. Its all about money, and it will always be that way unfortunately for us.

You'd make the F-16 because people demand it. Then based on the demand you set the price to profit. If there are a dozen devs making civil aircraft and no one making F-16's, you have even more incentive to make F-16's.

Also keep in mind while there are more civil sims, many of them have combat aircraft. Why are developers wasting their time making combat planes that won't sell/profit in sims where players must not care about military planes (going by arguments here)?

The argument that DCS will attract more people because of more civil aircraft's is ridiculous! So is the statement that DCS has the best FM.

Well I know someone who was specifically waiting for an aerobatic aircraft to get into DCS.

1. DCS doesen't offer:RL navaids, RL visual representation of major airports & area scenery's, good ATC SID/STARS (to name a few). And very important an superb weather engine with manual & RL weather functionality with multiple cloud layers & weather themes.

Is this a problem? You have to realize that the sim fanbase is not homogeneous. You have people that are actually pilots and might use them to practice their work. Then you have people who like flying but aren't really knowledgeable and won't use all of the simulator's detail. DCS lets you fly planes, so it's automatically a competitor to any other flight sim. It just won't compete over the entire flight sim fanbase. People that want to fly like real pilots won't come to DCS just yet. People that want to fly neat planes have all they need.

2. DCS don't have the whole world coverage. Flying on 3 maps ain't going to attract civilian pilots.

3. If the free TF-51D hasn't attracted more players, an EagleII won't do a better job.

Well it worked the opposite for people I know.

4. You can't change airplane location or weather on the fly, back/forth replay doesn't work, no slew mode, flight save mode etc. etc.

Yea with private mods anyway apart from 3 or 4 that use modules.already to dcs.

Mod free aerobatics servers have been popular for a long, long time. Aerobatics has been a part of DCS before DCS existed in its current form.

I'm not interested in either f18 nor f14, yet I understand that there is huge interest for them in this community. I believe that once released, they will be state of art products, yet to me they are X-wing and Y-wing respectively. However I wouldn't go on and bash their subforums with "sigh, can't you guys rather work on something else?! Perhaps something that's more to my taste?".

What I'm trying to get across is that ultimately I'm more surprised not by CE2 announcement itself, but by the reaction and backlash from a lot of people here. You know you can spend your time better than throwing a tantrum. Rather hide your wallet, or something if you have worries. For months people probed M3, asking whether they are alive etc until they finally shared what they are working on... so this is it ("the super pooper excretionator" Rudel teased about), people just need to chill out, accept the reality and respect their decision (I'm sure they weighted carefully their options past the split and simpler project was expected - or some just refused to see it coming?). Instead of a couple words of encouragement during not easy times for M3 to get through I would safely assume, we get down to spin shitstorm instead? WTF seriously, reminds me of kindergarten at times!

Definite must buy for me as it's always been one of my favorite civilian aircraft. Hard to believe the amount of negative comments that have been posted over the last few days.

I'm not interested in either f18 nor f14, ... However I wouldn't go on and bash their sub forums with "sigh, can't you guys rather work on something else?! Perhaps something that's more to my taste?".

This had been said million times it's not this case and not this kind of the problem. The whole reason for a reaction comes from the fact that they decided to make something outside of the core of the title for which people came for. It's also done with a price for the main core (halted support for MiG-21) and it doesn't bring anything to the core of the platform as such.

The clean way would be to introduce a new 3’rd party or at least one with a closed backlog with intend to make a civ modules in possibly a separated stream.

Instead of a couple words of encouragement during not easy times for M3 to get through I would safely assume, we get down to spin shitstorm instead? WTF seriously, reminds me of kindergarten at times!

I'm really failing to understand why there is so hostility about the fact that people react about something they don't see any sense in.

It's really the same situation like a steak house that you had supported by coming every day, leaving high tips and making it popular among friends in order to help to grow their business had decided to reduce some of their meat menu in favor of the vegan instead. It’s like EA deciding to have the last DLC for Battlefield 1 a parkour game. Obviously people that would complain are the one that have to grow up.

Anyway, I'm really tired with this discussion and unsubscribing from this thread. As said we can take this discussion to the wallet decision. Sorry to say but now a lot of opinions voiced in this thread made me to feel like a sucker buying non priority modules just with the intention to help the 3'rd parties to develop. As also suggested many times I’ll take the customer stand point and not buy the CEII and request to complete the MiG-21 as this is what I had paid for.

Anyone is free to decide to do what they want. They can even develop a goat simulator as far as I’m concerned. Business case for it can be for sure justified in some way and there are people that buy this kind of the title. Others should stay quiet as everyone is free to do what they wish and accept the fact that now instead of waiting a year for a module there is risk they’ll have to wait even more.

Don't worry firmek, I've read every single post in both main threads regarding CE2 to this date to form my opinion about what is going on here. Don't really need a summary, nor explanation.

What this module brings to core of the platform is yet to be seen. As I said earlier, I would love to see some added value or extras coming along with this bird too. Yes, slower progress on Mig21 fixes is not what I'm happy about either (since its release it's my main module), but maybe the whole picture is a bit wider in this case and the dev team actually waits for the coveted 2.5 merger (and that is just my guess here, I speak only for myself). Meanwhile working on CE2, refining it and adding visual aspect to it - so it wouldn't end up just as private synthetic test bed. Or so it would occur to me, on top of it considering also the funding and manpower to create content, afford the plane licenses, etc. Isn't that alone an addition and of benefit to the community? Especially since it's something different - an aerobatic biplane. Or do you reckon keeping it in private would have been better overall - causing less angst or grief even to some?

Despite my effort I don't fully understand the hostility and general toxicity either, especially the way how it is presented here more than anything. Maybe having enough of it is the reason I'm pointing it out? Works both ways I would say. Maybe reading all these posts wasn't the best idea after all? (in all fairness though, there are some very good ideas, proposals and constructive criticism drown among that ruckus and venting)

It's as if someone decided to build a WW2 PZL fighter - that's the military equivalent of this idea.

 

But, flying extremely gimped fighters from that era is hilariously awesome. :pilotfly:

It's this. All the clues add up. Christen Eagle II.

 

reddit thread, credit terrificfool & rainbow dash:

Rainbow Dash was the first one to guess right, because Rainbow Dash is awesome

Actually, my first reaction was, probably, like most ones' like this:

But I can understand the step. It's a small step for M3 to get their FMs right, but might be a big one for DCS after all. Actually, ED did this with the TF-51D as well and even Oleg Maddox had a Su-26 in Il-2 Cliffs. But of course, the latter one made it in as an easter egg and the TF-51D is for free, so there's a mighty contrast to the CEII which will most likely be $30.

Interestingly, they made the announcement right at the VFAT weekend. I hope they spread words over there, so they will reach their customers who do virtual aerobatics already. It's a nich inside a niche, but still I think it's quite amazing how many virtual aerobatic teams exist already who are able to fill a whole weekend with a big show, and probably that's not even all of them.

I think the big bummer was just the built up hype thanks to the small teaser bits and the big "oh, it's not a magnitudinal jet we expected after a magnitudinal MiG-21 that still needs some work" disappointment. It's easy to understand. And it's easy to rage about it. But that's also understandable, especially when waiting for vital fixes for the MiG-21bis. Actually, I haven't tried her for quite a long time, shame on me I didn't even try the FFB trim fix yet they made early this year I was asking and hoping for for ages. What is it that makes her so totally broken?

Since I'm rather like flying around fast and low when not combating, I'm not particularly interested in getting this plane, even though I might enjoy a spin or two in this bird as I remember doing so with the E300S in one of the MS FSs like ages ago. And here comes the interesting thing about it. Yes, there are civ sims for civ planes, and most of them don't really need ultra sophisticated FMs. But aerobatic planes definately will gain a lot with proper dynamics, so there's a good reason to give it a try in our decent engine that can most probably do it best (actually I think the guys over at 777 are top notch as well, and they're doing props for years and they're doing great). After all, the CEII seems to be one of Dolphin's favourite planes - who would not want to try a chance to make his or her own personal dream come true? It's definately something we have to respect and since he's been developing for DCS already, why switch to FSX/P3D or XP11 when he can get the best FM in DCS?

Go to 1:54. I hope this will be possible. None of the currently available WW2 prop crafts can pull off that maneuover, just because of the total lack of tailplane control authority at close to zero speed, no matter how much thrust the engine is banging at them. But it's also apparent in the Il-2 BoX seriers which makes me wonder because in RoF this can be done with ease. Might be I underestimate the mass, but I think the hammerhead (or Immelmann in WWI, the true one) are possible in WW2 warbirds.

That's so hilarious, made my day!

But I really don't expect to see many people buy this.

 

People have been using ED's sims strictly for aerobatics for over a decade before you joined this forum. :thumbup:

LOMAC has been used for aerobatics right from the beginning. Been in the vJaBoG32 when it was founded and I remember they planned and actually built up an aerobatic team. But I left to concentrate on Il-2 FB. And, those aerobatic shows even have been streamed before YouTube even existed, let alone twitch...

Actually I still think we might be in for some surprises. What will be the next one? Maybe I'll get a bit OT now, but this is Surprise:

One of the Wonderbolts, the Royal Equestrian Air Force so to say. They're mostly doing aerobatics since it's mostly peacetime over there. I'd buy the CEII - if it comes with a decent and magnitudinal Wonderbolts paint job out of the box

Enough with the brony spam.

Yea with private mods anyway apart from 3 or 4 that use modules.already to dcs.

What is that, a comeback? Argument against the existence of people using DCS for aerobatics? Whining? Lock On didn't have the airplanes we wanted, so we made models. DCS didn't have the modules we wanted, so we made them.

My original point is that the aerobatics community is extremely resilient and larger than most realize. This reinforces it: when ED hasn't supported the aerobatics community directly, we did the work ourselves. It's high time the recognition has started to shift in our favor. I wouldn't have personally picked a piston driven propeller airplane, but I appreciate that it shows the recognition of the diversity in the community.

Go to 1:54. I hope this will be possible. None of the currently available WW2 prop crafts can pull off that maneuover, just because of the total lack of tailplane control authority at close to zero speed, no matter how much...

Ehem...it can be done in the Mustang. The CE2 did a beautiful hammerhead, but it is possible in the Mustang, though maybe not as clean. Pull the throttle back at 200 and slam it at 100, left rudder. I don't know about the other three props though.

I look forwards to the CE2, and will fly it vigorously. It will be an instant buy for me. I'm happy with any new addition to DCS, because it's better than nothing at all, and modules aren't just released every 2-3 weeks. There aren't many modules that I enjoy, so I'm not going to miss one that I will enjoy.

I'm not against having civilian planes in DCS. No. Actually a Cessna 172 would have been an instant buy. However, the choice here to build the Eagle is inconcievable. It's as if someone decided to build a WW2 PZL fighter - that's the military equivalent of this idea.

 

I will buy the Yak-52, I would buy a Cessna, or a Stearman, or a Tiger Moth too. But not this, sorry. I wish you good luck though.

The Eagle is just a learning curve for these guy's, look at the big picture here as a business (Their business not ED's) Wags even mentioned this in the letter, ED has the time in and built the skills, you cannot get there quickly until you have the time in, hands on at this level of FM's and system modeling. Who else is doing it FM's and systems at this level and in any sim?

To me, that's why other www sims are a little jumpy at the moment.:cry: ED's not bound to or rely on this only, like some of these other sims do, if you know what I mean.

.

Cool aircraft! Looking forward to it.

It does not fly at FL 180-20-30-40 " thousand feet." At mach 1 you wont even see it. LOL

I have enjoyed both military and civilian planes....seeing both compete at the Reno Air Races.

Jets vs Props....yu gotta see it. Its revenue will help Mag-3 and I say hurrah for ED in allowing Mag-3 to introduce this to DCS.

Was a time when I was perplexed when ED introduced Combined Arms...I thought, wait a minute...this is a Jet flight sim.....but I got over it and now enjoy it.....same with WW2 aircraft.....great too have them.

I have the Christen Eagle radio-control model....and enjoy flying it as much as I enjoy my RC jet model Ducted Fan SU-27.....and my BF-109.

I also have a flight simulator for my RC aircraft...all types. Enjoy what we get...I am old enough to remember when there were only one or two aircraft simulators and they were wire frame....lol.

Lazduc (Trying to be patient)

Lock On didn't have the airplanes we wanted, so we made models. DCS didn't have the modules we wanted, so we made them.

 

My original point is that the aerobatics community is extremely resilient and larger than most realize. This reinforces it: when ED hasn't supported the aerobatics community directly, we did the work ourselves. It's high time the recognition has started to shift in our favor.

A niche within a niche and you made the aircraft you needed for aerobatics because that doesn't require any sophisticated systems simulation; just slap on an aircraft model with a flight model approximation and you're good to go. The same cannot be said for a DCS combat aircraft.

I don't begrudge the aerobatic community getting anything but I also don't like seeing resources spent building modules purely for it either, especially when regular modules run slick/civ skinned/modded (or in another sim) would do more than fine.

I dunno about that statement, an acrobatic aircraft with all the power that a FM in DCS could bring, would be exciting,

An FM in DCS is nothing special since the dev team can make any FM they want and call it an EFM, which means nothing. ED/DCS has not control over the FM being produced by the dev team. DCS is open ended in that regard which means a bad FM is just as possible as a good one.