Jump to content

Next HB aircraft module (corrected list)


Leviathan667

Next HB aircraft module (corrected list)  

460 members have voted

  1. 1. Next HB aircraft module (corrected list)

    • Blackburn Buccaneer
      4
    • English Electric Lightning
      9
    • Gloster Javelin (not sure it is a complex aircraft)
      1
    • Panavia Tornado
      141
    • SEPECAT Jaguar (not sure it is a complex aircraft)
      13
    • Grumman A-6
      215
    • General Dynamics F-111
      35
    • Lockheed F-117 (nobody ever mentions this one)
      17
    • Sukhoi Su-24 (not sure it is a complex aircraft)
      18
    • Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-27 (not sure it is a complex aircraft)
      8


Recommended Posts

Not just a cannon (two cannons actually!), but also Sidewinders! In German service the Tornado is now even flying with IRIS-T (german AIM-9X comparable missile).

 

So yeah, unless it comes to BFM, the Tornado is well capable to defend itself in the visual arena, more so than the Viggen!

 

 

 

 

For some reason most chose the ground pounder only focus A-6 which is pretty slow and less maneuverable. Maybe its the Super-carrier module or the possibility of Heatblur doing the A-6 is more than hoping for a Tornado.:noexpression:

 

 

If there was a choice between A-7 Corsair and the A-6. I would have chose the A-7 hands down as its got more fun factor with backup weapon like cannons, a bit more speed and a big more modern head up display for accurate ground weapons employment.

 

 

 

I guess the Panavia Tornado has less chance as a module . Even though its got the value for money feel as its got backup weapons like cannon, air to air self defense missiles like Sidewinder and its similar. Also the swing wing feature and the its got better fun performance factor.


Edited by jojyrocks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Heatblur does not seem to have much connection with Euro planes.:noexpression:

 

 

 

Heatblur has made exactly 2 modules since it's existence and the first one literally was a Swedish plane so whats your point exactly?

 

The reason why ppl choose the Tadpole is because its really well liked and because this thread is about what we believe HB will release next not what we wish to be released next.

 

The A-6 hits every point of the requirements set out by the thread being a: (1) complex (2) twin engine jet.

 

+ we have a direct quote from HB regarding this:

 

The Intruder is an aircraft that has been under active development at Heatblur Simulations for some time, and subject to a license agreement, we hope to eventually introduce it into DCS world as a full, playable module - and we are developing it with this intent in mind.

 

It also fits extremely well with 2 other products from Heatblur, their Tomcat and their Forrestal class Super-carrier.

 

Making an Aircraft with as much detail as a playable module and then not making it the next module would be a waste

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heatblur has made exactly 2 modules since it's existence and the first one literally was a Swedish plane so whats your point exactly?

 

The reason why ppl choose the Tadpole is because its really well liked and because this thread is about what we believe HB will release next not what we wish to be released next.

 

The A-6 hits every point of the requirements set out by the thread being a: (1) complex (2) twin engine jet.

 

+ we have a direct quote from HB regarding this:

 

 

 

It also fits extremely well with 2 other products from Heatblur, their Tomcat and their Forrestal class Super-carrier.

 

Making an Aircraft with as much detail as a playable module and then not making it the next module would be a waste

 

 

 

 

OOps! My apologies...I had momentarily forgotten or goofed up about that:hehe::hehe:. Will correct it.

 

 

 

The Tornado is also a ground pounder a very fast one at that and can go backup air to air. Twin engine and twin seat and swing wing. Modern HUD for precision ground pounding. Not like the slow and sluggish A-6. Hell...even the A-7 is better than A-6 with its modern HUD, precision ground pounder and backup air to air, fit well with the Super carrier module. Its even a bit more nimble and a tad bit more faster than the Slow-mo A-6.

 

 

Hmm..I guess the development is already underway about A-6. I thought it was only updation on the AI model.


Edited by jojyrocks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slow-mo A-6.

 

I think some education is in order here. The Intruder made 560 knots on the deck and contrary to most other aircraft, it retained much of its performance even when loaded up with ordinance. In practice, it moved around at low level at about the same speeds as most other strike aircraft.

 

Also :)

 

800px-A-6E_Intruder_of_VA-145_in_flight_c1992.jpg

 

Intruder actually carried Sidewinders into combat in the 1980s off Libya. The idea was when Intruders were striking Libyan missile boats, should they get off an anti-ship missile, the A-6 would try to shoot it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuinely surprised that the next Heatblur module is, by popular belief, going to be the A-6. Obviously the voting is irrational, willfully selctive in acccepting evidence, and only tangentially related to the question actually asked - but even so I wasn't expecting so much demand for yet another US and/or strike aircraft.

 

Isn't there enough capabality for this already? Yes it's fun and it's cool, but it's already catered for. There are huge areas that are not, and I'd love to see these investigated in DCS and Heatblur have the chops to make the unusual interesting rather than irritating.

 

Given that DCS should just come clean about really being a c.1980-1990 Cold War simulator and drop all other pretences, there are some glaring ommisions. I know that the narrative is America vs. Russia, but is it really acceptable for DCS to continue to cater only to these two nations?

 

Thank you Heatblur for the Viggen, congrats on the F-14 (by all account a remarkable achievement), and please please let your next module be more closely related to your first rather than second release...

 

What do I think will be next? The Tornado fulfils a much longer and more compelling list of criteria than the A-6, and I'd be happy to see it next. I'm sure the A-6 won't be far behind, because it is great, would be a good addition to DCS, has (evidently) a lot of support etc etc etc.

 

What would I like to see next? Anything that wasn't used in Vietnam but would've been used in the Fulda Gap. There is so much to choose from, and it's all quirky and interesting and fun - like the Viggen and the F14 - and Heatblur are the only developers who might pull it off :)

 

Anyway...

Nah, I've only just met 'er...:pilotfly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuinely surprised that the next Heatblur module is, by popular belief, going to be the A-6. Obviously the voting is irrational, willfully selctive in acccepting evidence, and only tangentially related to the question actually asked - but even so I wasn't expecting so much demand for yet another US and/or strike aircraft.

 

 

Ofc its the next module by popular belief. Thats because its the only module to have any real evidence of being made. Everything else are planes that people want without any basis for their development while we know that HB are making a highly detailed A-6 and we know that they want to make it a full module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some education is in order here. The Intruder made 560 knots on the deck and contrary to most other aircraft, it retained much of its performance even when loaded up with ordinance. In practice, it moved around at low level at about the same speeds as most other strike aircraft.

 

Also :)

 

 

 

Intruder actually carried Sidewinders into combat in the 1980s off Libya. The idea was when Intruders were striking Libyan missile boats, should they get off an anti-ship missile, the A-6 would try to shoot it down.

 

 

 

 

I am aware that the A-6 has sidewinders...but it can miss. Having an inbuilt cannon always helps to go secondary, no countermeasure against that. A-7 can do that, its got cannon and air to air, fits with the supercarrier module. Its also slightly faster and more nimble than A-6. A-7 was the first production aircraft to feature a true Heads Up Display (more informative HUD and good for precision strikes).

 

 

I guess all chose for A-6 only coz it was already told to be in the works or hinted at that. So more possibility of that happening.

 

 

 

Still its got no fun factor than A-7 for sure...and certainly not the much faster swing wing Tornado.:smilewink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason most chose the ground pounder only focus A-6 which is pretty slow and less maneuverable. Maybe its the Super-carrier module or the possibility of Heatblur doing the A-6 is more than hoping for a Tornado.:noexpression:

 

 

If there was a choice between A-7 Corsair and the A-6. I would have chose the A-7 hands down as its got more fun factor with backup weapon like cannons, a bit more speed and a big more modern head up display for accurate ground weapons employment.

 

 

 

I guess the Panavia Tornado has less chance as a module . Even though its got the value for money feel as its got backup weapons like cannon, air to air self defense missiles like Sidewinder and its similar. Also the swing wing feature and the its got better fun performance factor.

 

Well, the A7 is claimed by Razbam... And honestly given their track record I'd much rather they do the A7 than the F15E for example.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the avionics in the following pictures to the A-6, you can see how close it resembles the F-14. No to mention it fits all the characteristics of what HB have said they are looking for in the next module. I am also very aware HB stated they had every intention on making this a full module if they could acquire the license agreement. I am super fired up about this one. The two modules I want most in DCS are the A-6 and F-105.

 

A-6%2BTRAM%2BCockpit0002.JPG

44fd520edf890c4ccfe316206a5e9761.jpg

186716509_f79d293e49_z.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats because its the only module to have any real evidence of being made...we know that they want to make it a full module.

 

This doesn't follow. Yes, HB are making an AI A-6; yes they would like to make a full module; no, the next module is not an A-6. We have no evidence of them making a full module. Nor a statement of intent. Just a statement of desire.

 

I'm no programmer or developer, but my understanding is that the gap between AI and full module is so big as to make limited impact. It certainly does no harm, saves research time etc, but the work involved in making a full module is the work involved in making a full module. Particularly given HB's fantastic attention to detail. Somebody please correct me if I err, every day's a school day, but I simply don't understand the 'AI A-6 therefore flyable A-6' rhetoric. Am I misinformed?

 

What I think (and voted): A-6, because of obviouse reasons

 

Forgive me for being blunt, but which reasons? I feel I've missed a memo...

 

...No to mention it fits all the characteristics of what HB have said they are looking for in the next module. I am also very aware HB stated they had every intention on making this a full module if they could acquire the license agreement....

 

All the characteristics? Does it?

 

As far as I'm aware, all HB have said is 'it will be a complex jet utilising some already-developed technologies'. Yes, they've said they would like to develop the A-6. I would like them to as well. I would like a pay rise. It may happen, it may not. But what I will get next is more certain. What HB are doing next is, I feel, l more certain and this topic may be more interesting if we pursued that with more intent.

 

"...a complex jet utilising some already-developed technologies":

A-6 ticks some boxes - twin seat. Also a nice fit wth the carrier, and arguably complements the F-14.

F-111 ticks some more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing

Tornado ticks still more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing + reverse thrust + terrain-mapping radar

 

The 'AI = full module' thing is not necessarily true and so I think it's the Tornado next, as do many others. But are we right? What are we missing? What have HB spotted that we haven't? What era? What nation? There are probably other 'Western' (very loosely) aircraft that fit the bill - what are they? There are definitely Soviet (equally loosely) aircraft that do - what are those?

 

Here's hoping for some education :)

 

Tonk'er :pilotfly:


Edited by Tonk'er
ps. robert.clark251 Those pics are great, thank you :)

Nah, I've only just met 'er...:pilotfly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Tonk'er the Tornado ticks the most boxes and should logically be HB's next module.

 

But I also think HB haven't yet made their mind as one of them has said, last December and in the context of a heated debate between Tonkers and A-6ers: "As for the rest: I'd leave it to general speculation for now, as that matches our own "state of mind" at the moment: not sure and we'll see. :)"

 

Link

Wishlist: Tornado ADV/IDS, Blackburn Buccaneer, Super Mystère B2, Saab J 35 Draken,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Tonk'er the Tornado ticks the most boxes and should logically be HB's next module.

 

But I also think HB haven't yet made their mind as one of them has said, last December and in the context of a heated debate between Tonkers and A-6ers: "As for the rest: I'd leave it to general speculation for now, as that matches our own "state of mind" at the moment: not sure and we'll see. :)"

 

Link

 

 

 

 

I think they did mention the desire of making the A-6. I can see that since it aligns well with the super-carrier module and that their desire of making the A-6 after the AI model pretty much shows why it got voted than the much faster, modern ground pounder Tornado which they barely mentioned.

 

 

 

The A-6 does not have modern HUD to to effectively use dumb bombs with precision. Its only good for planned targets. Not targets on the fly...especially with dumb bombs. There are no options of effectively dealing with secondary air to air (like helos or transport) or some soft ground targets on the fly, coz no cannon. The sidewinders can miss easily if they effectively drop flares.

 

 

The only fun factor of A-6 is just pure ground pounding (planned ground pounding) and carrier landing.

 

 

 

Its gonna be hard to hit ground target with dumb bombs that are not on the planned list.

 

 

 

 

 

The Tornado seems to be not in the plans...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't follow. Yes, HB are making an AI A-6; yes they would like to make a full module; no, the next module is not an A-6. We have no evidence of them making a full module. Nor a statement of intent. Just a statement of desire.

 

I'm no programmer or developer, but my understanding is that the gap between AI and full module is so big as to make limited impact. It certainly does no harm, saves research time etc, but the work involved in making a full module is the work involved in making a full module. Particularly given HB's fantastic attention to detail. Somebody please correct me if I err, every day's a school day, but I simply don't understand the 'AI A-6 therefore flyable A-6' rhetoric. Am I misinformed?

 

 

 

Forgive me for being blunt, but which reasons? I feel I've missed a memo...

....

 

The Intruder is an aircraft that has been under active development at Heatblur Simulations for some time, and subject to a license agreement, we hope to eventually introduce it into DCS world as a full, playable module - and we are developing it with this intent in mind.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3612905#post3612905

 

Short of time right now, but this is why many(including me) think the A-6 is next. We just don't have such a statement for any other aircraft from HB. Ofcourse, everything is subject to change....

Modules: KA-50, A-10C, FC3, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, CA, MIG-21bis, FW-190D9, Bf-109K4, F-86F, MIG-15bis, M-2000C, SA342 Gazelle, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, F-14, C-101, FW-190A8, F-16C, F-5E, JF-17, SC, Mi-24P Hind, AH-64D Apache, Mirage F1

System: Win 11 Pro 64bit, Ryzen 3800X, 32gb RAM DDR4-3200, PowerColor Radeon RX 6900XT Red Devil ,1 x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe, 2 x Samsung SSD 2TB + 1TB SATA, MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - VIRPIL T-50CM and VIRPIL MongoosT-50 Throttle - HP Reverg G2, using only the latest Open Beta, DCS settings

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't follow. Yes, HB are making an AI A-6; yes they would like to make a full module; no, the next module is not an A-6. We have no evidence of them making a full module. Nor a statement of intent. Just a statement of desire.

 

And what evidence do we have that the Tornado is being made on the other hand? As far as I am aware, the Tornado has not been mentioned by Heatblur ever. We do have a statement of intent for the Intruder.

 

 

Its gonna be hard to hit ground target with dumb bombs that are not on the planned list.

 

Your gripe with the A-6 is that it has no HUD and no cannon. Fair engough, that is not to everyone's liking. Not that you liking HUDs and cannons has anything to do with the topic though (what module HB will most likely do next).

 

Just to ease your concerns, perhaps you would enjoy some guided weapons of the Intruder's arsenale: AGM-45 Shrike, AGM-78 Standard, AGM-88 HARM, AGM-62 Walleye, AGM-123 Skipper, GBU-10, GBU-12, GBU-16 and AGM-84 Harpoon.

 

Also of course the Intruder can easily attack targets of opportunity precisiely with dumb bombs as well. The B/N designates the target either with his radar or the FLIR (the A-6E has an internal laser designator), then the pilot follows the steering cues on his VDI to an automatic release. Bombing with the depressed reticle gunsight remains as a backup.


Edited by MBot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...a complex jet utilising some already-developed technologies":

A-6 ticks some boxes - twin seat. Also a nice fit wth the carrier, and arguably complements the F-14.

F-111 ticks some more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing

Tornado ticks still more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing + reverse thrust + terrain-mapping radar

 

Erm, I hope for the same thing as you do, but as I highlighted in your text:

 

1st: We don't know how many of their already-developed tech they are going to use and

2nd: What do they consider self-developed. Is Thrust Reverser really a technologie, or is it just some additional lines of code? etc...

 

I suspect the A-6 also has an A-G radar, as it has some kind of radar and it is most likely no A-A radar.

For those who think the Tornado is good at TOO (Target of opportunity), it will not be that different than the A-6s capabilities.

 

For me it's like that: hope for the best (Tornado) expect the worst (anything else)

The obvious reasons are: they make a 3D model and an intetion was mentioned.

You answered your question in your own post just above your quote from me.

 

Could mean nothing, but it was mentioned at least.

Alias in Discord: Mailman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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