Next HB aircraft module (corrected list)

F111 without a doubt. Show me a war in the Dcs time frame (apart from ww2) that didn't involve an f111

COBRA said, and do not change that the new module has all the technologies developed by HB. Wings of variable geometry in that list I only see one. With revers thrust I only see one. The best thing is that that one is the same in both cases. In addition to the ground air radar but that has several. And a double seat. The name TORNADO. A6 is for IA.

"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."

literal quote from HB. It's a complicated twin engined, dual seat aircraft. Fits perfectly together with the Tomcat and the Forrestal class Aircraft Carrier

I'd like to see the Tornado most of all, but my spidey senses are telling me that it's most likely an Intruder since it would dovetail nicely with their aircraft carrier.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Variable sweep wings, twin engine, multicrew... Anyone for the Tu-22M ?

"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."

 

literal quote from HB. It's a complicated twin engined, dual seat aircraft. Fits perfectly together with the Tomcat and the Forrestal class Aircraft Carrier

This.

This is honestly the worse time to open a poll since with the current release of the unknown Supercarrier module, everyone will vote for naval jets. I personally do not want another naval jet but something from another nation other than USA.

This is honestly the worse time to open a poll since with the current release of the unknown Supercarrier module, everyone will vote for naval jets. I personally do not want another naval jet but something from another nation other than USA.

For me the A-6 is a module i would like to have yesterday instead of tomorrow :D

But after the A-6 i share your statement 100%, i would prefere some EU and RUSSIAN planes.

I don't really know how the process works, but I suppose it's possible that Heatblur got some kind of "package deal" with whomever holds the licensing rights since both aircraft were made by Grumman.

An F-14 A&B, AND an Intruder, AND a Forrestal class carrier is huge. Hell, that's a game all by itself.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

need more redfor!

Tornado DLC with both version (IDS and ADV) =)

This is honestly the worse time to open a poll since with the current release of the unknown Supercarrier module, everyone will vote for naval jets.

The poll doesn't ask for what we want, it asks for what we think Heatblur will most probably develop next.

With the explicit mentioning of the A-6 by Cobra there can be no doubt that it's most probably going to be the A-6 Intruder. It also totally makes sense with the current road DCS is taking (naval ops).

I still would have preferred a Tornado, but like the Viggen it would be a very isolated add-on in the available scenarios in DCS, so I am also happy with an A-6. It adds nicely to what we have and will get in the future.

I'm going with A-6, per Cobra.

I think they could absolutely leverage the hell out of the tech they have with either the F111 or an older Tornado next. I think there might be more hurdles to get tornado docs than the F111 though.

I'd love for someone to do the JAAAG though, it was a prety unique and widely used strike aircraft, though maybe "not the best".

It was my understanding that Heatblur was not doing any more modules for DCS. I truly hope I’m wrong about that.

It was my understanding that Heatblur was not doing any more modules for DCS. I truly hope I’m wrong about that.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

If the A-6 will be developed one day... I need the "Devil 505" skin from "Flight of the Intruder".

It was my understanding that Heatblur was not doing any more modules for DCS. I truly hope I’m wrong about that.

I really don't understand where people get those weird theories from?!

The devs clearly have stated their commitment to DCS: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3836167&postcount=42

I really don't understand where people get those weird theories from?!

 

The devs clearly have stated their commitment to DCS: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3836167&postcount=42

Maybe because they never used "DCS" in this statement, only the phrase "consumer/professional flight sims"..... :dunno:

Maybe because they never used "DCS" in this statement, only the phrase "consumer/professional flight sims"..... :dunno:

And DCS is not a consumer flight sim?!

We're working on another complex jet which will make good use of our own technologies.

Heatblur is not going anywhere.

I hope Heatblur stays in the game, whatever the aircraft is going to be.

And DCS is not a consumer flight sim?!

 

!

Ofcourse it is, but you have to admit we all know HB because of DCS, now they are working together with a professional Aviation/Sim company and they answer the "concerned questions" with a generally held phrase which can be interpreted as "everything is fine we will focus on DCS" or as "we finish our announced/planned stuff and went on and do our own thing to not be dependent of ED/engine limitations anymore"

Ofcourse it is, but you have to admit we all know HB because of DCS, now they are working together with a professional Aviation/Sim company and they answer the "concerned questions" with a generally held phrase which can be interpreted as "everything is fine we will focus on DCS" or as "we finish our announced/planned stuff and went on and do our own thing to not be dependent of ED/engine limitations anymore"

Doesn't sound that way to me:

We're working on another complex jet which will make good use of our own technologies.

We're not in any way sacrificing our roadmap or ambitions. If anything, we've just made them a guaranteed reality.

I'm all up for the Panavia Tornado. Its practically multirole...at least in a rough sense as it got a cannon armament as backup weapon.

The A-6 only excitement is the carrier landing part. But aside from that, its just a ground pounder focus and a slow one at that.

If there was a choice between Panavia Tornado and an A-6. I'd definitely go for the Tornado hands down! Its a much faster jet, swing wing, dual seat, backup weapon in case you come against slow air to air targets.

The su-24 is a complex aircraft with the most diverse and advanced weapon load of everything listed here including stand off weapons sead and anti ship missiles and bombs.

Where are you getting this “I don’t know if it’s a complex airplane” ideas? I also think we are getting the a6 but really hope for the su-24 as it’s been in service for longer than everything else on the list and definitely seen more action.

I'm all up for the Panavia Tornado. Its practically multirole...at least in a rough sense as it got a cannon armament as backup weapon.

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!

 

An F-14 A&B, AND an Intruder, AND a Forrestal class carrier is huge. Hell, that's a game all by itself.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

This is something that came to my mind as well.

As of writing this i am yet to vote on the poll, mostly because i was torn between the F-111 and the A-6. But now, i think i'll vote for the latter one.

IMO, this kind of approach for development modules makes much sense. I.E. Deka makes Chinese assets, HB makes cold war Naval assets and other 3rd party developers create their own "bundles". This may benefit the developers by reusing assets and creating assets that are more closely related to each other (less time spent in creating and debugging of features) and help DCS as a whole, by introducing content that is more internally "consistent".

Imagine the A-6. It has essentially the same wing as the F-14. Far from just looking the same (3D model), you already have a great deal of it's aerodynamic properties sorted out. Both planes were made by Grumman. So i wonder if they may have shared more common components, especially the with the earlier F-14A's? Then you have a Forestall carrier. Both planes operated from it. This gives you a working ecosystem in its own right. Then as you already have the engines for the A-6, you are one step closer to making an A-4. Again, it works with Forestall. You have the TF-30's as well. You are closer to making an A-7. Sooner or later, you have an entire carrier air wing from the late 60's to the late 80's. If someone makes a naval Phantom along the way, this is more then just a game in its own right. It's a base for decades spanning campaign.