How's classified is this Eurofighter ?

That’s more or less what i wrote above.

Yep, we posted at the same time... ;)

semantics?

Yep, supposedly the only NATO fighter able to hold its own against the F-22 post merge. (Although the Rafale has managed to beat it too)

Pilot on aircrew interview said it can sustain 9Gs without loosing speed or energy. And the one on fighter pilot podcast claims it can accelerate to Mach 1 from 200 knots in less then 5 seconds down low.

How's classified is this Eurofighter ?

Restricted is just an English generic term for non public data...that could refer nation secrets or private company confidential data.

But i repeat NATO restricted is a proper classification and it is the first level above unclass.

Now of course there is no commercial license that will allow the building company of an aircraft (which has access to classified data and the clearence to handle it) to give classified data to another company. But they are free to give under license their intellectual property, which is not (all) classified but for sure it is not in the public domain...

Thats what I intended

Restricted is a classification.....

In the nato world the only public information is the one released with this classification: “Nato unclassified releasable to public “

Also nato unclassified is not meant for the public, but it means that the operator can see/use the information on unclassified instruments (pc for example)

I agree. In terms of classification, NATO restricted is a level of classification (the minimum level barely above unclassified). In terms of security they are also similar, i.e I don't believe a security clearance is necessary to access NATO restricted data. When comparing data e.g aircraft technical data, NATO restricted is the equivalent of US unclassified, distribution statement B through E, export controlled information.

Also to clarify 'public information', this means available to the public through official sources. I very much doubt that a high fidelity, DCS aircraft model, of 4th gen+, in service aircraft could be developed with information accessible to the general public. I know of a case where an individual requested Typhoon checklists via FOI and much of that was redacted!

I agree. In terms of classification, NATO restricted is a level of classification (the minimum level barely above unclassified). In terms of security they are also similar, i.e I don't believe a security clearance is necessary to access NATO restricted data. When comparing data e.g aircraft technical data, NATO restricted is the equivalent of US unclassified, distribution statement B through E, export controlled information.

 

 

 

Also to clarify 'public information', this means available to the public through official sources. I very much doubt that a high fidelity, DCS aircraft model, of 4th gen+, in service aircraft could be developed with information accessible to the general public. I know of a case where an individual requested Typhoon checklists via FOI and much of that was redacted!

Well probably that depends from every country law....

In my country non classificato controllato ( controlled unclass) is the equivalent of nato unclassified while riservato (reserved) is the same level as nato restricted.

Military do not need clearance to access restricted data as it is implicit in their military status, while to access to higher levels they need a specific clearance for that level.

But civilian people needs the clearance to access the restricted data (we have also clearances for industries and civilians with equivalent levels). So it is not the same

I just hope they can get their hands on the EM diagrams for this bird so that we get realistic performance out of it.

Yep, supposedly the only NATO fighter able to hold its own against the F-22 post merge. (Although the Rafale has managed to beat it too)

See I used to believe things like that but when talking to someone who does C-130 maintenance and readying for "special operations" which can include training exercises hes come across F-22 pilots and talk to them before. According to them the F-22s are limited to a third of their true performance. Some limits are to be expected but a whole 2 thirds?. Yeah in the realms of classified information and word of mouth and hear say you can never really be too sure.

I mean at the same time pilots are the same group I heard from that the AIM-132 ASRAAM's true range is closer to 50km and is actually "much better" then the AIM-9X and is undercut a lot more for it's range number then the AIM-9X for public values (shit you find on Wikipedia ect) and which British exercises were able to down AWACS planes before being shot down by the US defenders (the British goal of the mission) but I'm even dubious on that as people have said the ASRAAM simply doesn't have the fuel or aerodynamics to go that far ballistic wise let alone guide to a target

So you never truly know and aside from Typhoon pilots I doubt anyone else who plays DCS would be able to tell if its even close to correct or not. As long as its fun, comes with features on time and is relatively game breaking bug free...thats all I'm hoping for.

Development process of study level aircraft

[uPDATED] Hello Guys.

I studied and informed myself a lot about the process of getting an aircraft into a sim, and what kind of information is needed to reach high fidelity or better: "Study Level" in developing a Sim. A while back in my efforts to understand more about the process behind such an endeavor of creating an study level sim for a platform, I had a chance to speak with an employee of a 3rd Party developer for X-Plane 11 and FSX and their efforts for an awesome study level A320, including the negotiations that they needed with Airbus in order to get things rolling. It made me even more curious and I started digging for knowledge. The transparent talks in forums regarding development on BMS was a help too. But I still don’t grasp all aspects of such a development effort and all my respects go to our developers that try to achieve their goals while they fight every obstacle on their way to fulfill our wishes and dreams.

Let me try to explain in detail, what kind of work might happen behind the curtain. ED or TrueGrit may correct me or add information if I say something wrong.

DCS has remarkably high standards and those standards must be achieved from its in house as well as 3rd party developers. They can only achieve this high level if they have enough information for the project. This information is obtained by negotiation with officials like the US Airforce or the company that has built the aircraft. Because of that high standard we don’t have any good 4th generation Russian or Soviet Jet in DCS, because the Russian Federation is very restricted, and the info of restriction is above that classified too. :D So to speak. It’s even hard to get enough public information.

Remark: Eagle Dynamics does not release or change weapons or modules for balancing purposes. The CEO made that clear in an interview. That’s why the performance of an AMRAAM is made as authentic as possible and will not be changed, just because some kids complain about it.

So, let's call the DCS level of fidelity by its name: "Study Level".

What is Study Level?

Study Level is the level of fidelity everyone should expect when he talks about a Simulator Platform that simulates one or several airplanes based on their real-life counterparts. That means, that a real Pilot who uses this simulation should be able to recognize every aspect of the airplane, the handling of the board computer, radar, instruments and displays e.g. MFDs. These Displays should work like in real life, if the Pilot that uses this simulation wants to reach a specific menu, he should be able to reach the menu the same way as he recalls from memory. In other words, how he has learned it in his classified or restricted handbooks or manuals of his aircraft that he serves on. Developers tend to invite or include these Pilots, Crewman or Engineers into their development process. This people are known as subject matter experts.

The quality of development can differ based on hands on tests, records, and subject matter experts.

Like Heatblur explained in their presentation of the F-14 Tomcat. "hand crafted, down to the last nut, rivet and bolt". To have such access, you need the trust of the officials, and you need to sign papers like an NDA for example. The Information needed by developers is mostly not that complex. That means they do not need to know how the wiring is made behind a Radar or MFD display. But they need to know what is displayed. How many Targets can be attacked and how is the maximum radar range. In cases of sensitive data, like radar range or how many tangos can be engaged at the same time, we have several possibilities:

- 1: The Aircraft in development is out of service and sharing sensitive information is not that problematic. (probably how Heatblur had gained info on their F-14 and Viggen)

- 2: The Aircraft is still in Service, but the company or agency can share the information under NDA. For a specific block or timeframe for example. (probably how ED had gained information for the F/A-18 and F-16C)

// Same goes for A-10C that will receive an upgrade now, because ED seemingly has gained the information clearance to develop newer systems into the A-10C. I remember that ED had requested help from subject matter experts in the community, to get information on a panel in the F-16. We have good informed people in our community and they tend to help if you ask kindly.

Besides that: If I recall correctly, the CEO of Eagle Dynamics or another developer explained in one of their recent interviews, that they work together with us military and that the military is using DCS. There has been two Interviews recently, one with the CEO and one with another developer. I don’t remember in which of these interviews they gave this information.

- 3: The Aircraft is new/young and has state of the art technology. In that case you either get inaccurate information or you are not allowed to display a specific technology no matter the detail under any license or NDA agreement given.

// That was the case with the last development attempt we had on the Eurofighter. The case with that “Typhoon Helmet” (Striker II) from BAE Systems and its capabilities if I recall right. https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/typhoon-helmet

Conclusion:

Guessing is not recommended for developing a study level simulation module for DCS.

Information from “subject matter experts”, provided data by officials and/or companies behind the aircraft and licenses/agreements with those are needed. And of course, a good amount of crazy and talented developers behind the project. :thumbup:

Hi guys!

...

Frequently asked Questions

...

What Tranche/Nationality can we expect?

We are in constant communication with the “NETMA” and our licensor “Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH” in order to bring you the most current version of the Eurofighter possible, without violating classified information. I know a lot of you are eager to get information on the version we are bringing to DCS. I am sorry, that at this stage we won't be able to answer any questions concerning the tranche, software or block. Rest assured that once we can say more, we will!

...

Where do you get the data necessary for programming the Eurofighter Typhoon?

We made a huge effort over the past year, to gather all publicly available data and will continue to do so until we are satisfied with the final result.

...

Dash

If I understand this quote right, TrueGrit has only access to public information. I love the Eurofighter; I follow its development since childhood, and I look forward to its DCS counterpart since it was first announced for DCS years back by another 3rd Party developer. But I am careful now with my hopes for this module. I recently watched an official Video from the Luftwaffe about a Eurofighter training together with Tornados in Nevada. In that Video they explained that the Eurofighter has gained ground attack capability clearance at the end of 2017. Because of that, they made sorties in Nevada and trained GBU delivery. I have hopes but I don’t believe that the TrueGrit developer Team gets access to documentation or the clearance to deliver us a Eurofighter module with the systems and tech from 2017/18. Please TrueGrit proof me wrong! I don’t need an impotent Eurofighter that is only capable of Air to Air combat. The Eurofighter is developed to become a true multi-role-fighter-aircraft with best dogfight and air superiority abilities. A true modern 5th generation beast.

Just to get things right and explain the significance of this Jet compared to others in the world:

The Eurofighter is the European answer to the F-22 Raptor and competitor to the Suchoi Su-57, Su-35, Su-34, MiG-35 and MiG-29. MiG-29 was introduced as counterpart to the F-16.

I claim the Eurofighter eats them all for breakfast and fights with the F-22 and the Su-57 until the next dawn.

UPDATE

I just found out who is behind the TrueGrit team. A very talented team of people gathered behind former Pilot, Flight- and Weapons instructor of the Eurofighter Typhoon "Gero Finke" and develops the Eurofighter.

There is a German Interview with Gero Finke about TrueGrit and the development of the most modern Aircraft in DCS with some outstanding screenshot that some of you might have seen already.

I dont know if this Interview was published already here in the Forum. Nevertheless I am working on a Translation already and will provide it soon.

After getting all the information about TrueGrit and Gero Finke from the interview, my hopes for a well developed Eurofighter DCS Module are very High now. Can't wait to see the result.

You can find the Translated Interview here:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4467248#post4467248

Below is a Link to the direct timestamp of Heatblur explaining its development efforts on the F-14. For everyone who did not know it already, it’s a very good and impressing information.

I included some nice video information about the Eurofighter for you guys.

Capabilities in detail. The German EF has some differences compared to RAF.

Finally, an Information video about the Striker II Helmet by BAE systems also known as Typhoon Helmet mentioned above. There is a lot of information videos about this helmet in the web. This Helmet is part of the Eurofighter Typhoon weapons platform and due to modern datalink capabilities and AR tech you can see enemies behind clouds etc. Information from AWACS and other allied forces connected to the system can send in information through PIP (Picture in picture). With Meshes and AR projection you can see the ground terrain while looking at the floor of the aircraft. Also allied tanks are displayed and several allied assets. This is the most modern Pilot Helmet in the world.

Kind regards, MKev

[uPDATED]

 

Remark: Eagle Dynamics does not release or change weapons or modules for balancing purposes. The CEO made that clear in an interview. That’s why the performance of an AMRAAM is made as authentic as possible and will not be changed, just because some kids complain about it.

 

- 2: The Aircraft is still in Service, but the company or agency can share the information under NDA. For a specific block or timeframe for example. (probably how ED had gained information for the F/A-18 and F-16C)

// Same goes for A-10C that will receive an upgrade now, because ED seemingly has gained the information clearance to develop newer systems into the A-10C. I remember that ED had requested help from subject matter experts in the community, to get information on a panel in the F-16. We have good informed people in our community and they tend to help if you ask kindly.

The AMRAAM's 80s range was taken from a F-16 manual which apparently briefly mentioned a flight time of 80s.

As for the Hornet and Viper themselves, for what the companies are willing to give they also are willing to give false or under estimation numbers of it's actual capabilities depending on the system/weapon. This is what is believed to have shaped the F-16/18s Radar, systems and weapons. An example of such is when they used NASA data for the F-16's FLCS and G limiter which they are now correcting after being given the right information.

So to say guessing is not out of the question isn't entirely true as ED and other devs don't mind "guessing" or bending the truth or what we know of the truth to make all the puzzle bits fit together.

Other then that, great post I enjoyed reading it.

There is a German Interview with Gero Finke about TrueGrit and the development of the most modern Aircraft in DCS with some outstanding screenshot that some of you might have seen already.

There's also an english interview with him. Not sure if you've seen it:

Below is a Link to the direct timestamp of Heatblur explaining its development efforts on the F-14. For everyone who did not know it already, it’s a very good and impressing information.

That's a trailer... :music_whistling:

The AMRAAM's 80s range was taken from a F-16 manual which apparently briefly mentioned a flight time of 80s.

...

So to say guessing is not out of the question isn't entirely true as ED and other devs don't mind "guessing" or bending the truth or what we know of the truth to make all the puzzle bits fit together.

 

Other then that, great post I enjoyed reading it.

Thank you. I tried to explain that guessing out of the blue is no way for ED. Lets call it a studied guess based on information of subject matter experts or documentation. You will never get true capability numbers (e.g. Radar or missile range) from a Jet still in service. Thats coming over time with trust, research and agreements. Thats why Modules can improve over time or get upgrades. We are lucky that ED is doing so. There are devlopers out there that would not bother. I hope you understand what I try to say.

...

That's a trailer... :music_whistling:

Sure it is a Trailer. But in that Trailer is a introduction part where they explain the development process before explaining features like multicrew. Thats the interesting part I linked the Timestamp of. True, there is more behind ist. But I can not present several years of Forum posts and information on development from Heatblur.

About the Interview you provided. No I did not know it. I will check that out too. Thank you for that.

regards.