Is it a bird? Is it a super bird?

I go to to move the F4-U and Iwo Jima to to 201? section, but on Steam, maintain the F4-U and Iwo Jima modules.

Ah, I caught that in the middle of a change then :)

So we can still hope for a Corsair, that's all good. Not that people here will read any of that, they're too busy venting ;)

NOBODY was expecting it, indeed a surprise, worst kind of

Actually, to anyone paying attention, you guys should have been expecting something like this since September:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3235191&postcount=79

I even posted a reminder in October:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3257174&postcount=30

My top guess back then was the Aviat Husky, but it turns out to be an Aviat Christen Eagle II.

This has to be the troll of the century. It just has to be.....

Actually, to anyone paying attention, you guys should have been expecting something like this since September:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3235191&postcount=79

 

I even posted a reminder in October:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3257174&postcount=30

 

My top guess back then was the Aviat Husky, but it turns out to be an Aviat Christen Eagle II.

Fine, we get it, you outsmarted us all. There you go, what you wanted to hear. You should have bought a ticket for the lottery.

There is only one way for M3 out of this:

Mount two Mistrals to the wings (from the Gazelle) MacGyver style.

Actually, to anyone paying attention, you guys should have been expecting something like this since September:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3235191&postcount=79

 

I even posted a reminder in October:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3257174&postcount=30

 

My top guess back then was the Aviat Husky, but it turns out to be an Aviat Christen Eagle II.

There's no secret that third parties develop for other sims, nobody suspected it would come here, there's nothing wrong into showing developments, most time is something to be proud of. But well.. seeing the outcome....

This has to be a joke surely? Can you fix the MiG21 please?

While I can't claim to be excited about it, I'll buy it. I've been hoping for some civil planes so I'll support this even if its not what I was hoping for. You us a Foxbat or a Fitter now though M-3 lol.

People really need to stop doing this. If you genuinely want an aerobatic plane in DCS then fine, go ahead. But if you're buying a module purely to "support the devs" you're shooting yourself in the foot. This is a business, and development decisions are driven by market demand. Not forum posts. Not wishlists. Not asking "please make this plane" in a developers forum. Not complaining when a module is released that you don't like. Its driven by what will and what will not sell.

When you buy a trainer or a civvie plane or something you don't actually want, all you're doing is telling the developer that those planes are in demand, which only encourages them to make more of those planes because they cost very little to make and will sell. You aren't "supporting the developers", you're just ensuring we won't get any interesting planes out of them.

If you want combat planes, buy combat planes and avoid this completely. The clearest message to LNS that we want combat modules would be if this biplane doesn't sell at all. If you want to "support" LNS, go buy the MiG-21. A lack of sales of this biplane and a spike in sales of the MiG-21 would be the clearest message that they need to make combat planes.

The years with DCS got me used to, accept and grow understanding for a lot of things. Normally I would say something "political" like "to be honest...".

This time they had really overdone it, I feel like I just got a big slap to my face :mad::mad::mad:

An aerobatic plane, in a Combat simulator? For sure it could be expecteed it's going to be "controversial". Yeap, instead of keeping a low profile lets make a hudge hype train, steamroll the expectations and and finally troll everyone.

You should really fire your marketting manager. This thread will serve as an outstanding exmaple of marketting fail. Great job heating the expectations and leaving pople pissed off.

On top of that we learn that this plane is the reason for why the MiG-21 updates had been put on hold. Seriosly. As a MiG-21 owner I just got a clear message -we don't give a !#@ about our customers.

Where the heck DCS is going. Someone from ED had to give an ok for that. Is there a pilot on board? Or the "sand box" approach had been taken to the extreme. Just throw in everything randomly having the long term DCS strategy to like this:

And the rationalle of it being a test bed... In which way it's flight model will be different from the Corsair. RLY, so far the trainers had been used as an intorduction and while already being questionable to many they still matched the military aviation portfolio. Now we have an civilian bi-plane. What's next? RC planes, hot air ballon, zeppelin, kites, combined goat simulator?

EDIT: All the similarities between aerobatic flight path and the pattern on the sign are absolutelly coincidental.

...Gripen..?

Firmek, i love your post :lol:

On the bright side, we can use it as target drones, it can't fire back anyway.

Now we have an civilian bi-plane. What's next? RC planes, hot air ballon, zeppelin, kites, combined goat simulator?

You say that like it's a bad thing. Now, I want to roll over on airfields with the numerous air Quake services and spam Red Alert 2 quotes.

KIROV REPORTING

Coming soon...DCS:Cessna 172, followed by the immense immersion of pure speed and luxury, DCS:Zeppelin. Come on guys, serious?! At least we have the Hornet, Tomcat, Phantom and Hind in the pipeline...

Guys relax, nobody lost anything and we had a nice 2-3 days of fun speculation and hype. You don't like, I don't like it. Read their FAQ they talk about some interesting stuff and don't loose your centerline. PEACE!

Coming soon...DCS:Cessna 172, followed by the immense immersion of pure speed and luxury, DCS:Zeppelin. Come on guys, serious?! At least we have the Hornet, Tomcat, Phantom and Hind in the pipeline...

HELIUM MIX OPTIMAL.

I had many good laughs on this topic, mostly how easily people get totally toxic.

This should be only thing in focus with this release.

Why did we choose the Christen Eagle II?

What started as a technology test-bed for propeller aircraft and multiple cockpit codebase, turned in the end into a full fledged aerobatics aircraft simulator. Our primary goal with the Eagle was to create a groundbreaking prop-engine flight model to be used for our WW2 aircraft.

Once they start rolling out WW2 airplanes, I will buy every single one of them, and then I will probably buy even this little bird... just for kicks.

Oh, and maybe I don't feel disappointed, because I don't get on board the hype trains. :D

I had many good laughs on this topic, mostly how easily people get totally toxic.

 

This should be only thing in focus with this release.

 

Why did we choose the Christen Eagle II?

What started as a technology test-bed for propeller aircraft and multiple cockpit codebase, turned in the end into a full fledged aerobatics aircraft simulator. Our primary goal with the Eagle was to create a groundbreaking prop-engine flight model to be used for our WW2 aircraft.

 

Once they start rolling out WW2 airplanes, I will buy every single one of them, and then I will probably buy even this little bird... just for kicks.

I'm tired with the promises. You can try to justify about everything. It's time to deliver, starting with completing the MiG-21. I had been supporting DCS with buying most of the modules, on a first day of release. Some I flew just few times but still bought them to support the 3'rd parties ED and DCS as such. Including modules from 3'rd parties that re-focused and released a new module when the first one was still incomplete.

I did really understood the niche business of the flight sim and difficulties that ED and 3'rd parties are facing.

Enough is enough however and this doesn' thave anything to do with the hype train, or the fact that I could just pass and not by the civilian module. This situation showed me there is no vision, why should I invest in something which lacks a long term consistency.

Unless there is a clear indication it's otherwise, from now on I'll approach it as any other title and buy only those modules that I'm actually going to spend time on.

Or your like me and you'd be disappointed if they turned out to be making a WW2 aircraft..but its not even that...lol

SMH. No thanks I have civil sims for just this kinda thing.

I greatly respect you and your posts, but may i ask how you know that it what they are doing does not require a fully functioning test-bed?

Because a test bed for a flight model does not require the detailed 3d model, cockpit and associated avionics. It requires a flying brick which acts like the real thing.

I'm tired with the promises. You can try to justify about everything. It's time to deliver, starting with completing the MiG-21. I had been supporting DCS with buying most of the modules, on a first day of release. Some I flew just few times but still bought them to support the 3'rd parties ED and DCS as such. Including modules from 3'rd parties that re-focused and released a new module when the first one was still incomplete.

I did really understood the niche business of the flight sim and difficulties that ED and 3'rd parties are facing.

Enough is enough however and this doesn' thave anything to do with the hype train, or the fact that I could just pass and not by the civilian module. This situation showed me there is no vision, why should I invest in something which lacks a long term consistency.

Unless there is a clear indication it's otherwise, from now on I'll approach it as any other title and buy only those modules that I'm actually going to spend time on.

+1

Because a test bed for a flight model does not require the detailed 3d model, cockpit and associated avionics. It requires a flying brick which acts like the real thing.

+1. Just to give some more insight. Prototyping is nothing unnatural in development. One of the obvious goals is to gain the experience. Completing development costs much more. On top of that what people forget that creating a software is only a portion, quite often a small one of total cost of ownership. You buy a puppy, you have to feed it. The software has to be maintained and that's costly.

+1. Just to give some more insight. Prototyping is nothing unnatural in development. One of the obvious goals is to gain the experience. Completing development costs much more. On top of that what people forget that creating a software is only a portion, quite often a small one of total cost of ownership. You buy a puppy, you have to feed it. The software has to be maintained and that's costly.

Yeah your absolutely right, but it'll probably be riddled with bugs for the first couple years its out anyways like most DCS aircraft ;) sucking up time and money...look what happened to some of the other 3rd parties...

Bye

Phant