Jump to content

is the AV-8B+ still planned ?


FZG_Immel

Recommended Posts

is it still planned ? I thought i read you would do it. Am i wrong ?

 

I think we won’t see it before Razbam get AG radar API. And since Hornet still doesn’t have AG radar mode, no need to hold your breath. :smilewink:

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the first video update they did I think they mentioned a Gr.7, maybe the 9. I can't remember at the moment.

 

Personally I'd rather see the +. (Along with a CH-53, 46 or MV-22) to compliment their Tarawa. I'd really like to see them flesh out their work with that. It's a new element in DCS and stands to be a powerful one. But I get there are a lot of Europeans in the community who want a GR version of the Harrier too. But who knows?

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz || Virpil Warbird Base || Virpil T-50 Stick || Virpil MT-50 Throttle || Thrustmaster TPR Pedals || Oculus Rift

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the first video update they did I think they mentioned a Gr.7, maybe the 9. I can't remember at the moment.

 

Personally I'd rather see the +. (Along with a CH-53, 46 or MV-22) to compliment their Tarawa. I'd really like to see them flesh out their work with that. It's a new element in DCS and stands to be a powerful one. But I get there are a lot of Europeans in the community who want a GR version of the Harrier too. But who knows?

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

They said on the forum that the issue was the AG radar.

 

I would vote for the II+ :smilewink:

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said on the forum that the issue was the AG radar.

 

I would vote for the II+ :smilewink:

Nice. I'll be happy to see it when it comes out. The two airframes are practically the same. I always imagines it'd be like the Gazelle models

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz || Virpil Warbird Base || Virpil T-50 Stick || Virpil MT-50 Throttle || Thrustmaster TPR Pedals || Oculus Rift

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the AV-8B was developed over the GR7 as at the time the MOD had still classified parts of the GR7 that would have been needed for the full module, I think that there was a poll at the time suggesting that most of the community would have preferred a GR7 over the AV-8B.

 

 

With the South Atlantic / Falkland Islands theatre coming I would bet we would see an FRS1 before we would see an AV-8B+. That being said I wouldn't expect to see anything until after the current focuses of finishing the AV-8B, MIG 19, F-15E, MIG 23 and of course the previously mentioned terrain are done 1st.

 

 

Also when we do see it I suspect it'll be another full module similar to if we ever see a 2000-5, whilst the airframes are similar the extra work required (at least for the systems) would justify them being separate modules. Honestly to get around this argument I kind of hope they have another look at getting a GR9 into DCS or even an FA2 (less likely, and if an FRS1 is developed would probably cause the same it should be a free module discussion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there it is. The plus is coming. In due time. Thanks for the update.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz || Virpil Warbird Base || Virpil T-50 Stick || Virpil MT-50 Throttle || Thrustmaster TPR Pedals || Oculus Rift

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's really interesting, I mean, really interesting:), and it will be a matter of cost for me. I hope in a GOOOD discount for those have already purchased the Night Attack..:D

 

I just find it a risky trend for the next DCS modules. but it's just my2cents ( and I hope to not bother someone or create flames :smilewink: )

 

cheeerio!:pilotfly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's really interesting, I mean, really interesting:), and it will be a matter of cost for me. I hope in a GOOOD discount for those have already purchased the Night Attack..:D

 

I just find it a risky trend for the next DCS modules. but it's just my2cents ( and I hope to not bother someone or create flames :smilewink: )

 

cheeerio!:pilotfly:

Well, its not happening tomorrow, DCSW still needs to evolve until it can handle the "plus" and I'm pretty sure that by the time the Hornet is complete, we can move forward with it. 3D work is not the problem, systems are, and even AV-8BNA systems are being worked on in DSCW, hence the apparent "slow development" time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it will be a stand alone module, it's not like is just a Night Attack version with a radar attached to it.

 

But, on the other hand, neither is it a Yak-141, so perhaps some discount for the AV-8B NA owners might be appropriate :)

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was there a change?

 

I was under the impression both aircraft were going to be included when buying the night attack? It's one of the reasons I bought it actually, because I am a lot more interested in the AV-8B+ than the night attack.

 

No promises where made.

I've seen this too many times - buyers of modules in EA that read to much into statements from developers just because they want to believe. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are reading into things, by your argument it seems that because they didn't tell you no, you think it's going to be included.

 

You need to read the page for the module when you buy it. The F-14 is clearly being sold as two versions of the aircraft. There is nothing on the AV-8 module page that would lead you to believe it's anything other than the NA version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we will..

But for it to happen, some stuff have to happen as well in DCSW.

And it will be a stand alone module, it's not like is just a Night Attack version with a radar attached to it.

 

Awesome news Prowler! Thx for the info

Main Module: AH-64D

Personal Wishlist: HH-60G, F-117A, B-52H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are reading into things, by your argument it seems that because they didn't tell you no, you think it's going to be included.

 

You need to read the page for the module when you buy it. The F-14 is clearly being sold as two versions of the aircraft. There is nothing on the AV-8 module page that would lead you to believe it's anything other than the NA version.

 

 

This. At no point is it described as a Harrier ''pack''. The module is explicitly described as being a Night Attack... there are no references to other aircraft. Too many people with wishful thinking.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have faint memory that it was mentioned somewhere else (not in the module purchase page) that there would come the + variant with the N/A variant.

But then there has been many times as well just mentions that + variant is considered but not promised.

 

And then it has been "as bonus" if the + variant can be done.

 

 

That is why there likely is confusion as no where it was clearly said that + ain't developed or it is developed but just that it is considered, nor has it been clearly stated (because previous clause uncertainty it ever to come) that it would be a own standalone module or a additional one (like the L-39 or F-14 does have).

 

Anyways, I hope it is a upgrade license for the N/A version. So example $69 for the N/A variant and then ie, $19-29 extra to get plus variant license. So you need to buy N/A anyways if you want Plus.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF

the accuracy of the ARBS could be fully modelled vs the conventional CCIP bombing calculations.

AND

The ground radar and it's operation sufficiently modelled.

THEN

I wouldn't mind paying full price for both.

 

 

I doubt the accuracy of the ARBS vs CCIP will be modelled to that degree though. At it's base level I think (but what do I know) the calculations for the two are probably coded the same. Even if they weren't, the Sim doesn't handle ground vehicle damage models to a degree the the CEP difference would matter.

 

My point being, there is a reason the NA is still in service alongside the II+. The ARBS is a very powerful tool. If it could be modelled that well, it'd make sense to charge full price. And I hope it can be. But I'm skeptical.

 

 

As an aside. I love this airframe. So I'm buying both, I don't care how much they cost. But that's just my 2 cents

I felt like it was implied it would be included but there wasn't anything stating so. I'd like a plus but probably wouldn't pay full price. Maybe wait for a good sale unless it could be justified why its 60+ dollars different.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz || Virpil Warbird Base || Virpil T-50 Stick || Virpil MT-50 Throttle || Thrustmaster TPR Pedals || Oculus Rift

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I doubt the accuracy of the ARBS vs CCIP will be modelled to that degree though. At it's base level I think (but what do I know) the calculations for the two are probably coded the same. Even if they weren't, the Sim doesn't handle ground vehicle damage models to a degree the the CEP difference would matter.

 

 

The interesting part is that ARBS is more accurate than A-G radars when it comes to bombing, at least F/A-18C and AV-8B+ training situations has been so. So if you can use ARBS in weather conditions, you are more accurate bomber.

 

And even Russians has now made even more improved one to their attack aircrafts. I don't now remember what was the aircraft but it was flying in Syria. The system gave a laser guided bomb accuracy to conventional dumb bombs. So you got cheap way to deliver bombs as each of them doesn't need to be more expensive, but the aircraft itself is the expensive unit and not the thousands bombs you drop.

 

I don't even know does the ARBS still have the capability to lock and track air targets like fighters and helicopters, or is it still locked to a ground targets?

 

It is sad if ARBS is "just a another CCIP" implementing instead the unique system it was made, without requiring the complex systems that A-10C brought to compensate wind, elevation and all.

 

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt the accuracy of the ARBS vs CCIP will be modelled to that degree though. At it's base level I think (but what do I know) the calculations for the two are probably coded the same. Even if they weren't, the Sim doesn't handle ground vehicle damage models to a degree the the CEP difference would matter.

 

Hopefully it will change soon:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/newsletters/newsletter19102018-bbbyicwhxnxrc1xytixmz4jlqm0od9gf.html?bx_sender_conversion_id=8379085&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=mail&utm_campaign=weekend_news

 

 

Modeling Update

 

We recognize that an important aspect to improve in DCS World is more realistic damage modeling in regards to localized effects, visual effects, affect on hit components, and type of weapon impact. Regarding the latter, the new damage model will be based on two types of weapon impact: penetrating impact and proximity impact. This provides us with three primary weapon effects on a unit: penetrating (projectiles), volumetric/pressure wave (high-explosive) and volumetric/shrapnel. This last effect allows weapon casing fragments to be tracked as unique objects entering the unit. This is not modeled in our current damage model system, but it will provide a great improvement to aircraft, and later, ground unit damage.

When a projectile or shrapnel penetrates a unit, the strength and functionality of the of the unit component it intersects with is affected. This includes components like spars, flight control surfaces, engine, weapons, fuel, etc. This, in turn, can greatly affect aircraft performance and system functionality.

The team has been working hard on this new damage model system, and the primary work is now complete. It is now undergoing internal testing. We will first roll out the new damage model system in our World War II aircraft, then later move to our more modern aircraft and then ground units.

My point being, there is a reason the NA is still in service alongside the II+.

Because there wasn't enough second hand APG-65 available for the upgrade ? :lol:

And even Russians has now made even more improved one to their attack aircrafts. I don't now remember what was the aircraft but it was flying in Syria. The system gave a laser guided bomb accuracy to conventional dumb bombs. So you got cheap way to deliver bombs as each of them doesn't need to be more expensive, but the aircraft itself is the expensive unit and not the thousands bombs you drop.

I think it's the Su-24M2.

 

 

While they certainly improved their CEP, the GBU like accuracy sounds like marketing BS to me.

 

 

Otherwise a cheap, light, simple and efficient solution to increase accuracy has often been laser rangefinder :music_whistling:


Edited by jojo

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point being, there is a reason the NA is still in service alongside the II+.

 

Budgetary restrictions? IIRC, the main reason the Plus program came about was that Spain and Italy had such requirements so the USMC jumped on that train to share the development costs.

 

While they certainly improved their CEP, the GBU like accuracy sounds like marketing BS to me.

 

Of course it is, though it's probably a huge increase compared to what those Soviet planes were capable of with their original rather primitive bombing systems.

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it is, though it's probably a huge increase compared to what those Soviet planes were capable of with their original rather primitive bombing systems.

 

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD147/RGSD147.chap5.pdf

 

Why to go for the "rather primitive bombing systems" insulting in the first place?

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we won’t see it before Razbam get AG radar API. And since Hornet still doesn’t have AG radar mode, no need to hold your breath. :smilewink:

 

And yet meanwhile the art team is already making a new 3d model for the mudhen module. Something that has a/g mode within its radar :/

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we will..

But for it to happen, some stuff have to happen as well in DCSW.

And it will be a stand alone module, it's not like is just a Night Attack version with a radar attached to it.

 

No? What other avionics changes were there besides addition of a hornets an/apg65 radar and ability to fire Ammrams?

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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