F4 PHANTOM

[potatoman530]

Here is a reddit link for those who dont speak Russian for the entire interview however this is the most important thing they mentioned :  https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/pikhlo/russian_interview_with_huge_news_for_dcs/ 

 

[QuiGon]

54 minutes ago, potatoman530 said:

Here is a reddit link for those who dont speak Russian for the entire interview however this is the most important thing they mentioned :  https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/pikhlo/russian_interview_with_huge_news_for_dcs/ 

 

 

For those people who are annoyed by reddit (like me), you can find the same information on these forums as well:

 

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by QuiGon

[Furiz]

58 minutes ago, potatoman530 said:

Here is a reddit link for those who dont speak Russian for the entire interview however this is the most important thing they mentioned :  https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/pikhlo/russian_interview_with_huge_news_for_dcs/ 

 

 

Well ED is not making the Phantom.

 

So probably by some one else.

[Dudikoff]

Maybe Heatblur? Hopefully. It would certainly make sense, unless there's some new unannounced developer..

Edited September 6, 2021 by Dudikoff

[upyr1]

5 hours ago, Dudikoff said:

Maybe Heatblur? Hopefully. It would certainly make sense, unless there's some new unannounced developer..

 

Heatblur has the Jester AI, so I expect it will be them, though I don't know what is going on with Petrovich 

[Harlikwin]

5 hours ago, Dudikoff said:

Maybe Heatblur? Hopefully. It would certainly make sense, unless there's some new unannounced developer..

 

 

It may be wishful thinking on my part, but yeah I really really hope its heatblur. Just cuz they do the best FM's IMO.

 

A few points to consider

 

But really, they can largely re-cycle Jester for the phantom, yes different "switches" and all that but the logic and all that should be the same. This should really cut down the dev time considerably.

 

Second, they are also making the Forrestal which operated phantoms, and they are investing alot of resources into that "era" already with the A6 as well.

 

Thirdly, they are gonna release the -95 versions of the F14 which will have "new-old" Aim-7 and Aim-9J etc missiles. As well as the ALR-45 which IIRC was used on the phantom as well. 

 

So in alot of ways they seem to be putting alot of resources into the F14 that could be "dual" use. 

 

[upyr1]

26 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

 

It may be wishful thinking on my part, but yeah I really really hope its heatblur. Just cuz they do the best FM's IMO.

 

A few points to consider

 

But really, they can largely re-cycle Jester for the phantom, yes different "switches" and all that but the logic and all that should be the same. This should really cut down the dev time considerably.

 

Second, they are also making the Forrestal which operated phantoms, and they are investing alot of resources into that "era" already with the A6 as well.

 

Thirdly, they are gonna release the -95 versions of the F14 which will have "new-old" Aim-7 and Aim-9J etc missiles. As well as the ALR-45 which IIRC was used on the phantom as well. 

 

So in alot of ways they seem to be putting alot of resources into the F14 that could be "dual" use. 

 

I believe in the 1980s a carrier airwing consisted of 

• 2 fighter squadrons F-14s, F-4s, or F/A-18s
• 2 attack flying A-7s or strike fighters flying F/A-18 
• 1–2 A-6 squadrons
• 4 E-2s
• 10 S-3s
• some A-3s.

If we get some AI A-3s I hope we also get the A-3's crippled USAF sister the B-66. We'll need to script random flame outs to make the missions realistic. 

[potatoman530]

8 hours ago, Furiz said:

So probably by some one else.

Idk it would be odd for the CEO of ED to announce a module for a 3rd party dev

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

I believe in the 1980s a carrier airwing consisted of 

• 2 fighter squadrons F-14s, F-4s, or F/A-18s
• 2 attack flying A-7s or strike fighters flying F/A-18 
• 1–2 A-6 squadrons
• 4 E-2s
• 10 S-3s
• some A-3s.

If we get some AI A-3s I hope we also get the A-3's crippled USAF sister the B-66. We'll need to script random flame outs to make the missions realistic. 

 

Yeah, from the Forrestal the F-4 was gone for the timeframe of HB's Forrestal (which is early 80s at the earliest). That said, AFAIK, the F-4S at least was still around at the same time (though only briefly).

[Wizard_03]

3 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

 

It may be wishful thinking on my part, but yeah I really really hope its heatblur. Just cuz they do the best FM's IMO.

 

A few points to consider

 

But really, they can largely re-cycle Jester for the phantom, yes different "switches" and all that but the logic and all that should be the same. This should really cut down the dev time considerably.

 

Second, they are also making the Forrestal which operated phantoms, and they are investing alot of resources into that "era" already with the A6 as well.

 

Thirdly, they are gonna release the -95 versions of the F14 which will have "new-old" Aim-7 and Aim-9J etc missiles. As well as the ALR-45 which IIRC was used on the phantom as well. 

 

So in alot of ways they seem to be putting alot of resources into the F14 that could be "dual" use. 

 

Have to disagree on the FM. At least for the cat, its in a good place now but its been quite a roller coaster. I suppose they are for everyone ED included but I don't think HB is any better. They do however do a great job with immersion, little touches like buffeting and audio cues in the cockpit really let you feel their products something that you start missing in other DCS modules.

 

Anyways But yeah I hope its HB too it would make sense, don't they still have an unannounced project listed on their public roadmap?

I think they have the best art department, certainly better then Raz and ED, However if its them I worry that they have too much on their plate. A-6, F-4, AND Eurofighter is a lot. even if they all are not under active development right now. Certainly gonna take a while for EA let alone Release states based on their track record.

 

Here's hoping its a Navy version!

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by Wizard_03

[Silver_Dragon]

3 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I believe in the 1980s a carrier airwing consisted of 

• 2 fighter squadrons F-14s, F-4s, or F/A-18s
• 2 attack flying A-7s or strike fighters flying F/A-18 
• 1–2 A-6 squadrons
• 4 E-2s
• 10 S-3s
• some A-3s.

If we get some AI A-3s I hope we also get the A-3's crippled USAF sister the B-66. We'll need to script random flame outs to make the missions realistic. 

 

Forrestal Class Air wings from 79 to Descomised:

CVA-59 Forrestal:
 

Quote

Nov 79 - May 80: CVW-17. 6th. VF-11; F-4J, VF-74; F-4J, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VA-85; A-6E, VAQ-133; EA-6B, VAW-125; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3D
Mar 81 - Sep 81: CVW-17. 6th/2nd. VF-74; F-4J, VMFA-115; F-4J, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VA-85; A-6E, VAQ-130; EA-6B, VAW-125; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3H
Jun 82 - Nov 82: CVW-17. 6th/2nd. VF-74; F-4S, VF-103; F-4S, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VA-85; A-6E, VAQ-130; EA-6B, VAW-125; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3H
Jan 83 - May 85: SLEP
Jun 86 - Nov 86: CVW-6. 6th. VF-11; F-14A, VF-31; F-14A, VA-37; A-7E, VA-105; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E, VAQ-132; EA-6B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Apr 88 - Oct 88: CVW-6. 2nd/6th/5th. VF-11; F-14A, VF-31; F-14A, VA-37; A-7E, VA-105; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E, VAQ-132; EA-6B, VAW-122; E-2C, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Nov 89 - Apr 90: CVW-6. 6th. VF-11; F-14A, VF-31; F-14A, VA-37; A-7E, VA-105; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E, VAQ-142; EA-6B, VAW-122; E-2C, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
May 91 - Dec 91: CVW-6. 6th. VF-11; F-14A, VF-31; F-14A, VFA-132; F/A-18A, VFA-137; F/A-18A, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-122; E-2C, VAQ-133; EA-6B, VS-28; S-3B, HS-15; SH-3H
Feb 92: Reclassified CVT
Sep 93: Decommissioned

 

CVA-60 Saratoga:

Quote

Oct 78 - Apr 79: CVW-3. 6th. VF-31; F-4J, VF-103; F-4J, VA-37; A-7E, VA-75; A-6E, VA-105; A-7E, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VAW-123; E-2C, RVAH-12; RA-5C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-22; S-3A, HS-7; SH-3H

Mar 80 - Aug 80: CVW-3. 6th. VF-31; F-4J, VF-103; F-4J, VA-37; A-7E, VA-75; A-6E, VA-105; A-7E, VAW-123; E-2C, RVAH-12; RA-5C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-22; S-3A, HS-7; SH-3H
Oct 80 - Feb 83: SLEP
Apr 84 - Oct 84: CVW-17. 6th. VF-74; F-14A, VF-103; F-14A, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VMAAW-533; A-6E, VAW-125; E-2C, VMAQ-2; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3H
Aug 85 - Apr 86: CVW-17. 6th/5th. VF-74; F-14A, VF-103; F-14A, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VA-85; A-6E, VAW-125; E-2C, VAQ-137; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3H
Jun 87 - Nov 87: CVW-17. 6th. VF-74; F-14A, VF-103; F-14A, VA-81; A-7E, VA-83; A-7E, VA-85; A-6E, VAW-125; E-2C, VAQ-137; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-30; S-3A, HS-3; SH-3H
Aug 90 - Mar 91: CVW-17. DS. VF-74; F-14A+, VF-103; F-14A+, VFA-81; F/A-18C, VFA-83; F/A-18C, VA-35; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-125; E-2C, VAQ-132; EA-6B, HS-3; SH-3H, VS-30; S-3B
May 92 - Nov 92: CVW-17. 6th. VF-74; F-14B, VF-103; F-14B, VFA-81; F/A-18C, VFA-83; F/A-18C, VA-35; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-125; E-2C, VAQ-132; EA-6B, HS-9; SH-3H, VS-30; S-3B
Jan 94 - Jun 94: CVW-17. 6th. VF-74; F-14B, VF-103; F-14B, VFA-81; F/A-18C, VFA-83; F/A-18C, VA-35; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-125; E-2C, VAQ-132; EA-6B, HS-15; SH-3H, VS-30; S-3B
Aug 94: Decommissioned

 

CVA-61 Ranger

Quote

Feb 79 - Sep 79; CVW-2. 7th. VF-21; F-4J, VF-154; F-4J, VA-113; A-7E, VA-145; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-25; A-7E, VAQ-137; EA-6B, VAW-117; E-2B, VQ-1; EA-3B, VS-29; S-3A, HS-4; SH-3D

Sep 80 - May 81; CVW-2. 7th/5th. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-25; A-7E, VA-113; A-7E, VA-145; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-137; EA-6B, VAW-117; E-2C, VQ-1; EA-3B, VS-37; S-3A, HS-2; SH-3H
Apr 82 - Oct 82; CVW-2. 7th/5th. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-25; A-7E, VA-113; A-7E, VA-145; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-137; EA-6B, VAW-116; E-2C, VQ-1; EA-3B, VS-21; S-3A, HS-2; SH-3H
Jul 83 - Feb 84; CVW-9. 7th/5th. VF-24; F-14A, VF-211; F-14A, VA-192; A-7E, VA-195; A-7E, VA-165; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-138; EA-6B, VAW-112; E-2C, VQ-1; EA-3B, VS-33; S-3A, HS-8; SH-3H
Jul 87 - Dec 87; CVW-2. 7th/5th. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-145; A-6E, VMAAW-121; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VAW-116; E-2C, VQ-1; EA-3B, VS-38; S-3A, HS-14; SH-3H
Feb 89 - Aug 89; CVW-2. 7th/5th. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-145; A-6E, VMAAW-121; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VAW-116; E-2C, VS-38; S-3A, HS-14; SH-3H 
Dec 90 - Jun 91: CVW-2. DS. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-155; A-6E, VA-145; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-116; E-2C, VAQ-131; EA-6B, HS-14; SH-3H, VS-38; S-3A, VRC-30 Det ?; C-2A
Aug 92 - Jan 93: CVW-2. 7th/5th. VF-1; F-14A, VF-2; F-14A, VA-155; A-6E, VA-145; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-116; E-2C, VAQ-131; EA-6B, HS-14; SH-3H, VS-38; S-3A, VRC-30 Det ?; C-2A
Jul 93: Decommissioned

 

CVA-62 Independence

Quote

Jun 79 - Dec 79; CVW-6. 6th. VF-33; F-4J, VF-102; F-4J, VA-15; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-87; A-7E, VAQ-130; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS- 28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H

Nov 80 - Jun 81; CVW-6. 6th/5th. VF-33; F-4J, VF-102; F-4J, VA-15; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-87; A-7E, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VFP-63; RF-8G, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Jun 82 - Dec 82; CVW-6. 6th. VF-14; F-14A, VF-32; F-14A, VA-15; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-87; A-7E, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Oct 83 - Apr 84; CVW-6. 2nd/6th. VF-14; F-14A, VF-32; F-14A, VA-15; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-87; A-7E, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Oct 84 - Feb 85; CVW-6. 6th/5th. VF-14; F-14A, VF-32; F-14A, VA-15; A-7E, VA-176; A-6E/KA-6D, VA-87; A-7E, VAQ-131; EA-6B, VQ-2; EA-3B, VAW-122; E-2C, VQ-2; EA-3B, VS-28; S-3A, HS-15; SH-3H
Apr 85 - Jun 88: SLEP
Jun 90 - Dec 90; CVW-14. 7th/5th. VF-21; F-14A, VF-154; F-14A, VFA-25; F/A-18C, VFA-113; F/A-18C, VA-196; A-6E/KA-6D, VAQ-139; EA-6B, VAW-113; E-2C, VS-37; S-3A, HS-8; SH-3H
Aug 91 - Sep 91: CVW-5. 7th. VF-154; F-14A, VF-21; F-14A, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VA-115; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VS-21; S-3B, HS-12; SH-3H, VRC-30 Det ?; US-3A/C-2A
Apr 92 - Oct 92: CVW-5. 7th/5th. VF-154; F-14A, VF-21; F-14A, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VA-115; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VS-21; S-3B, HS-12; SH-3H
Nov 93 - Mar 94: CVW-5. 7th/5th. VF-154; F-14A, VF-21; F-14A, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VA-115; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VS-21; S-3B, HS-12; SH-3H, VRC-30 Det ?; C-2A
Aug 95 - Nov 95: CVW-5. 7th/5th. VF-154; F-14A, VF-21; F-14A, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VA-115; A-6E/KA-6D, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VS-21; S-3B, HS-14; SH-3H, VQ-5 Det A; ES-3A, VRC-30 Det 5; C-2A
Feb 97 - Jun 97: CVW-5. 6th/5th. VF-154; F-14A, VFA-27; F/A-18C, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VQ-5 Det 5; ES-3A, VS-21; S-3B, HS-14; SH-3H, VRC-30 Det 5; C-2A
Jan 98 - Jun 98: CVW-5. 5th. VF-154; F-14A, VFA-27; F/A-18C, VFA-192; F/A-18C, VFA-195 F/A-18C, VAW-115; E-2C, VAQ-136; EA-6B, VQ-5 Det 5; ES-3A, VS-21; S-3B, HS-14; SH-3H, VRC-30 Det 5; C-2A
Sep 98: Decommissioned

 

Some maintain the F-4J/S some years, others change to F-14A on 1980.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Silver_Dragon

[Exorcet]

10 hours ago, Furiz said:

 

Well ED is not making the Phantom.

 

So probably by some one else.

Reddit has updated to say the F-4U is coming, not the F-4.

[MiGCap1]

With the TrueGrit coop HeatBlur has some real life German Phantom pilots at hand ... Gero Finke was flying the F-4F at Wittmund before he transitioned to Eurofighter in 2004. 

[Silver_Dragon]

57 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Reddit has updated to say the F-4U is coming, not the F-4.

 

Chance Vought F4U Corsair has building by Magnitude 3. On the interview, very clear say "Phamtom" no "Corsair".

Edited September 6, 2021 by Silver_Dragon

[upyr1]

2 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Yeah, from the Forrestal the F-4 was gone for the timeframe of HB's Forrestal (which is early 80s at the earliest). That said, AFAIK, the F-4S at least was still around at the same time (though only briefly).

We need an older carrier then

43 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Reddit has updated to say the F-4U is coming, not the F-4.

I wish they would say Corsair then if the community gets confused we will think it's the A-7 which we know is coming out. It's safe to say that the community wants the Phantom II and Iowa-class battleships. We have countless threads for both

[Silver_Dragon]

Minsky has update your post...

 

Quote

EDIT: Since this part got a lot of attention (and even accusation of me being a "bad translator"  ), I must clarify that ED haven't specified who's creating the Phantom (ED or a 3rd party). I made a literal translation of Kate's words ("Он будет точно в DCS. Достаточно скоро"), without adding anything from myself.

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by Silver_Dragon

[potatoman530]

Man that really sucks the F4 phantom is probably one of if not the most wanted module in DCS

[upyr1]

2 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Minsqui has update your post...

 

EDIT: Since this part got a lot of attention (and even accusation of me being a "bad translator" ), I must clarify that ED haven't specified who's creating the Phantom (ED or a 3rd party). I made a literal translation of Kate's words ("Он будет точно в DCS. Достаточно скоро"), without adding anything from myself.

 

 

The translation of Kate's words are clear. Now what is the exact question? 

5 minutes ago, potatoman530 said:

Man that really sucks the F4 phantom is probably one of if not the most wanted module in DCS

You know it's mine 

[Silver_Dragon]

8 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

The translation of Kate's words are clear. Now what is the exact question? 

You know it's mine 

 

on the interview, the question crearly say "Phantom" no "corsair".

 

About Reddit... has been "Copy / Paste" the Minsky post, and now, has change them "facepalm".

Second edit by Minsky.... 

Quote

 

EDIT #2: This is getting a bit ridiculous. Now people are saying that my translation is bad because it's not the Phantom, but the Corsair that is coming. Guys, seriously. You don't even need to know Russian to clearly hear the word "Phantom". Not "F4U", not "F4D", not "Corsair", not "Su-57".

 

Here's the literal, word-by-word transcript of that part:

 

Interviewer: Фантом... / Phantom...

Kate Perederko: Да? / Yes?

I: Перспективы? / Perspectives?

K: Он будет точно в DCS / It will definitely be in DCS.

I: Замечательно! / Wonderful!

K: Достаточно скоро / Soon enough.

I: Волшебно / Fabulous.

 

P.S. I have nothing to do with that post on Reddit. The person who made it just stole my translation without asking permission or giving me any credit.

 

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by Silver_Dragon

[Minsky]

I have no idea if the interview itself is incorrect, badly edited and whatnot. I'm not the one who made it. I simply translated what I heard in the video. And it was "Phantom". Not "Corsair" or F4-whatever.

[ebabil]

I am speechless. an ED producer gives an interview and we still don't know exactly what he/she meant and said

[IcedVenom]

4 minutes ago, ebabil said:

I am speechless. an ED producer gives an interview and we still don't know exactly what he/she meant and said

We definitely know. It's just the community who seems to be deaf.

[Rick50]

 

Minsky, thank you for your efforts! I believe you when you say you made a "literal translation of Kate's words"

 

 

I believe there was no mistake in the interview OR the translation.  I believe I made a mistake in concluding that it might be ED making this Phantom module, but now believe it's being made by a 3rd party dev, thanks to BigNewy's response saying it's not ED. But ED management would know about 3rd party devs getting near release time for a new module. 

 

Did she make a mistake in revealing this tiny scrap of info? No, I don't think so either... she didn't name the dev, nor did she give a release date, nor even a variant... all she did was answer a question about a well loved plane many of us want to see, and gave us hope that we'd probably see one soon! 

 

Now... could she have mistaken F4 for F-4, and forgotten the name of the aircraft? Not remembering the Corsair name and upon hearing the Phantom name with F4 just reflexively agreed? Possible I guess.  But even if that were such a mistake, so be it, I make mistakes all the time, and I bet all of you make mistakes from time to time too, that's just part of life. I'd be far more disapointed if people got upset at her about such a mistake, than in realizing a Phantom was not arriving.  Disapointed? Sure, yes, but upset at others, that wouldn't be fair. 

 

I just hope that over the next while we get more information that confirms or denies a Phabulous module!  I ALSO hope this doesn't scare off ED from giving interviews, which is a real possible consequence of this fallout.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Rick50

[Svend_Dellepude]

Hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom, hope for Phantom... 

[Harlikwin]

4 hours ago, Wizard_03 said:

Have to disagree on the FM. At least for the cat, its in a good place now but its been quite a roller coaster. I suppose they are for everyone ED included but I don't think HB is any better. They do however do a great job with immersion, little touches like buffeting and audio cues in the cockpit really let you feel their products something that you start missing in other DCS modules.

 

Anyways But yeah I hope its HB too it would make sense, don't they still have an unannounced project listed on their public roadmap?

I think they have the best art department, certainly better then Raz and ED, However if its them I worry that they have too much on their plate. A-6, F-4, AND Eurofighter is a lot. even if they all are not under active development right now. Certainly gonna take a while for EA let alone Release states based on their track record.

 

Here's hoping its a Navy version!

 

 

 

Yeah IDK, FM's are one of those personal preference things, HB is mine precisely due to how they deal with those small details/cues. 

 

At any rate, while I want to see both an F4E and a F4J/S, I think if HB is doing only one it will likely be the J/S. Systems wise they might as well be 2 different planes, so I don't expect a 2 fer 1. IDK on FM, maybe thats close.

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by Harlikwin