Jump to content

Eagerly awaited aircraft for DCS World


Recommended Posts

Well, my first guess was the AH-64, alternaties I thought possible were the MiG-29 and a collab with Heatblur on either a Tornado or F-111.

 

Then BN and 9L said it wasn't going to be anything that's been teased already so I thought the Apache was out as it had been teased at least since 2018 (Wags Interview in a video where he taught someone CnDing the Hornet, when he also mentioned Syria for the first time - he said the Boeing licence wasn't only for the Hornet), well even further back before the Shark was out there's been A model blk 49 cockpit shots on SimHQ (still there today). So TBH I'm kinda confused that this one, which had been ruled out, actually shall be the eagerly awaited brain melter.

 

Anyway, I'm totally happy with it being teased as a D model with the Westinghouse mm-wave radar. As to say an Apache was expected, now a Longbow is confirmed cheerilee.png

 

As for the Tornado being off the table now I'm rather sad... fluttershysad.png

But I won't give up hopes, for one reason. I usually watch the German channel of VoodooDE for VR news and game first impressions. As of recently, he's got another 50+€ patreon which is Adams Group Simulations - and as a flight simmer I naturally was curious about them. They turned out to be a company who create and maintain VR training flight sims for the Luftwaffe, both Eurofighter and Tornado. With Gero Finke involved and TrueGrit and Eagle Dynamics logos on their site. Since TG already stated they would look into making a Tornado module after finishing the EF, I would expect them to be the ones with the best chances to be allowed to do that twilightsmile.png

 

Then the F-4 statement with it being off as well with the option for a 3rd party to pick it up was a shock to me. But maybe there's already something yet to be announced around that, and I do want to get that from HB as many others there. And they'd really be the guys who literally could nail it, also making naval versions and not just the E model. They've done some great work already that can be used as base for the thing and we'll even get an appropriate carrier with the Forrestal from them. I'd really celebrate getting the Phantom from HB if it's not coming from ED ajmug.png

  • Like 1

dcs-dashie-ed.jpg.c4fa047dc1c71d5ceb1913aa54b2a11e.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Not going to make everyone happy, that is impossible, if multicrew or the apache is not for you no problem.    For those who are excited its going to be great, the messages I have been getti

I’ve copied my post from the newsletter thread, as I think the same perception exists here that there aren’t many helo drivers around here:   I know many wanted the F4, Tornado, or a mo

Yet there are still some good news for us Soviet/Russian planes lovers on Russian section of ED Discord. Seems like early MiG-29 really is going to be done. Now that's the eagerly awaited module for m

I don’t say any of this to throw shade at anyone in particular; just some difficult, but truthful observations that if thought about, can help bring clarity. 

 

1. The forum represents a tiny sliver of the player base - a very small percentage of us ever comment or even visit the forums. What is said here is often NOT what the overall player base is interested in. It’s hard to remember this because only the truly motivated ever get around to posting, versus lurking. So, what appears to be an obvious slam dunk to us may not be with the larger player base. Totally normal behaviors - but if we forget that facet, we’ll spend a lot of time frustrated.

 

2. Evangelizing about our most favored module doesn’t necessarily equate into good business sense, what the overall community wants, or more importantly - will pay for. I hate it too, but reality. 

 

3. It isn’t easy to produce these unbelievably complicated modules and deliver them to an insanely (that’s ok) demanding player base. The F-14b took more than five years and is still AWIP.  Remember, during that five hears HB saw exactly $0 in revenue. It was all pro Bono until we started buying the module. An insanely popular module in the forums equals about 100 sales @ $79. I love the forums too, but it’s a honey trap of good intentions for those who want what we hope for, but ultimately our wishes might not be what the game needs ATM. 

4. Compared to other markets, the hardcore simulation market is very small and very expensive. That’s ok too, it’s just reality. For example - interested in WWII stuff? You’ll need the asset pack ($15), a map ($30) , a plane ($40), basic joysticks ($70) and I’m assuming the hardware to run it all. That’s a high hurdle to cross for the average Joe to dive in. For example, the popularity of Minecraft is directly related to its insanely low system requirements. Anyone can play it. Many of us have spent thousands on rigs and equipment. Again, that’s fine but it isn’t anywhere near the average game player looking for something new. 

 

5. The study sim market is a fraction of the causal simulation market for all of the above reasons, amplified. We are a fraction of the whole interested in flight sims. My brothers are perfect examples - very interested in flight sims and this one in particular, but the equipment needed and amount of time needed don’t work for them. We are a rare breed of people, in terms of actual size within the gaming market. I don’t say this is put us down - only as a comment on the reality of just how big the market actually is. 


6. ED runs the risk of too many moving plates with third party developers. This isn’t a simple offloading of work to unnamed ‘others’ who magically produce what we want. There’s A LOT of work here. A LOT

7. ED runs the risk of too many modules. Yes, I know to all of us that seems insane. Many of us own quite a few - most don’t. Those of us that own multiple study modules simply aren’t a big enough part of the player base to make a module make economic sense. It’s everyone else who actually carries all the water, in terms of the game’s longevity and most importantly economic prosperity. Remember, profits motivate those modules into existence. 
 

I don’t say any of this to insult anyone, or throw salt in anyone’s wounds. I think we sometimes forget - know I do - just how many considerations are a part of what is ultimately a business decision. It’s always easier to troubleshoot and much harder to execute. 
 

ET - clarity, grammar and a legion of typos. 


Edited by Palmetto 1-1
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2020 at 8:17 PM, Northstar98 said:

 

Oh yeah I saw, I'm just worried that there might be some foot shooting involved if it turns out the RADAR is a no-go.

 

. I would like to think that AH64D without Radar will be a EA thing and down the line they would add a Ah64D with Longbow radar installed and it radars functionality at least in some capacity given that even the old Janes Longbow had an apache had a working radar.

 

 

 

 


Edited by Kev2go
  • Like 1

 

 

 

Build:

 

 

 

 

 

Windows 10 64 bit,

 

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kev2go said:

 

. I would like to think that AH64D without Radar will be a EA thing and down the line they would add a Ah64D with Longbow radar installed and it radars functionality at least in some capacity given that even the old Janes Longbow had an apache had a working radar.

 

 

 

 

 

As much as I liked Jane's Longbow 2 it was extremely simplyfied when it comes to radar/interferometer modeling, it was so generic it didn't disclose anything or required and classified stuff.

 

There were so many F-22 simulators, some even serious ones like F-22 TAW. Does it mean it is even remotely possible to model DCS standard F-22? Hell no! They just made up most things, other made generic and super simplyfied and some classified systems simply ommited completely.


Edited by bies
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2021 at 3:17 AM, bies said:

As much as I liked Jane's Longbow 2 it was extremely simplyfied when it comes to radar/interferometer modeling, it was so generic it didn't disclose anything or required and classified stuff.

 

There were so many F-22 simulators, some even serious ones like F-22 TAW. Does it mean it is even remotely possible to model DCS standard F-22? Hell no! They just made up most things, other made generic and super simplyfied and some classified systems simply ommited completely.

 

 

YEs janes longbow in generally was simplified in its systems relative to modern flight sims.  Then again im not judging this purely on janes.  its been 23 years since janes longbow 2. It would possible to make a more detailed emulation of the longbow today based on the non classified  publicly available information since then.  with minimal effort a mere keywords for a google search is enough to find yourself a manual . So I would be very surprised if ED omitted the longbow radar entirely, even for a post EA complete product.


Edited by Kev2go

 

 

 

Build:

 

 

 

 

 

Windows 10 64 bit,

 

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bies said:

As much as I liked Jane's Longbow 2 it was extremely simplyfied when it comes to radar/interferometer modeling, it was so generic it didn't disclose anything or required and classified stuff.

 

There were so many F-22 simulators, some even serious ones like F-22 TAW. Does it mean it is even remotely possible to model DCS standard F-22? Hell no! They just made up most things, other made generic and super simplyfied and some classified systems simply ommited completely.

 

But it worked. Not that DCS radar modeling is much better.


Edited by stormridersp

B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC, Ryzen 3600, 32Gb DDR4 3600MHz, GTX1070Ti, CH Stuff, Oculus CV1

 

Wishlist:

AH-64

F-15E

F-117A

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I've just watched a video about the Lockheed AH56 Cheyenne attack helicopter on Curious Droids channel. One of those would be real fun! Faster than an A10 & easier to fly cos of the rigid rotorhead. Built around TOW, 30mm cannon & a gunners seat that had 360degree rotation during flight.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR-r6RR1nJM

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Goggz said:

I've just watched a video about the Lockheed AH56 Cheyenne attack helicopter on Curious Droids channel. One of those would be real fun! Faster than an A10 & easier to fly cos of the rigid rotorhead. Built around TOW, 30mm cannon & a gunners seat that had 360degree rotation during flight.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR-r6RR1nJM

 

I would love it, however it wasn't operational, so it probably isn't as suitable for DCS (personally I'm okay with such aircraft, so long as they can be modelled accurately, with the capabilities they actually had, but I'd still prioritise operational aircraft over them); this is also a good video for it.

 


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...