Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Anything Century Series would be great!

 

Yeah, they would. It's a shame ED is averse to them :cry:

 

Especially given that they should be far less complicated than our 2000+ BLUFOR aircraft, the only thing is simulating older RADARs and the FDM, the rest should be simpler.

  • Like 2

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

Eh, I think it's fine and we'll see quite a few in the next, say, ~5-10 years. We're more or less running out of fancy Western 4th gen flying ipads, and barring some miracle Flanker module, Cold War jets are the way to go for most devs. And obviously, if you start doing Cold War jets, you can't skip the Century Series. And as you're saying, given that they're simpler, they take less resources to code, so even if they sell half as much as the Hornet or Viper, they could easily end up being more profitable.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Eh, I think it's fine and we'll see quite a few in the next, say, ~5-10 years. We're more or less running out of fancy Western 4th gen flying ipads, and barring some miracle Flanker module, Cold War jets are the way to go for most devs. And obviously, if you start doing Cold War jets, you can't skip the Century Series. And as you're saying, given that they're simpler, they take less resources to code, so even if they sell half as much as the Hornet or Viper, they could easily end up being more profitable.

 

Not to mention that a lot of assets (at least for the early 70s) fit them way better than the 2000s+ aircraft, of which there's only ships (half of them graphically questionable) and a few tanks and that's it.

  • Like 1

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

F-106A? I would buy it! We probably would need a Century Series developer. The F-100D would be an essential module for a Vietnam map. I just think aircraft modules should be built to go with maps, not just built for some whim...the way it partially seems to be now. The MiG-21. People wanted one. They always want the latest and greatest of any model aircraft. So we got the MiG-21bis. But what map, what theater does it belong to? If we were to have a Vietnam map, for instance, the MiG-21PF should be the module...and it might actually fly better. F-106A: I'd love it, but what map does it fit with? It is a cold war interceptor. It's job was to shoot down Soviet bombers...that's about it. Well, I guess you could fly THAT mission on about any map...if you are doing an "Intercept strategic bombers" scenario. For the rest of the Century Series: I think the F-100D and F-105D would be best, because they would go along with a Vietnam map...which had an awful lot of historical missions take place. F-101, F-102, F-106?...interceptors. The F-104 can be a few different things. CF-104 was a nuclear strike aircraft. F-104S was multirole tactical. F-104A and C were interceptors, mainly. They were adapted to do things they weren't really designed for, but then that happens with a lot of aircraft. Historically, I think the F-100D and F-105D are the most important of the Century Series. But I'd love to fly the F-101B, F-102A, F-104 and F-106A, too. Maybe instead of a Century-series developer, they should be an Interceptor developer. Because there was also the F-86D Sabre Dog and F-89J Scorpion and F-94 Starfire that were "interesting" interceptors. And I haven't even mentioned interceptors of countries other than the US.

 

What is really needed is a financial model that allows for a dedicated team of aircraft module developers to make it their day job. We, as customers, would have to shell out more money. I wonder if a sort of customer "bidding" system would work. You want an F-106A, for instance? All who do would have to place bids on one in, say, $25 increments. Not as in an auction, but as an investment. You really want that 106? You might purchase 20 bids on it for $500. Expensive? Well, do you want the 106 in your lifetime? And not only that, you'd want to convince as many others as possible to join you in placing their bids on it. These would be "paper" bids. You don't actually lose money...not at first. Let's say 2000 bids come in. Maybe that would be a threshold amount that would then trigger a "put your money where you mouth is" campaign. A developer wants to produce the F-106, let's say. Now everyone who bid would need to actually spend the money, as an investment, to confirm to the developer that the module can be built. If the real bids evaporate, then the deal falls through, and the module doesn't get built. In that way, popular modules would get built. Maybe more of them, more quickly. --is this possible?-- If a mixed full-time/part-time developer team could be kept busy for a year, or three, making modules that provides a living for the right, dedicated, enthusiast developers...maybe 3 to 5 modules could be produced per year instead of just 1. Now, an F-105D, for example, might get a lot more bids due to its legendary place in history in the Vietnam War. There might be some Instrument and engine systems similarities between the 105 and 106 that allows the F-106 to then be produced afterwards...J-75 engine, "tape" instruments, for example. And for the F-100D...its instrument panel has a similar layout and instruments and gunsight to the existing DCS F-86F. The F-100D flew more missions in Vietnam than any other aircraft type, I believe, and was never shot down by a MiG. It has 4 of the same guns the F-5E has. But it's going to be "manual" bombing with the F-100D just like it is in the F-86F. Would enough people place enough bids on it? There are a lot of interesting aircraft that had significant use in history that deserve to be built. But we will never see them in DCS if some new funding/production scheme isn't devised.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Absolutely yes. F-106 had it all. Very advanced interceptor integrated with SAGE and first supercomputer. Great radar and avionics for it's time. Infra red sensor. Air refuel capability. All weather operations.

 

Carrying unique AA weapon like Falcon missile, Genie nuclear tipped rocket, vulcan cannon - all in internal weapon bay, not adding any drag.

 

Great kinematic performance, the fastest single engine fighter ever, very low wing loading and good maneuverability in a dogfight, it was outturning F-4s and F-100s - and some units had been trained in close air combat in Nellis.

 

Oh, and some badass looking, Blackbird-like unique cockpit.

 

20170612044357-4aac7747-me.jpg

f-106-delta-dart-escape-profile-after-firing-the-air-2-genie-nuclear-air-to-air-rocket-against-soviet-bombers.jpg


Edited by bies
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Minor correction - the M61 on the F-106 was not carried internally, it was carried in a pod attached in the weapon bay. I think you had to take 2 fewer missiles (or no Genie) to make room for the gun pod.

 

This is the weapons bay with the gun pod:

20131029183958-61ec9815-la.jpg

 

And this is without:

640px-F-106A_119th_FIS_weapons_bay_with_

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO it should be split as F-106 "The Six" 60s and F-106 Project Six shooter , minor cockpit changes as in removing the metal frames and adding a M61 Vulcan gunpod.

 

Off topic, that is a cool name for a jet and a cool program name

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bravelink03 said:

IMO it should be split as F-106 "The Six" 60s and F-106 Project Six shooter , minor cockpit changes as in removing the metal frames and adding a M61 Vulcan gunpod.

 

Off topic, that is a cool name for a jet and a cool program name

 

Changes of Six Shooter were not that big. Modified canopy, vulkan gun instead of nuclear Genie and gunsight.

Aerges is making four Mirage F.1 variants so there is no problem.


Edited by bies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't know the F106 as well as other aircraft, but from what I've read the differences are in the ballpark of e.g the L39 and C101 modules, so even less than the Mirage F1 Aviodev is working on.

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...