Pretty Big News for the Future

[Olgerd]

Speaking of videos,in case you missed it, heres another with f-16 HUD simbology during a mock engagement:

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos.php?action=view&id=99

 

Its not quite like in falcon 4, its close but I think the one on the videos is more stylish ;) specialy with the gun funnel with all those converging dots arround it.

 

Thanks. We have it too.

[nunsuch]

I don't think the Mig-31 would be a very successfull flyable add-on aircraft(unless it is widely loved in Russia) considering that it is a two seater and not enough information is available about its weapon systems. Time would be better spent on other aircraft. I would think it was great but I think most people would think it was to heavy and old. My vote would be on the Mirage 2000C but it seems even less information is available for that. After the Mirage 2000C the F/A-18 would be the best but if the F-16 is more economical I am sure it would be very popular as well. I like the Jaguar suggestion to but the aircraft I think would be most popular in the U.S. would be the F-14.

[MBot]

but the aircraft I think would be most popular in the U.S. would be the F-14.

 

I am thinking that too, the F-14 is an extremly popular plane ( I love the Tomcat aswell ). But mysteriously it doesn't get mentioned very often when discussing new flyables ( at least a lot less than the F/A-18 and F-16 ). Perhaps this is because the F-14 is not a true multirole fighter, but on the other hand the F-15C is popular in the lomac community and is air-air only too.

I find it interesting that the majority of the people are crying for the Hornet and not the Tomcat, as this is what I would have expected.

 

 

Btw Olgerd, how is the reference situation for the Tomcat ? Sorry I ask this question for so many different airplanes, but I find it interesting to know which planes have accessible references and which not. So be prepeared to hear that question again from me :)

[coldcrew]

I think ED learned their lesson with the F-15 and A-10, two supposedly very popular airplanes with americans. Fell flat on it's face. F18/F16/F14 it won't matter that much

[Pilotasso]

The plane that would have everybodys aproval would be the Harrier, but ED would have to implement thrust vectoring, even though its not intended for normal cruise flight.

[SUBS17]

I think ED learned their lesson with the F-15 and A-10, two supposedly very popular airplanes with americans. Fell flat on it's face. F18/F16/F14 it won't matter that much

 

I wouldn't say that, the A-10 was extremely popular online before FC and the F-15 was and still is the deadliest for AA online.

[SUBS17]

The plane that would have everybodys aproval would be the Harrier, but ED would have to implement thrust vectoring, even though its not intended for normal cruise flight.

 

I think the Harrier is a unique aircraft, it would be very cool to be able to fly it online.

[Allochtoon]

and the F-15 was and still is the deadliest for AA online.

 

I find that a rather bold statement. I presume this can be statisticially proven?

[rocketeer]

....Which makes me think why leave out the F-18.. could it be that ED really want to release their next sim, say Lockon Future air combat, with the announcement that you will be able to fly the Hornet? Hmm if so then its good business plan and to be honest I can’t say I would do it any different.

 

I could think of a few reasons why the F-18 was left out.

1. Not enough info =>don't think so since they can get info on the F-15, A-10, and F-16. And the F-18 has been around for some time now.

 

2. A2G and MFD functions too difficult to develop => don't think so either, since they are planning to do the F-16 which has A2G and MFDs.

 

So I'd go with Cosmonaut's guess that ED is planning to sell F-18 in the future separately, under a title not linked to Ubisoft's LOCK-ON. Of course I'd buy the game. ED is da best in flight sim. It's just that this will be a long wait though. Pity as I think the F-18 would be THE most popular aircraft,

1. Being American (we have so many Russians ones, and now with the new SU-25T and later the KA-50) helps tip the balance, and

 

2. Being multi-role its so great. It can kill bandits, shoot HARMS and Mavs and drop bombs. So versatile.

 

3. It provides carrier ops to the American side, which will be fun

[MBot]

The plane that would have everybodys aproval would be the Harrier, but ED would have to implement thrust vectoring, even though its not intended for normal cruise flight.

 

I don't think that would be the problem. En contrair, I think ED would welcome the challange. To be honest, I think one of the big reasons ED selected the Ka-50 was to show off their AFM skills :)

[britgliderpilot]

The plane that would have everybodys aproval would be the Harrier, but ED would have to implement thrust vectoring, even though its not intended for normal cruise flight.

 

Time for another Jet Thunder plug . . . . . ;)

 

http://www.thunder-works.com/news.htm

 

 

Sea Harrier with thrust vectoring, Pucara, Mirage, Skyhawk, carrier ops for both sides, all in a Falklands War scenario.

 

Oh - and moving deck crew. Cool, or what?

[MBot]

Time for another Jet Thunder plug . . . . . ;)

 

http://www.thunder-works.com/news.htm

 

 

Sea Harrier with thrust vectoring, Pucara, Mirage, Skyhawk, carrier ops for both sides, all in a Falklands War scenario.

 

Oh - and moving deck crew. Cool, or what?

 

 

Yes, but all this with only one part-time programmer. As much as I hope for a good Falkland sim, but the longer I follow the progress of JT I come to the conclusion that it is just too much to handel for such a small team. I wish them my best luckm but I don't think we will see JT befor the release of "ED's next 1.3".

[SUBS17]

I find that a rather bold statement. I presume this can be statisticially proven?

 

Before v1.1s release the odds were that if you were playing online alot of guys pick the F-15 first due to the radar and the AMRAAM. The only thing that comes close is the 29 with its r77s, but even then its fuel capacity and endurance is tiny compared to the F-15. Thats not to say that either the 27 or 29 are bad aircraft, its just that the AMRAAM-F-15 is an efficient combination. There were alot of complaints last year because of this happening on servers.

[Olgerd]

Btw Olgerd, how is the reference situation for the Tomcat ? Sorry I ask this question for so many different airplanes, but I find it interesting to know which planes have accessible references and which not. So be prepeared to hear that question again from me :)

 

Same here as with F-18 - TAC manual still needed.

[Pilotasso]

besides it would require 2 players to fly it.

[Stormin]

I think ED learned their lesson with the F-15 and A-10, two supposedly very popular airplanes with americans. Fell flat on it's face. F18/F16/F14 it won't matter that much

 

Incorrect. I've seen the sales numbers. Hardly a falling in any sense. You shouldn't make statements that are not based on facts.

[Stormin]

The plane that would have everybodys aproval would be the Harrier, but ED would have to implement thrust vectoring, even though its not intended for normal cruise flight.

 

Not a problem. I've already seen it done for flyable helicopters and "other" aircraft in the Lock On engine.

[MBot]

and "other" aircraft in the Lock On engine.

 

Ok, now you got my attention :)

[SUBS17]

Hey Olgred, regarding the Hornet is this enough info for ya?

http://www.patricksaviation.com/files.php?action=view&id=3

Only thing missing is weapons and HUD modes, Super Hornet very cool :cool:

More than a match for the 29K

[wsoul2k]

Hy Olgerd today for the next project from ED what shold be a NO GO condition to choose Flyables ?

 

 

I have read threads about MFD and A2G function and other limitations

 

my question are:

 

1-MFD is a problem ?

2-A2G function is a problem ?

3-Two seaters are problem ?

 

or just the lack of info is the problem ?

 

 

tks :)

 

BTW just to be clear if ( BIG IF here :cool: )any of this flyables became true they will apear in a NEW ONE project rigth ? or in a 1.xxx Lock On

 

 

tks again

 

Rodrigo Monteiro

[GGTharos]

Those are no-go conditions for LOMAC.

 

For the new project, at the least MFD and AG should no longer be a problem as I understand it ;)

[MBot]

my question are:

 

1-MFD is a problem ?

2-A2G function is a problem ?

3-Two seaters are problem ?

 

 

Judging by the planes Igor mentioned, non of these points is a problem.

MFD -> F-16, MiG-29K

A2G radar -> F-16, MiG-29K

Two seaters -> AH-64, Mi-28

 

So all these functions seems to be planed for the future.

[Olgerd]

Hey Olgred, regarding the Hornet is this enough info for ya?

http://www.patricksaviation.com/files.php?action=view&id=3

Only thing missing is weapons and HUD modes, Super Hornet very cool :cool:

More than a match for the 29K

 

Thanks. And this one we have too. ;)

This "only thing" is well described in TAC manuals. We don't have them yet.

[Dmut]

Hey Olgred, regarding the Hornet is this enough info for ya?

http://www.patricksaviation.com/files.php?action=view&id=3

Only thing missing is weapons and HUD modes, Super Hornet very cool :cool:

More than a match for the 29K

They have it, and it's not enought, since it doesn't describes a weapon delivery nor weapon avionics and radar modes.

 

edit: oops, didn't saw your post, Olgerd.

[Guest DeathAngelBR]

Did I read it right? Thrust vectoring modeling not a problem?