Tank50us

and how many Trainers have we gotten since? I could be mistaken, but the Hawk was probably the first... now we have the L39, C101, and the MB339... plus one of the Mirage F1 variants is a two-seat trainer.

knowing Rons ego... don't hold your breath. As I've said on that thread... this could've been settled months ago with the signing of one contract... and it apparently hasn't happened yet.

It would be. But let's not forget that outside of getting the Source Code for the existing modules, or getting RB back to work... there's only two options for ED: Replace them entirely or abandon them... and considering people LIKE those aircraft, it leaves them with just one: Replace them. Also, I think people need to understand that 95% of us will NEVER set foot in these pits outside of airshows or museums. So I think it's safe to say that "Good enough" should be the end goal of any module. Exact 1-1 is fine... but it's ultimately better to get something into our hands soon, and refine as time goes on. Think of it like Elite Dangerous vs Star Citizen. Elite was a functional title after about a year and a half of development, and was released to the public about a year later.... but Star Citizen? Still waiting. In DCS terms... there's the F-15E. RB sat on that thing for about a decade before they released it. And in that time, multiple third party developers cropped up, made something, and released it. Were those modules perfect on day one? No. But they were refined little by little until they got where they are now. Hence my statement about an F-15E replacement could be released to us inside 6 months, as ED has everything they need already to pull it off. It's just a matter of refining it until it's perfect after the fact. Which I personally would be fine with, especially if they come out and say "Hey, if you didn't request a refund for the RB F-15E, you get this for free or at a significant discount".

Well.. If RB isn't coming back to keep their modules working... I'm sure there's a few people who'd be happy to accept a new job...

Honestly, with exception to the Mig19, ED has most of the documentation to make a decent 'replacement pack' for those that didn't get refunds, but these aircraft would, by necessity, have to be different versions of what RB made, JUST IN CASE someone in RBs legal department rolls up a newspaper. F-15E can be replaced, like for like, with a different version of the E... I wouldn't go with the EX, as it's too new and there isn't enough documents available yet... but a 1989 or 1990 E model? That'd work. The Mirage 2000C can be replaced by a more recent M2k, maybe the Mirage 2005? Harrier can be replaced by the last USMC version... which has the Hornets radar... which is already in game The Mig19... that's a tough one since getting Russian Documents is notoriously difficult. But there is a team working on the Mig17 right now. The real catch is how much development time would be needed to get each one working. A replacement Strike Eagle could probably be in our hands inside of 6 months with BASIC functionality (A/A weapons, Dumb and Laser-guided Bombs, working flight and damage models), but that's only because they have most of the work done for them with the F-15C (same engines, radar, etc). But a new Harrier or Mirage? We'd need a couple years. Minimum. This all being said... I just hope they can figure something out with RB, either to get them working again, or get the source codes. But until then... pray.

So bub... with the likelihood of the Super Herc coming out late this year, or early next... how's that crow taste?

First, something like this would be an option, just like the IFLOLS for the SCM. If you don't want it, take a ten-twenty second jaunt through the settings, and turn it off. Some people have a hard time seeing the lights at all. Sure, you can probably see them just fine in VR, or with a high enough resolution screen and GPU... but not everyone has that... actually... for that matter... I'd be willing to bet money that at least 40% or more of the community is running the game with a computer that can run it at OK settings, and using lower-end controls. If my estimate is correct, then this option would likely help a fairly significant portion of the community, which in turn leads to better investment into DCS, which means more money spent on modules, etc. A small bit of development time to make AAR a little easier... and ED will reap the rewards. I can only see this as an absolute win.

yeah, it's a shame how so many people demand the ability to see the welds and bolts on an M1 Abrams or T-72 when the majority of us will be squinting at it through an MFD wired to a T-Pod... or pulling out of a dive a couple thousand feet above it as a 2,000lb gift pile-drives into the ground next to it. I can understand it for the helo pilots, after all... they get MUCH closer to the unit in question... but I'd still argue that ground units need to be optimized for performance not visual fidelity. After all, if you're an Apache pilot recreating the 1991 Gulf War, the dozens of T-72s, T-55s, and BMPs that you and your 15 wingmen are engaging... the mission NEEDS to run smoothly... even as turrets head to the moon.

honestly, the way the sim is, we really can't see it like 99% of the time. On the RWR it still shows up as "E2", and the only time we actually get a good look at one is if it's on the deck or we're flying in close formation. That being said, having more AWACS aircraft wouldn't be a bad thing, like the E-1 Tracer, KA-31, or that modified Sea King with a radar.

We can always RP them as these guys in that instance....

I mean... they could be weather radars too.

Bonus points if we can have it 'play' certain radars so that it appears on RWR as the desired emitter.

Now, we all have stories we wanna tell. Most of us will tell it through the events of a campaign. But if you want to shoot something for YouTube, you're usually stuck with one of two options: 1. carefully path the AI and HOPE they do what you intend or 2. Bring in a bunch of 'actors' to fly the jets, and hope that when it's time to shoot, the weapons do what you want them to do. Now, we've all seen some INCREDIBLE work by some talented individuals who can put together teams of people to get JUST the right shot. But what if we had access to some tools that made everyone's lives easier in this regard? What if you had the ability to have a path that an aircraft will follow, releasing a weapon at the exact point you want it to, and that weapon doing exactly what you want it to do? And this is just one example. I'm sure people here could come up with a number of shots they could pull off if the tools were present. What do you guys think? I imagine that ED has the tools already for their trailers... but can ya'll imagine what we could pull off if we had them?

I have to ask... does my idea have merit for HOW to do Infantry squads?

A fellow Ground Pounder? Here? Holy carp! Anyway, it's one of those things that will take quite a long time given everything else that's on the plate. That said, one aspect I would like to see changed is the way infantry squads are actually handled, compared to how they are now. Right now, they're basically treated as human-shaped ground vehicles, when they should have a similar system to the trains. You plop a squad down, and then build it up from the squad leader or use presets.