Tank50us

Why? There's dozens of manufacturers already that do exactly this, what could ED do that they can't?

because it's still in the early stages of development. If you want an idea of how it'll behave, just listen to the Super Carrier coms, which itself will get improved over time.

On the subject of ASW, the actual tactics are well known and documented, as are the tools used for specific tactics. The only thing really shrouded in secrecy about ASW is the actual acoustics of modern submarines, the properties of their hulls, and the exact workings of their sonars. However since Surface and Airborne ASW relies more on Active Sonar, this is all moot. The reason for this is because unless a surface ship is stopped, it'll never 'hear' a submarine over its own, very noisy, engines, and the same applies to helicopters with dipping sonar and air-dropped sonobouys from MPAs. On top of that, especially with the Maritime Patrol Aircraft, the equipment for passive sonar has to be very finely tuned, and is thus, very sensitive, and even with a parachute, the sudden stop will jar the equipment, and make getting a proper fix all the more difficult. Ergo, they rely on an active system as it's cheaper, and gives an exact fix on the Submarines position, allowing the torpedo to be properly set. This is especially important as most ASW equipped Helicopters have maybe two torpedoes at their disposal. So they gotta make those shots count. As for the other equipment used in ASW, the only thing I can think of that's really super classified would be the Magnetic Anomaly Detectors, which detect the disturbances of the earths magnetic field that are associated with submarines, however they're not exactly known for getting an exact fix on the sub, but they can give the aircraft an idea where to drop a sonobouy, which in DCS can be represented by an AI WSO tuning the MAD equipment automatically, and giving the player(s) an idea where to drop the bouy. Or, if they're lacking bouys, and know that there's no possibility of a friendly submarine in the area, they could drop a torpedo to go on a 'fishing expedition'.

These things are in the pipeline already. Check the roadmap.

I'd argue that it is possible, the challenge is creating an engine that'll run it smoothly, and then marketing it to the right crowd. The main issue however, is Time To Engagement, or, how long it takes from the moment you spawn to the moment you get to do anything of note. Which, for a fighter jet like an F-16, I think averages out to about 20 minutes or less. A rifleman by contrast would be riding a truck or in an APC for a good couple hours before they actually got into the fight, at which point some f---ing camping b---h (IT'S A LEGITAMATE STRATEGY!) pops'em with a .50cal AMR, and it's back to the spawn point to do it all over again. Not exactly a fun thing for most people to do, especially when most of the people who play DCS might only have a couple hours at most to play the game per week. So, in short: possible to make, good luck marketing it.

Overspeed is also an issue for aircraft like the F-14. If the flaps are out, and the aircraft gets above a certain speed, the flaps get bent, and won't function any longer. It's annoying as all heck, but it is realistic.

Bonus points if they allow us to put it in zones, like if we're flying over a 'nature preserve' and if we're flying below a certain altitude over that preserve we risk bird strikes.

here's the clip. And I was off a bit: "You've got missiles that can take out a door at five miles without knockin!" But my statement is still fact: I'd rather it be released in a playable state, then not playable at all.

I was making a reference to Firebirds.... I think.... it's in the demonstration scene.

Such is the world of Video Game Development. At least it's not an outright cancelation. Sure, it sucks that I won't be blowing tanks up from 8mi away, but at least the Apache is still coming, and will work on day one. As others have said, ED learned the hard way with the F-16 with it being too buggy and having few of the announced features. As for the collecting money part.... well.... artists and programmers need to eat too ya know... they can't just work on good faith alone.

Here's a better question: Why isn't something so common even an AI asset? AN2 Rep when?

It would also help for those that have lower quality rudder pedals, or no rudder pedals at all.

and the ability to determine who those coalitions are 'allied' with, or who they're 'aggressive' with. Maybe even allow the coalition to have a 'designated leader' amongst the coalition. For example the Blue Coalition is led by the US, Red by the USSR, Green by Italy, etc Designating the 'lead' member gets some special unit or... something? IDK... just an idea that I had all of 30sec to think on.

For This I'd suggest having a word with the guys who made the Syria Map. Why make a whole new map, when we can realistically expand one we already have? To be fair, while the current block Super Bugs are still highly classified, they don't have to do those versions. Most people would likely be content with one of the older blocks, and realistically speaking, it gives ED another aircraft to put on a Super Carrier, so it's not like it couldn't be done, but ultimately, it's their call what gets made and what doesn't.

Yup. This is how you set it up. Alternatively you can use a moving zone so that it feels more realistic (make the target a static object like a barricade). I might have to do some testing, but it could also mean that if you have a moving zone, when you have the unit 'die', it explodes. Again, it'll require some testing.

ED has said it'll never happen. Region is too hot for them to touch.

My speculation, and reasons are as follows: Updates to the weather system (though this is known at this point). An Early F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: My reasoning is that what we have currently in both the Viper and Hornet were used in early blocks of the Super Hornet, which will significantly cut down development time. And with the upcoming EF2K, will want to also introduce a Gen 4.5 fighter to keep pace, this would also give more people a reason to buy Super Carrier. A UH60 Variant: Right now the 'Utility' Helicopter role is taken up only by the UH-1H and Mi8 which have very limited offensive and defensive capabilities. A UH60 model of some description would also give incentive to overhaul the SH60 we have in game, and possibly set it up for an eventual module release. AH-1G: A good counterpart to the UH-1H. A very similar flight model and weapons load will make it a relatively easy module to add to the game. AH-1W/Z: Another option is the later Cobras, which use many off-the-shelf systems from the AH-64 (makes things cheaper, and eases training), This will also shorten development time significantly since much of the code can be ported over to either helicopter with relative ease. Now, with the Third Party Devs, I expect to see: F-15E from Razbam get rolled out late in 2022 A-7E rolled out in late 2022 A-6E from Heatblur given a proper trailer in mid 2022 with EA starting late 2022-early 2023 EF2K by Heatblur and True Grit in EA by mid 2022 F4U given a trailer in early 2022, and released by late 2022 MB-339 Released early 2022 South Atlantic Map released by mid 2022 Those are my predictions, but it wouldn't surprise me if we see AI versions within the first couple months of the year. Speaking of AI, given that we know that technicals and the bombers are being worked on, I expect to see them early in the new year as well.

NOTE: This is not another "I want the Super Hornet!" thread, this is more to discuss what would be needed to get the Rhino into DCS So.... if we assume that the early model E/F Model Super Bug is not that dissimilar from the Legacy Hornet in terms of systems, what would actually be needed to make the Super Hornet a reality in DCS? I imagine most of the weapons would just carry over, since the Lot20 Bug can use every single weapon the Rhino can (with an exception here and there), I can imagine that it would be a relatively easy aircraft to model in DCS since the main things needed would be: Radar data Engine data Flight Model Internal Systems Rhino specific weapons and stores Structural Data What do you guys think? Could this data be collected legally? Or am I nuts. Discuss

If...

Bonus points if some of these could come with LowFi flyable aircraft as well. I think we can all agree that even if we had more planes that came with certain packs, more people would be interested in actually buying them

I guess I'm a bit more optimistic, I'm thinking late 2022 early 2023 myself.

Why is this in WIshlist? Shouldn't it be in the Viper sub-forum?

There's also the fact that Razbam, like many 3PDs, are not doing this full time. The people who work on it are doing this as a side gig, while they do something else in the real world (They mentioned this in another podcast), so if any of them come home from a rough day at work, they likely don't feel like sitting down to do more work. Personally, my thing is that I won't mind not having all of the MudHens abilities from Day One. If I can shoot an AMRAAM or Sparrow, and drop dumb warheads on foreheads, I'll be happy with it until further capabilities come online. But I also know that I'm part of a silent majority on that, and many won't buy the module unless it has 100% of the features it should have.

And sadly, thanks to the CCPs stranglehold on the world right now, it's not likely to change any time soon. Heck, there's a whole list of banned Server Names and Phrases specifically to appease that horrible regime.

I'm going to go with a new tank, the turret and hull shape don't match a Leclerc Assuming they're French, they could be AMX-30s, or they could be a new Leopard 1. Hard to tell with FLIR sometimes.