Spino

The first one I'd like to see is the F-14E Super Tomcat (ST-21). For that matter, throw in the AH-56 Cheyenne! Now so far the only full-fidelity modules that have been made are real-life aircraft that actually saw service (F-14A/B for example). I'm just not sure how ED would feel about having 3rd party modules (not free mods) of aircraft that either didn't get past the drawing board or prototype stage, given that DCS is supposed to be realistic. On the flip side of that, I think that some of these machines might well help to level the playing field where aircraft like the upcoming Typhoon and Mi-24 are concerned (F-14E even though it would probably fight on the same side as the EF2000, and the AH-66). I'd love to see this stuff in DCS, but have you considered that this sort of thing has never been done before and how ED might react to it? I know someone else already posted something about this, but this could be more of an issue than you think. Maybe it's just me.

As far as I know, the Marianas map releases first as a modern map, so it'll go well with aircraft like the JF-17, J-11, and the Tomcat and Hornet. I'm looking forward more to the F-8J Crusader that Magnitude is working on, and I'm not sure I understand why they aren't prioritizing that over the Corsair since the Crusader would be more compatible with a modern version of the Marianas map, but that's another topic in itself. I think to make a WWII version of the Marianas map realistic, we'd need a lot more AI models (ships, aircraft, and submarines), and new flyable modules to the tune of what Microsoft did with CFS2 back in the day. CFS2 had the P-38(F), F-6F(-3), F-4F(-4), F4U(-1), A6M(2 and 5), and the N1K2J as flyable aircraft. With the level of detail that DCS has, making all of that would be a tall order. Right now there are only a couple of planes that I know of that actually exist that would be at home in a WWII version of the Marianas map - the P-51D, P-47D, and F-4U (when the latter is released). There's all kinds of stuff that could fit well in a map like this that isn't currently in the pipeline (at least that I'm aware of), like: Flyable Planes: F6F Hellcat F4F Wildcat SBD Dauntless TBF Avenger P-38 Lightning A6M Zero D3A Val B5N Kate Seafire AI Planes: G4M Betty B-29 Superfortress PBY Catalina Ships: Essex Class CV Independence Class CVL Shokaku Class CV Fletcher/Benson Class DD South Dakota/Iowa Class BB Cleveland Class CL Baltimore Class CA Mogami Class CA Myoko Class CA Fubuki/Kagero Class DD Submarines: Type C/D Class SS Gato/Balao/Tench Class SS Long list, but even longer for DCS. ED and the third party devs could pick ten things out of that list and it would take them a good while to complete them all. I have no idea when ED plans to release the WWII version of the Marianas map, but I doubt that it'll be missing all of this. My guess is that they have some of these things in the works or at least projected to be and they just haven't said anything about it yet (in particular the ships and AI planes, though what they are working on could very well be different from that list I put together). It might be a good while before they release the WWII version for that reason, because otherwise it would be kind of like what happened with the F-16C.

Now that is a proper skin, just needs a window fix!

It's added now, available in the high-fidelity mods section.

You know what, I did forget that one. I'll get it added shortly.

Someone please do this lol

What's the status on the Constellation Class Frigate?

They said Vulkan is supposed to come at some point this year, like August maybe IIRC. I know it wasn't supposed to come with the initiqal release of 2.7.

@Tank50us

They do look like World of Warships models, but I'm not sure that the Iowa in World of Warships has the barrel shrouds that this has.

I have a website with links to a number of DCS mods (see link below). https://sites.google.com/view/spinossimulationsite/dcs-world/mods?authuser=0 DISCLAIMER: I am not hosting or redistributing any of these mods, I am simply finding their locations on the web and providing a user-friendly way to access them. The "download" buttons will take you to the original location of the mod, so you can download it from there. On the main mods page I have some of the most high-quality mods listed, like the Community A-4E Skyhawk and Grinnelli's F-22 Raptor. I also have a subpage for other aircraft mods and a subpage for ship and vehicle mods. This list is by no means all inclusive, it isn't anywhere close. I will add more as I find them and have time. Feel free to post links to mods that aren't already listed on the site (must be the original mod location though). That will help me collect them and add them.

Are you talking about Vulkan? That would certainly make it scale better over multiple CPU cores, but for people with CPU-strong systems it might not do them much good given the current GPU market. I have heard before that DCS can't take full advantage of high-end graphics solutions like the 2080ti and 3080, like it only uses 40-50% of the GPU, but ED may have already changed that, IDK. I wouldn't know anyway because DCS eats my GPU alive with usage around 99% most of the time, and mine is at the low end, so that's to be expected. Right now it's paired with an R5 1600AF, and atm that works fine, but once they add Vulkan support I'll likely be completely GPU-bound, and since I already hit full GPU usage a lot, that's not likely to help me any until I'm able to swap it for a more powerful one.

This is more like it. Although the Tirpitz handily sinks an Iowa, which shouldn't happen.

Just downloaded it, testing now.

When?

It seems that the Iowas don't have a collision model. They aren't landable and missiles go right through them. Any fix?

Obviously 2020 has come and gone, do we have any projection on the release date?

I thought it was either the -135 or -130, but you're right, it's the -132. I can remember the -129 no problem, but IDK why I have trouble with the -132.

Same here. There weren't any RCS-reduction measures planned for the ST-21. The ST-21 was supposed to have the GE F-110-129 (or some version thereof, maybe -429 with the tailpipe extension that the F-14 engine bay required). Circa 2010 it might have gotten the F-110-135 which is the same engine used in a special version of the F-16 (IIRC was special-ordered by Qatar or some other Arab country). The -135 delivers over 30,000lbf thrust in full reheat under the right conditions.

As you can see here, the plane has an AIM-120, AIM-9Xs, a GBU-12, a pair of JSOWs, and SDBs. It also has a Sniper XR Targeting pod, and the other pod is a FLIR/navigation system. Now obviously all of this didn't even exist back in the 90s, the artist tried to depict what the F-14E might have been like circa 2010. Original plans called for a Litening TPOD and the upgraded avionics/new engines/airframe redesign. Here's a better example of what that might have looked like: Another thing that was planned was to get rid of the windscreen bracing that was a significant visibility problem in the Tomcat. The windscreen would have been more like what you find on a Hornet or F-15. Here's an article that summarizes what was supposed to have been the ST-21 and goes into a bit of detail with possible upgrades circa 2010: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29653/this-is-what-grummans-proposed-f-14-super-tomcat-21-would-have-actually-looked-like ANFT has similar information, albeit without the artwork.

They did do a lot of that stuff, there was a whole lot of redesign that went into the ST-21. AFAIK no RCS-reduction measures were considered, it was mostly about expanding the capabilities of the Tomcat airframe to meet future needs. Therefore the more powerful GE F-110-129 engines, redesigned wing gloves, extra fuel capacity, and modern avionics. The wings were supposed to have enlarged slats and flaps, and even be a little thicker in one design variation for even more fuel capacity (I'm not sure how well-thought out that idea was, the Turkey already had such long legs that thickening the wings might hurt the plane's top speed. I have heard some wild things about P&W F-119 engines and thrust vectoring nozzles, but I don't think Grumman ever seriously considered that, especially the nozzles. As other people have said on here, the RCS reduction measures applied to the Super Hornet cause a lot of problems for performance, which is why if you're going to build a plane with high performance and low RCS you have to design it from the ground up for those things, and the F-14 design just wasn't there in terms of being easily modified to accept RCS reduction measures without a significant performance hit. The Super Hornet has S-Shaped intake ducts that hide the compressor faces of the engines fairly well, but that due to the geometry of the Hornet that wasn't too hard to design for. As far as the Tomcat is concerned if you try to do anything like that you basically end up with a swing-wing Su-57. All the stealth Tomcat concepts I've seen (other than a single-seat derivative of the F-22 with swing wings, which doesn't really count) make no attempt to hide the biggest radar return source on the plane - the engine compressor faces. Yeah they look cool, but in practice they wouldn't have been nearly as hard to detect as the photos would suggest. I suspect Grumman knew this, but whether they did or not they never actually had any plans that I'm aware of to lower the plane's RCS. It was meant to be essentially the carrier-based counterpart to the F-15E, albeit retaining a heavy focus on the F-14's original fleet defense role. The Navy was apparently still concerned enough about the fleet defense role that it researched two designs for missiles to replace the AIM-54, and the Navy had only one plane with the performance and the radar capabilities necessary to fully exploit these long range AIM-54 replacements - the F-14. The AAAM program as it was called was cancelled in the 90s for the same reason as the ST-21 - the powers that be thought that it was too expensive and unnecessary. While the AAAM and the ST-21 weren't exactly developed in conjunction (IIRC it was originally intended to arm the F-14D), they would have probably become very much related had the ST-21 actually been chosen over the Super Hornet, because the F-14Ds would have likely been outmoded buy the newer and more capable jet. You can go totally fictional with the stealthy look and all, or make a plane that is as close as possible (under the circumstances) to what the ST-21 was supposed to have been. I personally favor the latter, but it'll probably come down to popular opinion among the people who make this happen as to which version gets made - and that assumes that it actually gets made. This is what I envision when I think about the ST-21. @Tank50us I'm not sure what you think about this, but this is artwork based off what Grumman had come up with. Just food for thought.

Based on the things I have seen, I imagine that the F-14E's front cockpit might look something like this. Obviously the old F-14A/B style stick would have to go, and be replaced by a more F-15-like stick, like what the F-14D had, and the warning light panel is probably not in the right place, but the overall MFD config here is probably pretty close for the front cockpit.

I think the easiest way to satisfy most people with an F-4 Phantom would be to make 2 versions that were very similar, like the F-4B and F-4C. That way you have a carrier plane and a land-based plane with basically identical external models and flight characteristics. Granted that won't make people who want an F-4E very happy, because the F-4E has a gun and fits more scenarios as far as DCS is concerned (we don't have a Vietnam map, but we do have PG, Syria and soon the Marianas). The only situation I can specifically think of that calls for an F-4E though is the Syria map, and that only because the Israelis never bought any F-4 versions other than the E. The F-4C would actually fit rather well on PG though, in the hands of the IRIAF. They bought the C, D, and E as I recall.

I'm not saying that it would be realistic, although it might be closer than you think. Weight was supposed to go up by a couple thousand pounds on the ST-21, but unlike the F-15EX, the extra fuel tankage came in the form of increased wing glove area, while on the F-15E/EX it's in the FAST packs hanging to the sides of the fuselage, which is actually eating lift area to a degree because it covers up the underside of the wing root. I'm just saying that the overperforming F-14B FM is probably a good taste of what the ST-21 might have been like in terms of performance. However, the chances of HB actually letting anyone use that FM are basically nil, so the FM would have to be written from the ground up for any ST-21 mod. I'm not in favor of these RCS-reducing measures that people have said should be part of an ST-21 mod, for the reasons you just mentioned. Let's face it, the F-14 has the RCS of a semi, if not bigger, and no RCS-reducing measures would do anything significant for it unless you're willing to give up the sheer performance that is the whole reason for having a plane like that.