Cedaway

It looks like that: Google 'synthetic aperture radar'

Hard to find our way in 1850+ posts ;)

So, does that mean (if well understood) it is the coverage of the antennas (per band) of the F-35 around its airframe? But I thought it has a full spherical coverage

It's already been stated that the Black sea map won't fit with EDGE engine. EDGE need the maps to be done from scratch. The present map could not be 'converted'. What I foresee is: If we want to load the current black sea map, DCS would run the current engine If we want to load a new map (I.e. Nevada), DCS would run EDGE. So, will we have two Image Generator in a single game? Future will tell.

What does mean the red/green/yellow color in the scheme ?

I went to the Russian side of the forum, where there is also a thread about the K.I. F-35 and where Frogfut is active. I feel it's encouraging when I read (google translations) like these about the project: Quotes: Translation: Seat vacant. Sit down and do it. If someone will buy it, then that's great. Group comrades sitting and vereschit what everyone is doing wrong. So sit down and do the ®. uncover the secret: for me the most is that all aircraft, designed in DCS and unparalleled (s) in the real world. translation: "As our dear boss, in our case the main thing - realizmu!" Or is "Chief ED" for the DCS does not say? translation: This is my personal wish and it is quite achievable with a good degree of realism. AND about realism in general: Translation: Certain it is. This would be similar to the real, but will not be real. Many things modern PC just does not pull. AND finally, for the haters ;) : Translation: You are not forced to buy. When there is no choice of what to buy, it is certainly cooler units makes mustang - FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Do! Give a modern fighter! Someone makes a modern fighter - FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU! Give us a plane BRITE Wright! You would not understand. And now you and the Typhoon and the F-35 and FW-190 and MiG-21 - all bad.

Valid point, but I'd take the opposite direction: It's great from ED to have open the gates to the WW2 era... But now, someone has to cross that gate and continue that way... ED opened many doors but can't develop all era/aircraft by itself. ED had the great idea to 'open' DCS World to 3rd parties. It's merely up to them now to 'fill the gap'. Again, I hope EDGE will come with good surprises and could make 3rd party scenaries possible.

For Single player Missions and campaign: Since we have consistent / coherent maps, assets (ground-naval-air), to 'immerse' the player, why not go with diversification. Some missions/campaign are well done, other suffers or will suffer from that uchrony or from simply the place of the world the events take place (For example, I don't like the idea of P-51d fighting FW-190D9 above the current map)... One good point was that there are some great people working at ED and in collaboration with 3rd parties to make those missions 'credible' (Like the amazing UN UH-1H campain). One thing, especially for the WW2 era aircraft: What I would like to see for this particular era is : - Scenaries where actual aerial battle took place - Great amount of aircraft aloft (not just 2 or 3 but massive air raids with bombers and fighters like during the warmest part of the battle of Britain and the retaliation by the allies up to the heart of Germany) OK, OK, for that, some would call and say 'go play IL-2 or CLOD,...' Yup, that's fair. But I hope see a day that we could choose our era/scenary in relation with our aircraft into DCS World. (Not for tomorrow but it's still a hope) First great enhance to come: EDGE. After this, maybe should we see 3rd parties develop and release terrain packages or 'era of assets' packages (like Beczl did with his enhanced ground objects mod IIRC) For Multiplayer sessions: Since the host can choose the 'ROE', no problem.

(Sorry) :lol:

31, I played that when I was young:

You're not a complicated guy, Silver_Dragon :smilewink:

That ! And to see 'life' on the deck... Since carrier is very populated during ops... Oh, forgot: rendered with EDGE of course :D :P :smilewink:

:thumbup: And :thumbup: too Didn't found the more 'adapted' word. (And damn it's hard to write with a tablet... )

Bah, even u.s. président Obama had to publicly show his birth 'papers'. Human skepticism will always remain one of the most powerful brake to progress... I know haters always gonna hate but judge the final product, not the announce of a product that is not even close to alpha stage or the responsible of the dev company who tries to get the job done...

Not from ED, but from David Kinney, posted on the Kickstarter Forum: 'Hello Timothy good question. For those reading this that are unfamiliar with DAS; DAS uses 6 electro-optical sensors, AN/AAQ-37,to improve both the F-35's survivability and it's combat effectiveness. The system will warn the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats, provide day/night vision, and support the forward-looking infrared sensor. The implantation of this system is pretty straight forward, however only so much is know about the limitations. We will, early on in its development, set limitations as well as a standardized crew interface and build from there. We will know - through the simulation module- the location, force code, and type of all simulated objects. we can pass it on based on the limitations that WE set - best guess at first, then tighter as more information becomes available. Thanks again... The DAS provides: •Missile detection and tracking •Launch point detection •Situational awareness IRST & cueing •Weapons support •Day/night navigation'

Physically 31 Mentally 18 ;)

Oh, thank you for the fast answer :thumbup:

:music_whistling: Errr, on what basis or documentation will/would YOU state the level of fidelity of the Flight Model or sensors accuracy, avionics,... ? Are you professional in aerotech or are you involved in the real F-35 project? Guess not. So, as you well said,... 'Good wind'. ;) And if you're still interested in high level of fidelity, instead of trolling the K.I. F-35 project, try with beczl Mig-21bis or VEAO Hawk or...

Something I don't understand: For high price pledgers, F-35A and F-35B or/and C will be available. BUT the goal to reach is $75K. On the kickstarter site, there are those sentences: REACH GOALS Again, all of us here at Kinney Interactive thank you for your support, and it’s important that you know that all of the funds will go towards the development and integration of F-35A Lightning II, (and reward fulfillment). Possible additions, based on Reach Goals, are listed below. Please note these goals will extend the schedule but will not change the initial delivery of the F-35A. $75,000 – F-35A F-35A Lightning II includes Campaigns, Training & Instant Action Missions $105,000 – Interactive Ground Crew F-35A + Ground Crew includes interactive Crew Chief for launch and recovery activities. We will also work to integrate the ability of the pilot to do a "Walk Around" prior to flights. $155,000 - F-35C F-35A + F-35C will include CVN – 78 with full carrier operations plus interactive deck crew. Plus two more campaigns, (one Navy & one USMC), additional Instant Action, Training, and Online Missions. F-35C will have paint schemes for TWELVE SQUADRONS, (8 Navy / 4 USMC) Squadrons are subject to founder selection… $220,000 - F-35B F-35A + F-35C + F-35B will include the LHA-6 America with full carrier operations plus interactive deck crew in support of the VSTOL fighters. Plus two campaigns, additional Instant Action, Training, and Online Missions. F-35B will have paint schemes for EIGHT SQUADRONS, (4 USMC / 2 UK / 2 Italy) Squadrons are subject to founder selection… SO, If I underdstand correctly, if Kinney Interactive reach $75K goal, it would be possible or at least financially easier to model the F-35A... And for the B and C version that are promised? Should the company reach $155K or $225K in order to have the C and B version modelized?

In Belgium, it does make sense :lol:

As Rusty said. DCS uses one core for the simulation, graphics,... + a second core for the sound engine. The 'full' multicore / multithread support would not come before the new DCS graphic engine core (EDGE). By the way, as DCS is 64bit app, it does presently support/address 4gigs+ of RAM. How it works, how it is distributed (RAM, VRAM - graphics-A.I.-sound-models-simulation-...) is a total mystery to me.

I'm in for $56 more... Now, looking forward. I hope there will be a K.I. section soon as sub-forum. Good luck K.I.

The basis question was "Are Hardcore DCS study sims going away?" Let us see,:suspect: -FC3 is mid-core but ED plan to add AFM. We don't talk about neither clickable cockpit nor 'procedures'. Normal, it's Flamming Cliffs series. For the rest, we have / will have - DCS A-10C - DCS P-51 - DCS Ka-50 - DCS UH-1h Incoming: - DCS Mil-Mi8MTV-2 - DCS F/A-18C - DCS Mig-21bis - DCS Mig-23 - DCS Hawk - DCS Typhoon - DCS ... IRIS - DCS ... RAZBAM - DCS ... Mil-Sim - DCS ... Coretex Design - DCS F-35 just announced OK, some companies has already stated that their first module to come out would not be at DCS level due to the fact it seems to be ... complicated to code... So, short answer: No, I don't think DCS study sim is going away. It will just come at time in our hard drives... I even think that the genre has a kind of 're-birth' thanks to ED and the DCS level of fidelity inspiring the devs. But, the child need to take its maturity... EDIT: I have a quite limited flight experience (prop & jet) and in MY opinion, nothing, I say NOTHING can replace the feeling you have in a real aircraft. Not even the best sim in the world. BUT, DCS study sim is the genre I like because it gives me satisfaction and joy while I'm sitting in front of my desktop! And I'm sure most of the people wandering around this forum could easily understand what I'm talking about. ED and third parties tries to give (sell, yeah, everybody need to live) the 'ultimate' experience of the flight to the everyman and they do that with remarkable quality I find. I'm super-über-duper satisfied with the modules I've bought and think it worth every $ in them.

Voted Yes but under condition that the whole world to be modeled. That can maybe interest FSX users.