-
Posts
514 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Stackup
-
The link isn't working for me, would it be possible for you to reupload it?
-
FLIR is aircraft based, not map based. AFAIK the map makers have nothing to do with what it looks like, nor do they make the map twice, once as FLIR and once normal. So the map will support FLIR the same way all the other maps do since it has nothing to do with the map and everything to do with the aircraft module you are using.
- 3 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- normandy 2
- apache
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
I believe they said we shouldn't expect release until the cold-start video comes out.
-
F-4E Phantom Development Report - DCS Newsletter 31/03/2023
Stackup replied to IronMike's topic in DCS: F-4E Phantom
Thanks for the update! -
Uh, the visual effects for the Mk 77 firebomb as stated in the Roadmap for the DCS F/A-18C Hornet. This was a thread about a Vietnam map. The F-4 verifiably dropped napalm on missions during the Vietnam War as did many other aircraft. Are the effects on people who get hit horrible? Yes, they are and I'm not saying they aren't. I am in no way advocating for the continued real world use of napalm. I merely stated that I would like to see the effect completed for DCS. This is a combat flight sim. When we fly and shoot missiles, rockets, and guns or drop bombs, we kill pixels on a screen. Are the AI any worse off if they get hit by a cluster bomb or a 30mm cannon round than they would be if they were caught in a napalm strike? No. They are not real people suffering real world injuries and they most certainly can't feel pain or be maimed for life because again, they are not real and closing the mission kills them just as much as any virtual weapon.
- 42 replies
-
- 12
-
-
-
I thought Nineline or someone else on the ED team had said something to the effect that ED was planning or wanting to do it, but they have to wait on core improvements and optimizations so performance isn't tanked by the sheer amount of trees among other problems. Maybe I misheard that as it wasn't an official announcment or anything, just a vague statement of future plans. Vietnam would be an awesome map to get, but Heatblur doesn't make maps and I'd rather see them finish up their current roster of planned aircraft like the early F-14, F-4 variants, and the A-6. From ED's side, it'd be nice to get the napalm effects slated to come with the MK 77 firebombs after the F-18 exits early access so we can see napalm on upcoming modules such as the F-4, F-100, and A-1 as it seems like that would be way simpler of a task than a Vietnam map.
-
My guess is they also worked on the TCS pod to make it removable when they release the early A or at least the Iranian version.
-
I believe this is what was referred to based on my readings from the HB Discord and the Hoggit post about the same thing.
-
The F-14's fuel probe is retractable and the door removal is just cosmetic at this point and I doubt HB is going to make a new flight model simply to reflect the door being removed since it's not a major change like the pheonix pylons. Not sure about the JF-17, but those are external drag producers and change the airflow around the fuselage. The one piece windshield would not change the external shape of the canopy enough to warrant a new flight model since the drag and weight changes are minimal. If anything, it's just a modifier to change the FM inputs like they do for the various loadout options, not a completely separate FM. If we want to get really technical and crunch the numbers, if you removed even a single antenna from an airplane you need a new flight model because the drag and weight distibution is different. The majority of pilots won't notice that slight difference in performance unless they are specifically looking for it, even irl, so in my opinion it's not really worth the extra development time to make a different FM for minor external changes that are essentially visual only.
-
More this. Of course it's possible to model the map terrain and assets, etc, but I seem to recall hearing somewhere that that country in particular does not want anyone making games where you can fight a war over their territory even if it's just virtual. This would cut the northernmost area off any possible Vietnam map and some of the eastern areas in the Gulf of Tonkin if this is the case. I hope they can figure a way to do this both with good performance and proper land area because I think a properly fleshed out Vietnam with period correct assets(ground, AWACS, ships, radio comms, aircraft variants, etc.) would be of great benefit to DCS as a whole. Time will tell I guess.
-
Can they even make this area?
-
Razbam has a completed model for the MiG-19S that's on the backburner right now given the F-15E and Red Star Simulations is well on their way to getting their MiG-17F ready to present to ED for 3rd party consideration so that's two more aircraft that fit the timeframe accurately. In regards to the other aircraft that are later variants to the ones that actually saw service in Vietnam, it seems clear to me that no one will not be making earlier variants of any of these aircraft so we need to accept what we have already. Heatblur will in all likelihood not add another F-4E from 5+ years earlier than their current (post '74?) early variant and the same goes for seeing an A-6A or B along with the E. I believe the A-7E we are getting is the closest since the E did serve in Vietnam afaik just maybe not this upgrade package or however it's differentiated. I think most of the feel of Vietnam can be achieved with some imagination and the variants we are getting. A good example of this is the Paradise Lost campaign from Reflected that has you fly both slick and gunship missions based on real reports and first hand accounts of missions from Vietnam. Of course you are flying over the Marianas and not Vietnam and of course the Huey is not one of the many variants used in Vietnam, but the mission set and atmosphere made up for that in my opinion. That won't work for everyone I know, but to me it's better than having no Vietnam experience at all.
-
Think the F-15 Release is/will have an Impact
Stackup replied to Czechnology's topic in DCS: F-4E Phantom
Depends which part of America, gas isn't near that much where I am. -
This. None of the rest of your post was necessary, just thought you would like to make accurate statements and be properly informed. You're the one complaining about me telling you that you are wrong. I will not be preordering the Strike Eagle and may not even buy it at all because I would rather save my money for the F-4, and anyway, what's it to you?
-
Yes they did, it was in the initial Q&A images posted here from the Razbam Discord. The team member (Lucas) said today that apparently it was never planned and has revised the Q&A post accordingly. The Steam preorder will NOT be taking place ever, only the EA release at 20% discount.
-
Think the F-15 Release is/will have an Impact
Stackup replied to Czechnology's topic in DCS: F-4E Phantom
Do airshows only have modern aircraft where you live? In my 23 years, I've seen A-37's, MiG-17's, and F-80/T-33's, just to name a few, and let's also not forget all the warbirds. These airshows had modern aircraft of course, but that wasn't all they had. Seeing 3 MiG-17's doing a formation pass into the sunset with the burners lit was a sight to behold let me tell you. The first model I ever built was a Revell Thunderbirds F-4E and personally I couldn't be happier to see the direction DCS is headed with all the Cold War module announcements. F-4, F-8, F-100, A-1, A-6, and A-7 are all on my list as is the MiG-17 if Red Star Simulations ever gets to 3rd party status. I think more people than you realize appreciate older airframes like the Phantom and it certainly isn't limited to just the older generation. -
Deka Simulations announces the DCS: J-8II for DCS World!
Stackup replied to Mike_Romeo's topic in DCS: J-8II
I have a source, just not one you accept. Based on the wording of @uboats answers, I would say he is the closest thing to an official source from Deka than nothing. He has repeatedly used "we" in his statements concerning development and has posted answers to pretty much every post concerning it. That's good enough for me, even if it isn't for you. -
Deka Simulations announces the DCS: J-8II for DCS World!
Stackup replied to Mike_Romeo's topic in DCS: J-8II
The official Deka source would be the fact that they picked the J-8PP and not the J-8F or some other variant. From what I understand, they are based in China and want to bring Chinese aircraft into DCS. It really takes no speculation to determine that they would have preferred to do one of the more prolific variants, but settled for one that would not result in legal troubles. AFAIK besides what Nineline and Uboats (although I assume you think he doesn't matter since he has the title of moderator), no word beyond the newsletter has been released. That being said, it doesn't take a statement from Deka to realize that the Chinese government is not a fan of allowing their technological information to be used by others and so a variant with Chinese avionics is out of the question unless they change their policies. -
Deka Simulations announces the DCS: J-8II for DCS World!
Stackup replied to Mike_Romeo's topic in DCS: J-8II
Who exactly is relevant? Nineline and Deka have both said that this is the only J-8 they can legally get the information required to complete the module. It's easy enough to make an informed statement about the availabilty, or in this case lack, of information related to various aircraft from both Russia and China. If it wasn't a problem to get info on Eastern aircraft, we would already have a FF MiG-29 and Su-27 since there is great demand for these aircraft. ED planned to make the earliest MiG-29 variant but that fell through due to lack of cooperation from the Russian government, probably among other things. Deka, I believe has wanted to do an Su-30, but lack of information has stalled that project as well. -
Same aircraft involved in P-3Ares Hainan incident in Y2K
Stackup replied to DmitriKozlowsky's topic in Military and Aviation
Eh, not really. Their big complaint is the variant of the J-8 chosen was a prototype, not that the J-8 isn't a real plane. Of course they can complain all they want, but they don't have to worry about the legalities and consequences of acquiring and publishing information the Chinese government doesn't want them too... -
You're right, it was. My mistake.
-
F14 Skinners thread (Paintkit in 1st post)
Stackup replied to David A Sell's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
I look forward to downloading it and being one aircraft closer to a full proper flight deck for 74-75! -
It's definitely Guam, it matches between the shots both on the near side of the island as well as the far side with the point Anderson AFB sits on today clearly visible in both shots. The entire outline of the island also matches perfectly in both shots. As to which airfield it is I have no clue. While the island is definitely Guam, I am surprised that Northwest Field is not visible in the 2023 AB video when we can see it clearly in it's modern state of disrepair in the current Marianas screenshot.
-
F14 Skinners thread (Paintkit in 1st post)
Stackup replied to David A Sell's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
That's still really cool. Would be a good stand in for the 4 bladed E-2C as well. Do you have any plans to release that skin if you get it to a quality standard you are happy with?