NineLine

Of course, but we are also not going to over commit right now, and will follow up on these subjects as development proceeds. Usually, we just tease and then allow discussion, the FAQs is new and we know things will change don't want to pin our selves in any places we cannot get out of.

I didn't move it, not that I disagree with the move either. 110% yes, all they need to do is put together a proposal with their work and send it off to the team for review, Wags is a good place to start, or even me as I can direct someone in the right direction as well. In reference to Ru fighters, we have said that a 3rd Party team outside of the ED offices and in another country could get away with more. The Zero is actually a good example, even the P-47 to a certain degree. The Zero and a lot of documentation for it was destroyed post-war as many know the Japanese really pushed them away from the directions that took them to war. A lot of documentation was lost. Flying Zeros or other Japanese aircraft are hard to come by, especially with their original power plants. We have to fill the holes with other methods, such as CFD Studies, captured aircraft studies, etc. In a weird sort of way its similar to the F-35 except for different reasons. If that makes sense. The P-47 was somewhat similar in that when the original manufacturer was bought, much of their records were destroyed, or thought to be destroyed. Once again we looked towards CFD studies, and well our boss has flown a P-47 so that is helpful. We did end up finding documentation in the end, but again it shows that an aircraft could be done if you can fill the holes in other ways. Now I know what everyone is thinking... you cannot fill the holes on the F-35. You would be right on some things for sure. But this is also true on anything we modelled, even the A-10C defensive systems are not near what they are capable of, same with others. We do not want them to be either, not because we are lazy or dumb but because we are not out to make a simulation for adversaries to train against, especially important for the F-35. So we use other methods where we find holes in our research, other holes will remain open for good reason and you will have an F-35 that belongs in an air combat game. Nothing in DCS will make you a real-life fighter pilot. BUT DCS will get you closer than anyone can. So why I believe and can safely say ED is not doing less with the F-35 because it will be the best F-35 available in any Simulation Game on the market for regular people to buy and fly. That is all we have ever tried to do, from the Ka-50 to the AH-64D. SMEs here and there, including those that work with us will happily tell you what they flew in real life is not 100% what we have done, but what we have done is as close as you can get without joining the military. I have spent well over 24 hours now on the subject, but the bottom line is this. We will make it, we know what our customers expect, and we will give you the best you can find. It will improve the DCS environment, it will push us forward and expand our horizons. When the F-35 comes out some will want it, some will not. Like any module we have produced, it will be our best effort, I promise that. Thanks!

I thought my little speech was nice and that is your take away, hurts man... really hurts.

What a concept, a business trying to remain profitable But seriously, DCS needs to grow, it needs to expand. The newer aircraft always do better no matter how popular Cold War, WWII, etc may seem. If we grow stagnate we will not continue to thrive. We must keep pushing the hobby further than it has been, this is what makes DCS a survivor in a wasteland of simulator games from the 90s on. Continuing to strive to do more, be more and offer more. Not everyone likes change or embraces it, but growth in DCS will benefit everyone, allowing us to do more and be more.

The F-35 should grow and expand DCS in different ways including weapons. The final say on weapons will come a little later when we see what can and can't be done here.

That is a fair question but not sure it can be answered just yet. I expect to see development reports on different aspects as we progress, we will look at those when the time comes. Thanks.

Like most early teases in the Beyond videos, it could be some time before we do another update, it just depends on how things develop.

We have been looking at our own solution, but I am not sure what would be the first release to have such a thing.

Once again, it did not crash and burn for any reason but confidence was lost in the person who wanted to do it. There was never even a contract signed with ED as far as I know. It didn't even get rolling. Comparing that to our effort is disingenuous at best. All that said, I see this thread just spinning in circles, you all got your opinions out and now it is time to just wait and see what we do. I am sure there will be plenty of reviews when it first releases and you all can make a more informed decision then. Thanks al for the feedback.

But you are judging on if we can bring the best possible simulation long before we have brought the best possible simulation, even with many modules already under our belt. You are here, I hope, because we do things others cannot or are not willing to do, this fits the F-35 perfectly.

So we should have stopped at the Ka-50 and A-10C? That sounds like a great business plan. The standard is making the most realistic flight simulation of a specific aircraft possible. That has not changed. You can read that how you like, but its a standard we carry with every module.

We have more teams now, but they are, for the most part, more specialized. So Another Helicopter would just not be right now as we have a number of them still ongoing. An export Su-27 is possible or other Ru aircraft but focus is on the MiG-29. A Super Hornet will have to wait till after the C is done, etc. Add to that as I said above, DCS needs to move into the future, and the F-35 for the most part has generated a lot of excitement, and so it should.

That is not true, we were allowed much more access for the Ka-50 and A-10C for reasons, we do not always get those accesses, so we still do each and every aircraft to the highest degree possible, as we will do with the F-35, and I will say it will be the most accurate F-35 available. The A-10C is a great example, its not 100% accurate, even with the II version. Nothing modern military will ever be, its just the way it is. But we would not do the F-35 unless we felt we could do it justice in DCS. But here I am again saying the same things to the same comments. I don't know how much more I can give without just saying read the FAQ and follow the development.

Well, some of those are coming via 3rd Party, and on top of all I have said previously already, DCS does need to grow and expand into the future eventually. Cold War is fun, WWII is my favorite, but newer aircraft when the opportunity is there must be grabbed, even if we only get AI equals at first. It's progress. Everything you said is pretty much spot on. As for documentation, if someone were to come to us with what we have on the F-35 before we decided to do it, they would have most likely been given the opportunity, there was already an attempt a while back, as well as a mod. So it's not like it's never been looked at before. The only thing I will say is that we are knocking down a barrier, where we can add better support for the level of aircraft that will only benefit the ability to add others and have an environment more suitable for them. As we said, it is not. The only guess involved is everyone guessing this is all we can do.

Guys, I am trying to keep this open for discussion, but if it's just gonna turn into a fight, I will close it. Please be nice to each other. And if you do not want the F-35 or think we can't do it, then you just need to wait to see as the product develops. Thanks.

We won't be simulating a 2025 operational F-35, so it will be interesting to hear his thoughts when it releases. Thanks.

That might have still been BST days or poor wording from a person who is not an English speaker. But it's not documentation it's the version we are modelling, period. If we decide to do a version that has Mavs one day, it would be possible, but it's simply not planned.

Trust is managed on knowing the facts, the fact is that we never said that we couldn't do AGM-65s on the F-6 because of lack of documentation, but because it was not the variant we are modelling. So in order to trust us, you first have to make sure you understand our reasoning for things. We have stated that we are looking at radios and INS for the F-5 for the version we are modelling. Anything else would be for a different version and would work more for a different variant altogether. So I am not sure what this has to do with trust, but more so a misunderstanding of our reasoning on the reasons for adding something or not. No, you are reading into what I have said. Please read the FAQ and you will know what to expect from the F-35, based on whether you want it or not, if you don't want it, it's okay. Probably not a flyable Su-57, but I see the Redfor side looking brighter all the time.

That is also an aspect people leave out. If we did only aircraft we could model 100% 1:1 we would have a very slim line up, and the Ka-50 and A-10C would not exist.

No, I mean sure, a pack or just added to the sim, whatever works.

Thanks for your feedback, it does mean something to us, but we stand by our ability to make a very good representation of the fighter for DCS. We would not have announced it otherwise. I think AI would be important for interesting missions and campaigns with the F-35, I think its reasonable.

You are assuming we cannot build it with some level of realism, that is not correct. We could also do what you mentioned for the F-5, but would be feature creep and require a different variant (we are looking at the radios and INS). The two things are not the same no matter how you word it, sorry.

The Yak-52 has received some improvements in that time. The Viggen you will need to talk to Heatblur about this, but I am pretty sure its received plenty of fixes and updates in that time. We have done our best to honor as much of that Kickstarter as we could, but it's just not possible. We felt there was many more interesting aircraft to introduce to WWII, the 262 was from the 3rd Party that started that Kickstarter and later folded.

We are not modelling a Japanese version of the F-15C, we are doing the US one, but we did say we could include some liveries for Japan, all this is in the FAQ. Thanks.

Once again, that has nothing to do with being able to model the F-35.