upyr1

I know various people at ED have stated that someone else would have to do the more modern Redfor. If I remember right the Red Star simulation which is doing the MiG-17 is German I belive the lead developer's dad was a former East German fighter pilot. Then we have a couple fitters in the works and I believe Dekka said something about possibly doing the Su-30 (I expect that might get vetoed by Bejing) Anyway On the MiG-29 all I have to say is that is an instant buy. The fulcrum is cool

The A-4 team said when they got started they had no intentions of making it official. So that would be a bad example. Though I mentioned a couple modules that got their start as mods. I didn't misunderstand what you stated and the fact real-world military forces want as much of an edge as possible, doesn't change the simple fact that DCS players on PVP servers would like some balance which would be up to the mission designer. That might mean slapping a Su-57 or 75 livery on a F-35 and saying it was flown by the aggressor squadron or you might decide to limit the F-35 to PVE servers and single-player missions. You could also use mods as well.

Quite true, we don't know when they plan to actually release it or how long it will be in Early access nor do we know all their sources. As I have said in the past- good mod support is important. There are some real aircraft and assets which for some reason isn't in ED (yet) either due to the fact no one has got around to it, or the data is missing. Then of course we also have fantasy modules. I also hope to see more assets of all eras

I hope they succeed in doing that. As long as ED believes there is enough data to produce a decent module without changing their standards, I don't care what module. If I am interested in a module I will buy it if not I won't. I'll confess I plan to buy the F-35. I'm happy about that

I hope this happens to some degree with every new module. I know that I have advocated for Naval modules to act as a vehicle to upgrade how ships are modeled

This is why I didn't like the fact MAC is dead.

The Su-30 one of many modules I'd love to get more information about. I would love to see what people can do with the open source material about modern RedFor. While I do want better mod support I also would rather see an official module over a mod any day. that's a bummer

No matter what modules are coming out these things need to be improved. I expect that EW and RCS would be the most difficult due to the lack of information however I still think something can be worked up.

I agree that DCS needs more modern AI assets, so I hope to see Cuban Ace's Su-57 in DCS at least as an AI asset. It is going to be a lot harder to balance PVP with the F-35. I'd also toss in that we also nee more Assets over all though

@NineLine has stated that in the past if you have a mod that you think could be implemented in DCS all you have to do is contact them and they will have a look at it. I know there have been at least two modders I can name off the top of my head who have become third-party developers, for example, the Airplan simulation company who are making the C-130 module as well as IFE who made the MB-339. The C-130 is not going to be identical to the mod as a lot will be added to it, but it doesn't change the fact it happened. Ballance is up to the mission designer, as I stated earlier it is a mistake to assume that some mod will never make it into DCS. The only time you should make that assumption would be if the developers said they had no intention of porting it into DCS or the mod is highly unrealistic. Though knowing DCS's history of seasonal easter eggs and April Fools Day jokes they might be game to add it as a joke.

thanks I just sent him and ED a thank you note I'm stoked

Great job, @cubanace and @BIGNEWY and @NineLine and all the other folks at ED thanks for giving him a chance It will be great to have the Su-57 in the virtual sky of DCS even if it is only AI and a MOD. Especially with the F-35 coming out.

And Sabaton fans

Obviously the RCS is going to be one of the areas where we'll never have something 100% accurate anyhow, what can ED say about how the F-35's RC will be modeled Would they model the angles or just have stealth mode/ beast mode? Also would it be possible for someone working on a Su-57, or J-35, F-22 mod to make use of the new RCS model?

I hope his AI asset gets added to DCS. I'm going to have to try to find his page and send him a thank you note. I love it and I am really thankful for the members of the Modding Community who try to submit their work to ED to get added to DCS.

I know ED has said they aren't going for balance, that is up to the mission designers. I don't blame ED for saying lack of information. There are some aircraft out there which we may never get enough information for which is why I ask for decent mod support. My ideal would be for the user files section to act as a repository for some common mod manager. Then I know some mods like project flanker you have an A2A version and an A2G version I'm wondering if that could be possible to fix.

With any luck this will inspire other developers to do modern Red for which a lot of people want.

I never asked for the F-35 but then again I simply didn't think that there would be enough data to make anything beyond an AI F-35. I'm not complaining about the F-35 just shocked and looking forward to it getting released. Then as I have brought up out of that 30%-40% that will be redacted what are things that ED simplifies to begin with? EW is simplified for starters, 9line said as much.

I know the sunk cost argument is a fallacy however with how long things stay in EA and how much things change over the EA period they might get better data. Also there's the fact people modern modules they might as well. They could make a few bucks and possibly grow the user base some. I'd be lying if I said the only lighting or Panther I wanted in DCS were the P-38, English Electric and F9F though I expected to see those before the battle Penguin. I think they have plans for Charlie and Bravo I'd love to see those too

I hope that the Codename Flanker team submit their work. I'm going to ask the guy who helps admin the DCS mods facebook group. I figure the reason the F-35 module is getting so much hate, is the simple fact that those on the consumer side of DCS simply don't know what ED's standards are and what is actually necessary to get a module done. If figure it is important for people to understand there are two aspects to a simulator procedural and performance. Procedural would be flipping the right switches and pressing all the right buttons. I know that Jello the Host of the Fighter Pilot Podcast stated that the F/A-18 nailed the procedural. Then there is performance- not only do we have the issue of flight model but also what the avionics can do. Obviously flight model is vital, obvious. As for the combat avionics, I'd assume that is the hardest thing to get performance data for. Also even when the data is available there is the question of what DCS actually models. I know some things are simplified because the data is top secret and other cases it is to save CPU and RAM. When I saw the module I first wondered if a military customer had asked for it. I saw that wasn't the case but that does raise one question which is how much do MCS (the professional version of DCS) and DCS actually differ?

I'd agree with that. There is no doubt in my mind that ED will be able to do the most realistic F-35 for the commercial market. ED's need to grow was the reason that I was excited about MAC, I figured it could be a good gateway to DCS. Also this is why I really hope to see some Land and Naval modules in the future. I don't know what a vin diagram of flight, tank, and naval simmers and wargamers would look like but I know some of us would instabuy a DCS Iowa module (like me).

I know there is talk about adding napalm to DCS it would be cool to see the Zabs come back

2 weeks? seriously I'm looking forward to seeing more about the F-35

My question is wether or not it would be possible to fix this with the Su-57? either AI or flyable. This is my biggest concern I'd like to know more about ED's standards and what other planes have we seen get rejected that could be release to the F-35's standards? This is why I don't expect it to be on many PVP servers (unless we get the Su-57 either as a mod or officially) or F-35s on bothsides This is a concern of mine. I can see it attracting new players but I can also see it causing problems with the base. All I know is if the F-35 had been released as a MAC module I'd have felt better People always say this about every new module. I don't know how big the ED staff is or how many developer teams they have but I have stated DCS needs to release modules Balance isn't an issue with PVE and single-player, but I figure if you are interested in more balance then you are better off with Cold war era servers The question I have with the F-35 and J-8 are what data is actually needed to do a good module? This is a good question, and related to this is using the F-35 standards what other modules are possible? the D and super cats would be awesome

If someone can cobble together a Su-57 that meets ED's standards with open source documents that would be awesome.