upyr1

While I am not a pit builder, I have to agree this would be a nice option to add. Since the way things are right now you'll need 2 switches for a covered switch. 1 for the cover and 1 for the switch. If you have the cover on your physical cockpit then why make 2 steps in DCS?

The OP is trying to reduce the number of electronic components and possibly is using the cover on a physical switch

It looks like we're getting more ships acording to the 2024 trailer, anyone have ideas on what all is lined up?

The Corsair we're getting might not be the right version for Korea but neither is the MiG-15. I'd still love some Korean War missions.

I hope we get a Zeke module

It looks like we're getting some ships

Cool, the Enterprise He did some great work, but I'll be happen to see the official assets

It's awesome we're getting them

I believe this is the most important statement in the whole thread. I'd like to know what pilots are saying this and the reason. Are USAF pilots saying this or is everyone saying this?

I'd love to have a training campaign using an AI instructor You would start with some airmanship missions, start-up, taxing, take-off, and navigation missions. followed by weapons training, possibly aerobatics, and combat missions. The AI instructor will give you hints if requested. You would get graded based on how closely you perform the syllabus the only sure way to fail a mission is to die.

I hope they will at least fix the VR and other bugs or start on the vehicle modules

If we do have enough information, would you be interested in the G?

The main problem I see with the request is the idea of making it part of combined Arms, as ED says that is complete.

True we never had it, which is why it needs to be built.

Didn't Razbam talk abut a cold war asset pack?

I'd also love to see ED work on Forward observer functionality as well. Right now DCS artillery is flat-out horrible.

I'd also include the option of listing both

That is the reason the JTAC needs to change their laser codes. That is what they do in real life

Dumb me changing rewriting the post and not editing fully. Anyway, the statement from Nick Grey may still hold some clues about HB's plans. As I don't know what he knew when he said it.

HB hasn't said anything 100% about the Naval Phantom. I figure most people believe it will be the J because that is often viewed as the ultimate Naval Phantom. I know at one point Nick Grey was saying he wanted all the major F-4 variants. The odds of seeing that would ultimately come down to perceived interest and how similar the models would be and perceived interest. My understanding of things the B and the C would be the most similar Navy and USAF versions. basically, the RIO/WSO stations are the biggest differences. The J's the definitive Naval version The D is the evolutionary link between the C and E Then the Royal Phantoms will need a whole new flight module

Awesome. @SOLIDKREATE

I asked Heatblur about licensing Jester AI. It looks like if everything lines up they would license Jester AI for the EWO in the Wild Weasel variant.

My biggest problem with the F-15E is the fact you currently don't have the option for an AI pilot so you can fly as a WSO We at least need the option

Any chance we can have numbers added so the laser code is easier to read?

thanks for posting the video, do you have any interest in working on an asset pack?