Woogey

Technically its IndiaFoxtEcho doing the F-16A for MSFS, Heatblur 3d Scanned a Euro bird to make the 3d model for them. Both studios are developers for DCS, so that could work in our favor. I can't see ED authorizing a competing F-16 for DCS, however Heatblur selling them an f-16A 3d model is not beyond the realm of possibility. Even less work for ED to make it happen.

Good day friends, This proposal is aimed square at Eagle Dynamics, and the producers that Turn ideas into solid plans. There is a coincidental phenomenon with a few of ED's fully fledged study level aircraft. A-10C, F-16C, F/A-18C, and soon the F-15C. In Flaming Cliffs we have the A-10A, and currently the Old version of the F-15C. I propose that ED turns the Flaming Cliffs F-15C into an F-15A, upon release of the full fidelity F-15C. Functionally, it doesn't need to change at all. The 3d cockpit would need a little remodeling, but the exterior model could virtually stay untouched. Just remove that little sensor on top of the nose. That's part one of my proposal. The 2nd part of my proposal plays into this A and C duality. With the soon to be released Cold War Germany map creating the most Buzz for DCS in a long time, I propose a Flaming Cliffs level F-16A and an F/A-18A. IE: Flaming Cliffs 2026. Most of the European F-16 operators purchased A models. It might be a small detail to some, but to many there is a significant desire to have a small mouth P&W powered skinny tailed -16. This would also give ED an opportunity to bring the existing F-16Ai fleet up to the sims current standards. Similarly, we have an old F/A-18A Ai model that is in need of a refresh. Having it in the sim is important to early 1980's operations (similarly to the F-16A) and good majority of the sales outside the U.S. were in fact A models. Both of these airframes had significantly less capability in the early days which meshes well with a Flaming Cliffs style of game play. With all of this said, the first replies to my post, are going to be "I'd much rather ED spent their time and resources modeling...... XXXX" This proposal is also kind of along the same lines as the cancelled? Modern Air Combat title. A better variety of entry level aircraft that would slot into the existing sim and play nice, but not have anywhere near the capability of the full fidelity upgraded modules. Just some food for thought. -Woog PS, while were at it, turn the Flaming Cliffs F-5E into an F-5A

@Maestro The static aircraft that you use in your scenery look very good. Even better than the civil aircraft mod that we’ve had available for many years. I hope you please consider adding these as a functional AI assets pack. Having these as an official part of the game would make for some very strong mission options for our campaigns. -Woog

These BT liveries look very nice please do release them. I especially like that you got the color stencils in for the early Ghost scheme. Great job!

Now it is certain that we need some new Ai modules or explosive static aircraft for this amazing map. Ugra please consider creating these two aircraft to help bring the Cold War vibe to life. -Woog

I have started this paint this morning

The reason they are private, is they are typically conversions of Payware from other sims, and they do not have permission from the originally developer to distribute the the Mod. That -46 looks like the Capt Sim model to me. It has a beautiful exterior model, with a standard 767 Cockpit unfortunately. -Woog

Looks like the link needs to be updated again. Mediafire says "Looks like something is missing" I would really like to do some C-47 Paints. Thank You - Woog

@KrazyPilot I think you’re right about the two teams merging into one, here is the third team that I spoke of: https://discord.gg/2HvvMxXm Doing the Spark ‘Vark. -P

There are multiple F-111’s in work by 3 different teams right now. I don’t think we need a 4th. -Woog

The new template gives us all the Roughmets and all we need to make it happen, except having a lua file example and the arg’s needed to switch on/off the various antenna configurations that ED were so kind to give us. Wish they would do the same for the Hornet and the Viper. Maybe @Eagle Dynamics you could at least provide a “read me” file with an example lua text so we could actually use the template? -Woog

No, I purchased a 3-D model of the type 22, that I slid over to the admiral. I did some texture work so we have all 4 batch 1 boats. He’s working on it, but it’s in the queue. So no accurate timeframe as to when it will be ready. -Woog

@Beldin There IS a type 22 Batch 1 inbound though……. -Woog

@Oban Sweet, nice to see some of the older UK boats making there way into the sim.

Sierra99, I appreciate your experience and eye witness accounts of not ever seeing them. This might be attributed to the locations that you were deployed to in combination with time frame. In reality, none of this debate really matters. The biggest thing for me as a customer and fan of the F-15C is, it’s a capability and an asset that was available to the A/B/C/D community. It is an option that should be available to the virtual community as well, if we as individuals want to equip our Eagles with them. If YOU don’t want to for whatever reason, that’s ok. I want to have the option. Especially for operations with liveries that should have them with the earlier compass grey paint schemes. I hope that ED gives us the option. The development work for ED to add them, would not push back the release date, because we don’t have one. It would set the new model apart from the existing FC model by yet another extra feature, giving the community just one more reason that they “need” this version. Honestly, I wish that ED would “downgrade” the FC version to an A, concurrent with the release of the new C, just to give us even more variety. Edit: Fast Packs may be unicorns, well I’ve never seen a unicorn, but if I did, I wouldn’t berate it and mock it for being an abnormal horse that serves no purpose. I would think cool, that’s something different, that you don’t see every day. Something that sets it apart from all the others. In essence I welcome the additional capability -Woog

The Alaska birds had them concurrently with the Iceland birds. The Alaska patrols area is much larger than the GUIK Gap. The point is lost on you, why are you resistant to the possibility of more capability? If you don’t like them, that’s ok, don’t fly with them. IT’s a fairly simple ask for ED. In all honesty, 2 people could probably get it done in a single day = 16 man hours. -Woog

The reason I made this post, is with the announcement of a "NEW" F-15C, there is more of a chance that ED will actually consider it. There are more than a few units that flew with them. No they are not the same as the F-15E, No they are not Bomb racks. I am not asking for some weird configuration that there is no info on. Its simply part of the standard US F-15C configuration options. It would not change the weapons station count. The Loadout Manager could stay the same, on the user side, it could be as simple as adding a check box item in the fuel portion (See Example Photo) On the coding side, Checking the box would call up a different drag index, and add fuel (and Weight) to the internal tank QTY. -Woog

ED, can we please get the extended range air to air conformal fuel tank as an option for the new Charlie? Please see attached photos.

Hey guys, your destroyers are looking really good, in addition to the aircraft of course. I’ve just been messing around with them. The fleet is building nicely. I know it’s not the focus of this particular group of enthusiasts, but I was wondering if you guys might have an interest in releasing the World War II versions of the destroyers as well? This is something that’s lacking on the World War II front and those would be very welcome additions in their Old-school form.

I hear you Hawkeye, on the subject of Qatar and Bahrain. Why on Earth would ED decide to completely omit them from the PG map when they are near the center of the High detail area, and then include them on the Iraq map when they are at the far corner of the coverage area? It baffles me how this is a plan, yet it is not possible to add Fallon to the far corner of the NTTR Map? On one hand we have a single airbase, on the other hand we have an entire country........ go figure.

Ggrewe, I guess you didn't know, WE CAN fly between maps. It requires a slight workaround, but a smoother option from ED is inbound, short of a complete merging of the maps. Also, Personal Opinion here, I think the Afghanistan map is better than Iraq as far as production quality goes. Early days of course, but the building placement and lack of riverbank elevation on the Iraq map leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully they get their object placement algorithm dialed in and these rural areas get fixed in a polishing pass. -Woog

Eagle Dynamics hear us out. Please expand NTTR. Please give us a Low detail expansion all the way to the west coast (Orange border). Please update the existing area to be high detail with your current map tech (Red Border). Please extend the high detail area south to the Mexican border to include San Diego and Yuma (Purple Border). If nothing else please add Fallon to the existing map. Please add the following air bases so that our modules have a true home. Miramar (F-14, F-5, A-4), Yuma (AV-8B, F-5), El Toro (F-4S, F/A-18, A-4), Lemoore (A-7, F/A-18) George AFB (F-4E, OV-10). As a bonus, you could add Edwards AFB for ALL air frames, NAS North Island, and Luke AFB (not pictured) for F-16's. The Orange border is the size of the new Iraq map dimensions. -Woog

You know with ED having the power to approve or deny 3rd party projects in their platform, I am surprised that they have not directed the map production better. If the Syria map boundary were to slide up and over West a bit, and the Sinai were to slide down and West a bit, it would minimize overlap and dual production of airbases. The secondary benefit being that it would cover more territory that is currently omitted. On ED's side of the house, Slide Iraq up to meet the border of the Caucuses map and now we would have no blanks or duplicated work. It seems like this would be beneficial for future proofing in preparation for the global coverage, and/or the ability to merge maps. -Woog

There are a ton of assets that we need for Cold War (Air, Land, Sea) Its the aspect that DCS fails at the most, nothing fits together in time frame. However, if CH started down that road, he would have to change his name to Retrohill.

A quick and dirty deck texture update. The model itself is pretty decent. A couple of things to note: The FLOLS (Meatball) is completely absent. The SPS-49 radar lacks animation, as do the propellors. And then of course the CIWS do not have any gun barrels. I assume that this means the weapons are not currently programmed, I have not tested them yet. Would anyone be interested in the WIP deck textures? -Preston