Woogey

Call to arms, Cypress and Bahrain (Please) While I understand that it is outside of the scope of the project, completely omitting the island is a very odd decision. (As is omission of Bahrain in PERSIAN GULF) It should be included even if it is a flat featureless landclass style blob in the shape of the actual Island. This way it will take up very little memory resources. At least then Naval Formations will have to accurately navigate around it, and air defenses can be placed upon it which our aircraft will have to avoid. -Preston

RealSimGear GNS430 @DWAIL Any Chance that we could get this working with DCS? Its esentially just a button box with a screen attached......... https://realsimgear.com/collections/all/products/realsimgear-gns430-bezel-for-x-plane-realistic-gps-for-your-sim?gclid=Cj0KCQjw0YD4BRD2ARIsAHwmKVkJm7gAtDN5LunnlX-72pFGPtvVkjN6uiteM9__5E4oPKwxeK7u1IsaAtFkEALw_wcB

There’s about a million pictures online that say otherwise. As an aircraft mechanic I can tell you categorically those pylons were not welded to the air intakes. Quite honestly if you’re not a member of the HeatBlur team you don’t have any business answering the question. Sorry I don’t mean to be rude, but that’s the way it is.

Fuel Tank Pylons This may seem like a small feature, but important. Can we get a fuel tank pylon delete option in the Loadout Menu please? The Clean Tomcat is really iconic, also there was a very limited amount of external fuel tanks early in the F-14 program, which is why you see early A’s without them most of the time. -Preston

Langley Fast Packs It wasn’t just Iceland and Alaska that got Fast Packs (Conformal Tanks)

Hey Guys, A while back (when NTTR was still in beta) Wags had made a comment about bringing a feature to the sim of individual Airport Addons. Has this idea gone by the wayside? It was a great idea, and would be a much welcome addition to add missing bases such as NAS Fallon, NAWC China Lake, and the famous Edwards AFB, but also to be able to bring additional detail and accuracy to the Myriad of Civilian airports in each of the maps. Really seems like a missed opportunity on the part of ED.

Nope, just a different 3D model.......and really just the Extended canopy of the two seater. It is requested as Ai, it does not need a new flight model, it does not need a separate cockpit model, just a visual representation.

It would be really nice if this new F-16 Module also came with some additional F-16 Ai models, specifically a two seat version. As the two seat F-16 was produced in very significant numbers, It would really add to the experience if we could have F-16D Ai’s on the ramp, and in the sky side by side with our Single seaters. You cannot find a single base anywhere in the world with F-16s that does not have a large amount of 2 seaters present. They are not there for training only, they in themselves have a 100% combat capability, maybe even better than the single seater with the second set of eyes in the back.

Well the A-6E and KA-6 will be free Ai models added with your F-14 Purchase. It makes a very good business case to make an Ai EA-6B model that you would get with your purchase of the Complete flyable A-6E module when it is ready in a couple of years. I wonder though what we will see first the A-6E full module, or an F-14D?

Hey Guys THANK YOU! Is there any way we could get the remove pylons option for stations 1, 2, 7, and 8? 1 & 8 are the parent wing glove stations which were removed on show birds occasionally. These stations aren't as important to me as the fuel tank stations 2 & 7. These station quite often were not mounted. Please add this in a future update, as she could be just a little more sleek and sexy if the 2 & 7 were able to be removed! Thanks again Gentlemen. -Woog

Robert you’re clearly a fan of the Hornet, which is why your statement sounds like I personally attacked you. Just because an aircraft has a higher score card does not mean it’s a better or more capable aircraft. By every single measure, the Tomcat was more capable. If you compare the score card for all Tomcat A2A victories, you will find the Hornet coming up short. You seem to forget about this other little country called Iran that shot down many more Iraqi jets than US Hornets ever did. Respect is something that is earned by a person, not a machine. If you want to credit the machine properly, then credit the Tomcat for being so persuasive, that it did not need to bloody it’s claws. Enemies ran in fear when locked up by the AWG-9. Moderators, can we now close yet another argument thread? This place is filled with vile human beings. I just wanted to know about a carrier model.

Ripper: Indeed life is pretty damn good to me. Zhukovsky: I am not sure exactly what “armchair analysis” you are speaking of, other than the simple fact that the Legacy Charlie Hornet is a lesser aircraft to the Tomcat and the Super Hornet. Operational Security is a great blanket term that most definitely covers the release of classified information regarding aircraft and anything else you might want to use it for. I am not here to argue another pointless fight. Zuk was anything in your statement constructive or necessary? I just wanted to find out more about the carrier plans. -Woog

I am aware of the Heatblur Forestall class. I am also aware that the Hornet is being developed by BST/ED and the F-14 by HB, two separate companies altogether. The simple fact of the matter is that the Charlie Hornet no matter the era is not the top dog on the deck. It was always 2nd to the Tomcat or the Super Hornet except for a couple minor examples. Therefore we have need to have either Super Hornets modeled as Ai, or ships modeled era specific for both Hornets and Tomcats. As we all know that DCS can never replicate current gen weapons systems for OpSec reasons, the choice to model this version of the Hornet is perplexing at best. Older Hornets, worked the same way, they just had less system depth, or with out many of the pages and options that were added later in life. I just wish that the Producers would do a better job of focusing the subject matter to be more consistent between modules. In the case of the A-10C, I get it, they were under contract for the actual US Air Force. I fail to believe that ED is under contract for an F/A-18C that has been retired by its primary operator, and will be retired by more by the time the module is "Finished." Honestly, Pre-Millennium Eagle Dynamics. That should be your focus for now. Its the only era that you a can legally accurately simulate consistently. -Woog

Not sure where to put this so moderators please move accordingly. I was just wondering about the high detail Nimitz class model that is coming. Will it be a high detail version of the Stennis? Or will it be a different ship of the same class? The reason I ask, is my hope that the ship is modeled correctly to present pre Super Hornet era details. For example Nimitz came out of RCOH in 2001 with a brand new tri-level main mast, and never again operated Tomcats in that configuration. IKE Came out of her RCOH in 2005 with the same tri-tier main mast, and also never operated Tomcats in this config. My hope is that ED does it’s research, and provides us with a high detail in the NIMITZ class ship that represents a mid 90’s configuration. This would be the best compromise to get both F/A-18’s and F-14’s operating from the deck at the same time. With that said, I know their aim for the Hornet is a mid 2000’s update, which just doesn’t Make any sense, unless they plan to add Super Hornet Ai to the fray at some point? -Woog

Any chance you might release it as Ai only? How far did you get on the 3D model?

I might have missed this, but are the guys still developing this out some more? Is there an intention to still add more features, or are we complete as it is? -Woog

It serves a couple purposes. It was installed on all aircraft carriers after a collision with the USS Belknap (hence its name). It Is a convenient place to mount weather station equipment, and also has a position light and a camera mounted. -Woog

P.S. would Love a Bronco for DCS! It is in my top 3 favorite fixed wing aircraft. (F-14, A-4, OV-10)

If memory serves me correctly, Tim Taylor of Metal2Mesh modeled the Aerosoft Bronco for them. Tim is a good friend and partner with Ron and Larry, so it makes sense that they have a version of this flying in their personal copy of DCS. What I would give to spend one day on Ron or Larry’s computer flying DCS! T-2’s, A-7’s, OV-10’s, Scooters, and many more I’m sure!

Are there any plans to add the missing Belnap Pole to the Stennis? Seen here painted as an American flag in this photo of Carl Vinson leaving Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.

While the KA-6D first hit the Fleet in 1970 as did the A-6E. It was my understanding that all 90 KA-6D's were rebuilt from A-6A airframes. While technically true, it turns out that 12 of the 90 were in fact A-6A's that had been early upgrades to the A-6E standard, prior to conversion to KA-6D. These were early "barebones" A-6E's that had not received the TRAM upgrades and such. I would like to offer my Apologies to you Sir. I was mistaken. -Woog Ref: http://www.joebaugher.com/usattack/newa6_4.html

I couldn't agree more! While I understand, and have read Cobra's reply to this exact concern, I also hope that somewhere down the road we can get a "fresh out of the depot" version of the A, B, and D cockpits. While I understand that these were workhorse machines that got beat up pretty quickly, We could also compare this module to your favorite beloved model of sports-car. I'd prefer to hop into a classic car that was in good (Not Pristine) condition, over one that looks like it has been left out in a field with rats and birds making a home in the Cockpit! What I don't want, is a request like Clean Cockpits, to take precedence and delay our release any further than it already has been. The textures DO look amazing even as is, and I can not wait to get my hands on it! Please Cobra and the Heatblur team: All I want for Christmas is my F-14. -Woog

Sorry revelation, but your statement is not correct in any way. The D's came before the E's. They are not re-purposed E's at all. In fact the other way around. There were new build and rebuild A-6E's. Followed by TRAM updates, and many more. One of the largest improvements: a completely new composite re-wing program on the E's after multiple crashes lead to the discovery of fatigue and wing failures. With all of this said, the press release states that they are doing both of the aircraft KA, and E- Tram as Ai of course. -Woog

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think it’s actually the case. In terms of information processing, the potential with the right design philosophy is no more CPU intensive than Dubai or Nevada. Again not huge in terms of gigabytes of data, using the land class methods. Not to mention that loading and offloading of visible objects is a feature being refined by E.D. as we speak. Additionally There is a VERY high probability that DCS 3.0 will use a full globe simulation engine. To create a map like this is going to take a couple years anyway, now we’re in overlapping territory with the next iteration of DCS. We might have different philosophies here, but I am the type of person who rises to a challenge and finds a way to make it happen, This is called progress. While others may be left behind thinking “it can’t be done.” -Woog

Same Size as Caucuses and Persian Gulf, 600 miles by 1000 miles. Granted these maps have a much smaller “High Detail” area, but the full map are is in fact 600mi x 1000mi. The point of bringing up the ORBX stuff in the original post, was to show that the map could be high detail in its entirety, and still be kept to a manageable size memory wise. This map could be done and still not break 40gb. There is no reason this map could not be slid north a wee bit, but it can’t go West and East to cover Kaliningrad. That would expand the map to be larger than anything in DCS currently. The main thing is to not slide it far enough north that Bitburg, Hahn, and the other SW German USAFE bases become excluded. It would also be preferable that they are not at the very edge of the map. While Sub pens would indeed be a high value target, this is also primarily a flight sim, Therefore the aircraft and there airbases need to take priority. -Woog