Woogey

I just find it interesting that the CVW-8 guys are simulating the late Super Tomcat Air wing when HeatBlur have not actually announced the F-14D. One could argue that the Early CVW-8 airwing is more famous and anticipated to be a part of IE: F-14A’s from VF-84 Jolly Rodgers and VF-41 Black Aces. Awe the intricacies of simulating historical Air Wings. Back to the Topic, I am down for a HeatBlur Tomcat Driver shirt or two. -Woog

With China coming online, I am guessing that two of the new aircraft will be the: J-10 (already released) J-15 with Liaoning I also am going out on a limb here, but I theorize that maybe some previously cancelled full fidelity modules might just show up at an FC4 level. Namely: A-7E and the T-2C However, it is possible that ED could make the new S-3 model into an FC4 module....... Lastly there is a very good possibility that they will give us the original single seat Mig-29K and the Navalized Frogfoot variant. -Woog

I am guessing that the J-15 will be next on the agenda as well as a properly modified carrier to represent the Lioaning. The question I pose, are these two of the four jets ED have been quoted as bringing to DCS as Flaming Cliffs 4 modules? Or are they talking about 4 all new modules? -Woog

While I see your point, a solution would be to update the standard free map just slightly. Where the Existing airbase ramp and taxiway layout would change to match the new High Detail Version. This way in multiplayer, taxi position, and parking would be synced. I see on the TBS site the Crimea is already WIP, I really hope this comes to the DCS version of the map as well. -Woog

Although the “new” Caucasus Map is a definate upgrade, I agree that it needs infrastructure updates. There is a need for a greater variety of region specific buildings. The airbases do not currently match real world layout at all, and the Road network though the Urban areas is very basic. I may be in the minority, but I would pay for upgrades to the Caucuses map. Even if it were an idividual airbase or Cityscape product. I would especially be interested in products that would add detail to the outer edges of the Black Sea. Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, the Crimean Peninsula, Etc. Caucuses could be used as a test bed for expansion products. In this way, a new series of “mini-Scenery” products could be developed, drastically reducing the time between product releases of the larger regions. -Woog

Hey Guys, Has anyone done any PBR updates for the Titanium Engine Cowling on the rear of the F-15? Most of my Liveries I downloaded work, except that the Metal panels in the back just look like a painted gray color? Has ED updated the Texture template by Chance? -Woog

Hey Guys Does anybody know where to find the actual Map textures? What Folder they are located in? I would like to mod the Thunderbirds hangar to more accurately represent its real world coloring. -Woog

For Anyone who may have figured this out, Is it possible to paint up A-10A's without having Formation "Slime Lights." A-10's did not have these formation lights for nearly half their careers. If I want to portray some nice Euro 1 schemes from RAF Bentwaters and Woodbridge, then these lights need to be deactivated some how. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Edit: I can remove the Occlusion Shadows, I can delete the light strip graphic from the Paint Kit, I am not sure if the Raised bit is part of the Bump Map or the Model itself? Is there a file for configure of the Light effect itself? -Woog

This is the first I have heard of a New S-3 Model. A big thank you goes out to the entire E.D. Crew for slowly but surely updating the Naval Aviation assets in DCS. Here's to wishful thinking that you guys do the same for the SH-60, and eventually get an Ai EA-6B Prowler into the Sim. -Woog

Maybe you guys can get in touch with Henry Tomkiewicz http://htai-models.com/downloads.html and get some of his models into DCS? He has a very large collection of models that he has modeled based on the fact that they are operated in both the civilian market and for military use. He also has a complete Cessna Singles line. There are a couple caveats to his models: being optimized for low resource/high FPS, they have basic animations only, and Opaque Cockpit glass. I would love to see his King Air Series, the Beech 1900D, some Lear Jets, Cessna 150 and 170 series, and most of all the venerable C-141B Starlifter needs to be a DCS thing. Hopefully ED updates their AI traffic and Ground Routes system Soon. In theory Civilian/Heavy traffic logic should be more simple than a dog fighting aggressive Fighter Aircraft. One would think that standard SIDS/STARS routes and CHARTS could be used to implement a standard template for both Single player and Multi-player mission sets in the game. The Random traffic generator is helpful, but without the ED's refinement of Ground routes, will never be viable for a realistic implementation of civilian traffic. Maybe Pilot edge will have some influence with ED? -Woog

Are these civilian Aircraft still being actively worked on? I would like to suggest that the winglets be removed from the 747. This is essentially a 747-200 which never had winglets. Also, it could be used as Air Force One which never had winglets. It will also be a great addition to the Iranian inventory which got their airframes prior to the Winglet revolution. The other thing I would like to see is refined animations. Flaps, Elevators, Rudders, Spoilers, Nose wheel steering, Fan Blades, and Thrust reversers. What you guys have done is a great start, and a sorely needed addition to the Ai pool. Please don't take my request as anything more than constructive criticism. -Woog

Probably one of the most prolific helicopters ever made. You will find this air frame in every corner of the Earth. This helicopter has been used for every role you can think of, but especially important in any aspiring helicopter pilots military career. In the U.S. Navy/Marine Corps it is known as the TH-57, and is the primary training helicopter before moving on to any of the combat choppers that we employ. In Vietnam, the Original OH-58A was employed as a scout and Liaison platform, and of course the civilian version the B-206 Should be instantly recognizable to just about every one. If fixed wing trainers get so much attention, and now Eagle Dynamics are giving the green light for Civilian Aircraft, The Bell 206 series has to be up there on the priority list. Just my two cents. -Woog

Hey Bull, I have no flight time in the AH-6 which should be fairly obvious. After researching it a little more, it is apparent that We stuffed some Apache Electronics in it, and gave it some Link 16 capabilities for data share and drone connectivity. The 6 bladed rotor and Apache style X-pattern tailrotor I was aware of. This is part of the Drivetrain upgrade I referred to. The Little bird, or "Killer Egg" had been around for a long time. While the details and systems of the latest variant make it a NoGo, the standard MD-500 Defender, or even an old OH-6 Cayuse is absolutely able to be modeled. Being a Boeing product, I can tell you that there is no issue with IP licensing. Boeing will license any and all of it's products for game use, even the AH-64D. It is simply a matter of negotiating out the Royalty contract. This does not mean that Boeing is giving out classified info or even performance charts. It simply mean a developer can make a model, and use the Boeing name. -Woog

There is nothing classified about the Little Bird. It is an MD-500 with a couple of of off the shelf components bolted on. Even the New MH-6/AH-6 is not anything special. Boeing Upgraded the drivetrain, and gave it a glass panel, with standard off the shelf components. It is a cheap entry level attack chopper that could easily be reproduced in DCS. The Gazelle and BO are more technical, and they have already been done. -Woog

I know it has been 7 months since the last reply, but I wanted to check up on this project. Is the intention to have a US Navy variant as well? I hope to see this mod completed, the progress looks promising. - Woog

Overlooks Although I agree with you, I couldn’t resist, I made the purchase. The two biggest Adjustments that need to be made in my mind are in regards to the physical model. 1): landing gear and Oleo strut travel and rebound. 2): The two fins On the drop tanks. (There should be only one) Ron assured us months ago that these would be addressed, yet every new video shows that the landing gear still has not been adjusted, and the 2 fins are still there. Starting to get worried! -Woog

Haha, Just curious whatever came from this model after "discovering" it today. As previously posted, Google dug up the image from the O.P. today, and I think the model looks great! -Woog

Edge, I know this is a very old thread, but a Google search revealed this model to me. It looks absolutely wonderful! Was this the basis for the newer "Community A-4?" I much prefer the clean looks of the "Humpless" variant that you have modeled. -Woog

Good Day Friends, It has been said that DCS is always in a perpetual beta state. I had an idea that I would like to propose to EAGLE DYNAMICS: a once yearly stable update. Every year you could release the newly updated engine to the public around the beginning of December, and we can feel comfortable knowing that nothing will change or break for one full year. This doesn't mean that we won't get new content, just that the base game engine won't change. You could still offer up early access betas for those who want to be parts of the experimental side, of the platform. This system would probably be most efficient after the 2.5 merge. A good simple formula could look something like this: August 1st -Internal ED cutoff for new engine features. October 1st -3rd party cutoff for existing Module updates and patches October 2nd thru Nov. 30th stability testing Dec 1st -release new year stable version to the public. Meanwhile behind the scenes, the following years stable version feature list has already been in work from Aug. 2nd on. Am I the only one who would like to see a little more stability come to the platform? It seams like every time I Launch DCS, I have to wait for half an hour while new updates are installed, which may or may not work very good. Yes I run the alpha/Beta so I can get the new maps. This is part of the current process I get it. However, I hope in the future that new maps won't require new engine features, and they can just be added as a finished feature complete project. Essentially instead of getting a 1.5.2 version on the "stable" side it would just be DCS 2018. On the Alpha/Beta side, the version count can evolve just as it does currently. When those cutoff dates come around. The count stops, and only minor hotfixes should be introduced until stable release day comes. Does this make sense to anybody but me? Just a thought, Thanks for your time, -Woog

Sorry that this was replied to before, With 51 pages of forum posts, it is hard to find those replies sometimes. Anyway I don't recall getting a notification of response from the forum. Thank you for taking the time to respond again. I understand about the SFM having nose steering standard. With what you guys have been able to accomplish, I just assumed you had progressed passed an SFM. As far as the spoilers go, I have had exactly the opposite experience as you. I have not found any info that A-4E were retrofitted. I do not feel any of your team to be rude. I am the type of person who likes to be corrected if I have the wrong info, it means I learned something new. I understand how these ED forums can be, and I try to stay away from them for the most part. There is a lot of passion here, unfortunately Backed by opinion most of the time, and not hard facts. I think a lot of the reason for peoples (including myself) hope for the Humpless, and bent probe options, is to bring continuity to DCS. This is a sim that at times has lacked any sort of direction. With the F-14, F-5, F/A-18, and AV-8B on the way, it seems natural to have that mid 1980's configured Scooter in game. Don't get me wrong, If I were YOU, reading this post right now, I would be frustrated by yet another person who doesn't get it. I DO get it, we all get it, you are the developers of a sweet little module, and you're going to do it the way you want to. Thank You. I appreciate and respect the abilities your team posses to be able to create such a functional piece of artwork. -Woog

Good day Gentlemen, I am really looking forward to the mod, but did notice another discrepancy. The A-4E does not have the "Lift Spoilers" that the A-4F had. Also no nose wheel steering. For all intents and purposes, you guys are basically building an A-4F. As far as the features go, physical modeling there aren't a lot of differences, from your model either. Basically just the bent probe, and a couple antennae. I really love the extent to which you guys are modeling this, but you might want to just call her an A-4F, and then people might leave you alone asking for the proper A-4E configurations......... just a thought. -Woog

I wonder why it is that ED uses a solid as its backround for maps? Wouldn't it make more sense to start from a water base, then add landmass to it? Two prime examples: NTTR and Normandy. On NTTR, a very large portion of the California coastline is accessible, but instead of Sea, there is just an endless tiled land texture pattern. If it was a WaterBased world, then we would get much more use from NTTR, as we could actually spawn Carriers and Enemy fleets there. Normandy, has an enclosed land border around its entire periphery. In essence turning the Island nation of Great Britain into NOT an island. Instead we now have a really big lake! How did those ships get in there? What are your guys thoughts? Without ED actually spending time on a SoCal map, they could have left us with just a simple vector coastline with the pacific ocean intact. No extra detail, in fact less detail as the engine would not have to draw the land texture over and over. When the "drop an airport in place" tech matures, the community could add detail in the form of Coastal airports and buildings as we see fit. Cough cough, Miramar, Cough........ -Woog

Love the Progress on the Harrier, and Super Tucan is a great alteration. I am however sad to not see an A-7 or T-6 on this list. Is there any hope for the future on these airframes that you guys put so much work into already, or will they be shelved forever and parked in the boneyard with the T-2C? Maybe, they could be marketed as a group pack of less capable models like FLAMING CLIFFS were? A "Naval Legends" pack maybe? -Woog

That -111 looks hilarious with modern weapons hung under the wings! Great looking model though. I really hope these continue to work once the new map/merge are available. Beautiful work guys! -Woog

Good day Gentlemen, As most of us know the A-4E does not have a steerable nose wheel, does the SFM allow for differential braking? I am sorry if this was under discusion already, I must have missed it somewhere. I can't wait to get this beauty in the air! I know the typical aggressor configuration is not planned, but will we have the option to mount or dismount the weapons pylons? (Clean wings). -Woog