WHOGX5

The focus IS on DCS World. That is why we keep bringing up Falcon BMS. Because they did it right. What's the point in reinventing the wheel? Why not look at sims like BMS and IL-2, see how they did it, and then figure out how we can apply that to DCS? And if something doesn't work right off the bat, then we will have to adapt. If smart scaling a la BMS doesn't work in DCS, then ED will have to work their way around it. Don't get me wrong, I'm stoked for 2.0 and that ED added a model visibility option. But if it only works at long ranges, the problems at close range will still persist. Also, what will happen when we get the F/A-18 and slew our TGP to the radar? Will we see the actual aircraft that we have locked up, or will we see a low resolution image of it which then suddenly becomes a 3D model as you get closer? It does not have to do with ground detail more than anything. Sure, ground detail plays a part, but the biggest problem is that objects appear way smaller in-game than they do irl. Sure, the improved graphics in 2.0 will probably help, but the biggest problem will still be there. Especially in WWII combat and dogfights. Even though it is way better than what we have now, imho, the scaling solution ED has come up with feels a bit slapdash.

Well, as whiteladder said, we know what Link 16 does, and we have a pretty good idea of how it does it. I don't know whether Link 16 is actually classified or not, but either way there is a lot of information to be found on the internet alone, not to mention the contacts that ED has in the USAF/USN and in the RAF through VEAO. That's the beauty of game making though. ED doesn't have to know exactly how a MIDS-LVT(3) is constructed and what parts it consists of. We know what it does. All ED has to do is to create something that replicates Link 16 in a realistic manner. In the same way that they don't need to know exactly what components are used in an E-3 AWACS. They know what it does, then they replicate it.

Erhm, Kinda..... The JTIDS Class 2R was supposed to be fielded by F-15C's (only 18 F-15C's were actually equipped with them) in the 1980-90's but the programme was scrapped by the OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) due to conflicts with, and inferiority to (lower reliability and shorter lifespan than) the NAVY developed MIDS (which incorporates all the features of JTIDS). The airforce ended up choosing the MIDS-LVT(3) FDL, which is now in service aboard both ANG F-15A/B and USAF F-15C/D/E variants. The F-16 and F/A-18 are a part of the MIDS-LVT(1) family (LVT-1/4-7) together with a bunch of other NATO aircrafts (EF-2000, Rafale, Tornado, AMX). JTIDS Class 2 is still being used by certain intelligence aircrafts such as the E-2 Hawkeye (not the E-2D), RC-135 Rivet Joint and E-8 JSTARS, as well as the retired F-14D. In the end it depends on which era of F-15 ED decides to make. If they are going for a Desert Storm-era Eagle, judging by the A-10A, F/A-18C, F-14A/B and Strait of Hormuz, then the F-15 didn't have datalink. If they are going for a present day F-15C it should have full Link 16 support and interoperability with pretty much every USAF/USN/USMC aircraft involved in combat operations today as well as a couple of helicopters (MH-60R/S, AH-64E, etc.). I hope I didn't go too off-topic since this is a SU-27 thread! :music_whistling:

LG 29" 21:9 2560x1080

Q: Will there be some kind of DTC implemented so you can setup presets for your MFDs, weapon profiles and loadouts, countermeasures, etc., so you don't have to do it every time you spawn? Q: Will there be some kind of mission planner implemented so you can set your own waypoints, no-fly-zones, threat circles, alternate landing strips, check weather radar and forecasts etc., for your flight in single and multiplayer? Q: Is there any possibility for a "physical" interactable kneeboard in the cockpit with multiple pages (a la F4:AF or WDP for BMS) containing mission info, maps, notes, checklists, airport charts, etc.? Q: Will there be pilot bodies for all aircrafts? Q: Will there be taxi signs at airports so you don't have to guess your way to the runway?

The things I'd do for an UH-60M/MH-60R combo.....

I completely agree with tsb47. This will be a rewritten and re-edited version of a couple of posts I made before in a similar thread so if you recognize some of this, now you know why. The reason I think it's a good idea being able to be the RIO without owning the module, especially when you keep in mind that DCS World is free, is that you can give people who aren't into DCS a taste of what its really like without any economical ramifications. I don't know about you, but I find it very hard to enjoy DCS without a HOTAS and a TrackIR. FSX, for example, is very enjoyable with a bottom shelf joystick and no TrackIR, as it doesn't require the same ability to keep situational awareness while pulling off disorienting maneuvers and to be able to switch between radar modes, weapon bays, countermeasure programs, and so on, without letting go of your throttle and stick. That's the pro of the RIO seat. You can control the avionics with your keyboard and pan your view with your mouse since you don't have to worry about flying. People aren't going to spend $200-300 on gear, and then an extra $50 odd bucks on a module if they're not sure they'll actually like it. And about the TF-51 and the SU-25T, they're great for people who already fly other flight sims and thus have enough skills (and the gear) to quickly get into DCS without much of a learning curve, but I think it's easier to give the average "non-simmer" a taste of what DCS and the module in question is really like if they can jump into the pit after learning the RIO equipment and fly along with a "pro", getting a taste of real combat rather than trying to fly an entire mission on their own when they barely manage to take off properly, not to mention all the tactics and aircraft systems that need to be (thoroughly) studied just to complete your mission and make it back in one piece. Also, without trying to sound too cheesy, there are so many emotions you feel when you're flying in combat that you simply can't convey through words. The feeling of desperately trying to find a missile trail just after a surprise SAM launch. The feeling of limping home with a damaged aircraft with only fumes left in the tanks. The feeling of trying to catch a wire in strong crosswinds, at night, in poor visibility. The feeling of being in a chaotic dogfight, trying to differentiate between friend and foe before you pull the trigger, all while you have someone trying to get on your six. It's a big difference watching all of this happen in a let's play on youtube, and actually being there, experiencing it. And the people I play DCS with on a regular basis and who will be flying with me 99% of the time, as both RIOs, pilots, and wingmen, are already eagerly waiting to pay for the F-14 module. I want this for the people who don't play DCS. What DCS pilot would choose not to buy the module and instead spend all of their time in multiplayer flying as a RIO just to not have to pay? I just don't think there is anything to be lost by doing this. If the RIO doesn't like the module, then no harm done. If they do they'll probably buy the module and perhaps other modules as well. They way I see it, it's a win-win. If there is one thing that wouldn't hurt the DCS community, it's more players! More players = more fun and more revenue!

Digital Combat Simulator, Digital Civilian Simulator..... It works both ways. :)

Sure joysticks are cheap (depending on what you compare it to), but would you spend $50 on a USB tennis racket, even though you might only use it two or three times, to see if you liked a tennis-sim? I don't know about you, but I find it very hard to enjoy DCS without a HOTAS and a TrackIR. FSX, for example, is very enjoyable with a bottom shelf joystick and no TrackIR, as it doesn't require the same ability to keep situational awareness while pulling off disorienting maneuvers and to be able to switch between radar modes, weapon bays, countermeasure programs, and so on, without letting go of your throttle and stick. That's the pro of the RIO seat. You can control the avionics with your keyboard and pan your view with your mouse since you don't have to worry about flying. And about the TF-51 and the SU-25T, they're great for people who already fly other flight sims and thus have enough skills to quickly get into DCS without much of a learning curve, but I think it's easier to give the average "non-simmer" a taste of what DCS and the module in question is really like if they can fly along with a "pro" and get a taste of real combat rather than trying to fly an entire mission on their own when they barely manage to take off properly. And considering that the target audience would be pretty much everyone who is on the fence when it comes to realistic flight sims, I'd say it's a well worth trade off. I wouldn't pay 15 extra bucks just so that someone can sit in my plane once or twice for free. The people I play DCS with on a regular basis and who will be flying with me 99% of the time, as both RIOs and pilots, are already eagerly waiting for the F-14 to be released, just like me and, I assume, every other person in this thread. The reason I think it's a good idea being able to be the RIO without owning the module is that, without trying to sound too cheesy, there are so many emotions you feel when you're flying in combat that you simply can't convey through words. The feeling of desperately trying to find a missile trail just after a surprise SAM launch. The feeling of limping home with a damaged aircraft with only fumes left in the tanks. The feeling of trying to catch a wire in strong crosswinds, at night, in poor visibility. The feeling of being in a chaotic dogfight, trying to differentiate between friend and foe before you fire that sidewinder, all while you have someone trying to get on your six. It's a big difference watching all of this happen in a let's play on youtube, and actually being there. This! This is a feature I'd personally love to see in DCS!

Didn't ED say that they were going to merge everything into one process (.exe wise) when 2.0 is released? I don't know if that includes multiplayer or if it is just the singleplayer. If it does, however, that might just indicate a step towards merging the single- and multiplayer experience, similarly to BMS.

Since DCS World is free, if the RIO seat would be free as well (if flown in multiplayer together with someone who owns the module), that would be a great way to give people who don't play DCS a taste of what it's like. No one (who isn't already a flight enthusiast) is going to spend money on a joystick and a TrackIR, just to see if this sort of thing is my bag, baby. If they could jump into the pit after learning the RIO equipment and get a taste of intense air combat and the stress of trapping a wire, that might just get them over the fence. If not, then no harm done. And on the subject of money, what DCS pilot would choose not to buy the module and instead spend all of his time in multiplayer flying as a RIO just to not have to pay? I just don't think there is anything to be lost by doing this. On the contrary, I think it will do good for LNS the DCS community as a whole. And just to clarify, the person in the backseat, whether it be in a F-14 or a Hawk, should NOT be able to take over the stick. They should only be able to control the weapon systems, flick some switches, and enjoy the view.

F-16. Korea.

Wouldn't pay for it. Now, if we're talking 105's, that's a completely different subject. :D

I thing that sets the A and the C-version apart (except for all of the avionics of course) is the era. The A-version was the workhorse of the Gulf War, long before the USAF started upgrading to the C-version. That's probably why there's a C and an E-version of the hornet being made. The C-version served in the Gulf War, the E-version didn't. This is especially true when you keep in mind that the Strait of Hormuz-map is about to be released.

Even though I'm madly in love with both the WWII era aircraft of DCS and IL2, and the modern day aircraft of DCS and BMS (especially the upcoming Super Hornet!!!), the reason I'd love a Vietnam War era flight sim is because there isn't really any good Nam sims out there. The only Vietnam flight sim I own is Strike Fighters 2 and even though it's a lot of fun, it's a really bad sim (If you know about any better ones, please tell me!). And from what I've seen when it comes to EDGE it seems as if DCS 2.0 will be able to feature a lot more detailed environments. Just imagine the forests, the rice paddys and the deep, deep valleys. Seeing the smoke rising from the LZ in the distance as you hit the safety switch to your napalm. No fancy TGP's, no GBU's, no AMRAAM's etc. I'm getting all juicy in my pants just thinking about it... :yes:

I think the old flares looked WAY better and were more realistic than the new ones.....

I encountered this too. A wierd thing for me though was that it was the left 151/20 that showed up as jammed in the cockpit, when it was the right one that wasn't firing. And about the ammo counters, if i recall correctly, they don't actually count the amount of ammo you have in each gun. The pilot sets them manually to the amount of rounds you have for each gun before flight (the game does it for you) and then they just count the amount of times you fire (,or attempt to fire) your gun. But as I said, I'm not sure about this.

I agree and think this will be a necessary addition when Coretex Design release the carrier for the F-18. Ground crew will be absolutely essential. Taxiing up to the cat and navigating around the tight spaces of an aircraft carrier will be close to impossible in first person, especially if you have a crowded deck. And for the sake of immersion, it would be really cool if the ground crew walked around and checked your control surfaces, gave signals for the pilot to spool the engines, actually attached the munitions themselves when rearming, etc. I'm not a programmer so i don't know how hard this would be to implement but it feels doable.

So, i just got a hold of the TrackIR 5 and i have a small problem. I made my own profile in the TIR software and tried it in Falcon BMS and i had no problems. When i turned 180 degrees in the software i did the same ingame. But in DCS the software input seems to be doubled so instead of turning the same amount in both DCS and the software i turn 180 degrees in the software and 360 degrees in DCS. Any help is appreciated.

It works wonderfully! Thank you mister. When i asked for help, every single control for the KA-50 looked like this:

Hi all. I just bought the BS2 upgrade, added the module to DCS world and registered the serial key. The problem is that I can't map any controls. All the keyboard controls are premapped and ready but all my joystick controls are grey and can't be selected or mapped. I even tried to import my control scheme from BS1 but that didn't work either. I started the Shooting Range mission and everything (except from the HOTAS ofc) worked. I went through the whole startup sequence without any trouble. I have already installed the A-10C module to DCS World and it works to a 100%. Everything is up to date. I'm using a Saitek X45 HOTAS. :helpsmilie: