Grim_Smiles

I think all the gizmos and stealth in the world won't make a s*** pilot that much better. Let's hope the start-up sequences for a Raptor are as involved as the A-10C, that way the ones who wouldn't pop open a flight manual if they had a gun to their head aren't getting off the ground intact. If they manage to at least take off, think of it as a target rich environment.:smilewink: As for the F-22, if IRIS can make all the switches and screens work like A-10C, and the flight model and avionics as accurate as you reasonably can get (even if its only 70% on the avionics), I'd say go for it and let server admins and mission designers decide if they want them involved. Hell I've had friends who do other types of simulators tell me that flying DCS A-10C or DCS F-18C is not a simulator but a video game, because you can't get a modern jet to 100% accuracy due to classified material. To them, if it isn't 100% you are just playing with a toy. I of course tell them they are full of it, so no need to ask me to pass that on.:joystick:

Ah, did not know that. Makes sense, would be easier to do a high-fidelity S instead of a high-fidelity SM. Completely agree.

Su-27SM is the one announced as intending to be developed by ED, and personally I hope to see it over the Su-27S. I like to do SEAD missions but would like to do it in a fighter instead of an attack plane. I think a multi-role Flanker would make for a good opponent for DCS: F-18C.

Because the world is really going to decide what to arm their military with based on a video game that doesn't even model everything 100% :rolleyes:

Need to use a little imagination here on just how much something like this can actually help accomplish those things you want. hegykc said it best so I'll drop his comment here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1833511&postcount=7 Civilian aircraft require less work to model than military, because you don't have to worry about the lack of information (classified material) or concern yourself with modeling weapon systems. Meaning more modules that can be developed that in turn get purchased - earning ED more income. This allows for bigger staffing and resources so that faster progress can be made on fixing bugs, stability and development. While some things simply take time no matter what, more manpower and resources make a difference.

Badonkadonk: For dragging your tail on the runway on takeoff. Wing and a prayer: For successful RTB minus one wing. Just a couple that come to mind.

You and me both buddy!:cry_2:

These two videos pretty much demonstrate the problem. I've had my stuff pushed in by a C-130 before thanks to ATC clearing us both for the runway.

I think a lot of people just ignore it anyway in the state it is in, but then again pulling the ATC out of the game might not be an option. Might take more work than it is worth or might break something else - like rearming/refueling, etc. My understanding though is that it was intended for 1.2.5, but obviously something went wrong? If so, I doubt we will be waiting for 1.2.6 for ATC if this is the case.

I can't imagine that 1.2.6 is going to come for at least a few months, which should be plenty of time for the huey to be finished. Of course, they could have two separate teams working, one UH-1H and one Mi-8Mtv2, you never know.

Had a feeling the Su-25T cockpit was going to be mentioned, Wags has been quiet about it since first mentioning it. Good to see the new cockpit, will be the only SEAD aircraft until F-18 comes out. I am rather amazed at the progress Beltechsim made with the Mi-8Mtv2 if they are looking at a beta that quickly. Granted I doubt 1.2.6 would come until end of the year at the earliest, but I think that is still a hell of a lot of progress. And now that the Wags update is here, queue the inevitable:

:thumbup::megalol:

I think they do, it has just turned into a race to see who gets it first, so it results in an earlier and earlier time.:megalol:

"Well, that'll just about cover the fly-bys."

Who says player controlled civilian aircraft have to be on combat servers in MP? Are some people not aware there are aerobatic servers out there without any combat? Not to mention that many flying civilian planes are likely to just do it SP anyway? So there doesn't have to be counter measures, weapons or evading for these planes. Now, if you actually want to take a Cessna into a combat server? Good luck.

Exactly, there really isn't anything important that gets discussed, other than a "You didn't mention about <blank>! Game is going to hell!" or "That WIP screen shot sucks! Sky is falling!". And complaining about these threads only adds to the noise anyway. Someone wants important bits without reading the thread, I suggest they do what I do and filter for all posts by Wags, admins and tester accounts.

Ships in general need some work on their damage model, and I'm sure this is something ED would like to get to one day. I can see a modern super carrier taking a lot of punishment before sinking due to their design, but a small frigate isn't going to take well to an anti-ship missile. However, like any military vehicle you don't have to destroy it to take it out of the fight - something that isn't modeled on ships. Hopefully we will see something like this down the road for ships (and maybe vehicles).

Ah ok, thought maybe you knew something I didn't, I was really hoping Su-27SM was actually being worked on right now:cry:

I saw that Su-27SM is listed as "In progress", just wondering where the official info on this is? I thought it was just "Planned" at the moment, would love it if this was actually being worked on.

I've noticed no differences in system resources used when the Su-27 and Su-25A were switched over to a new cockpit. Most of my FPS issues have come from other things which have been hashed out already on this board.

Just to clear up any confusion on what Wags meant, the new 3D Su-27, F-15, A-10A and Su-25 cockpits have all been referenced by Wags with the name of "6 DOF" cockpits. This is just one of the posts where Wags refers to the new cockpits as "6 DOF": http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1643589&postcount=4 So thankfully they are doing the same thing for the Toad that they did for the F-15/Su-27/Su-25/A-10A.

Glad to hear the Su-25T will get a 3D cockpit.

More than likely these are renders made from the program they are using to build the models, not a render of what it looks like exactly in DCS/Edge. *Edit: I see SithSpawn beat me to it, lol.

I'd like to see some of the more prominent fighters from the major powers in the war. We have the P-51 for the US and we will soon have the 190 for Germany (though I think the 109 was a more iconic fighter for the Germans). Need the Zeke for Japan (A6M5 Type 0 Mod 52 should be the version that can keep up with the P-51 and Dora) and I'd like to see the Yak-3P for Russia. Spitfire of course for Britain, Mk. XIV. The plane I'm still waiting for is the Bf-109 though. Eventually I'd like to see all the fighter and bombers make it into DCS.

The Wags update for this Friday:cry: