Vivoune

I don't mind supporting them now, even if there's only SFM, but that's on the condition that the E/P/AFM version is the only available version in the end. I won't support modules that split the community and hurt the general soft's authenticity and quality.

Thanks for the preview! I don't speak a world of German! :) The engine sound is incredibly low though, when you did spoon it I thought you had the canopy closed, then when you closed it and you couldn't hear it anymore. A definitive buy for me as long as the EFM is the only version once it's finished.

Thanks guys, this is very informative and helpful! And yes, I'll probably end up getting both AFM versions, but not my friends, not before some time, and not before the bug bites. ;)

Thanks for your contributions guys and welcome to DCS ^^. Like the title says though, this thread is about the upcoming Jet trainers, not all and every other DCS modules. The subject isn't "which module for a beginner". Thanks

Indeed, there's no hurry though so it's fine. To me the value of these trainer jets is to offer for agile and rather forgivable flight experience with cockpits and systems that aren't too complicated that it needs hours upon hours of manual readings. While still keeping the level of modeling and authenticity that you would expect from any fully fledged DCS module. This way learning can be done in an enjoyable way with an aircraft that is specialized to learning and training so that you can easily translate and adapt all your sensations to other modules, instead of building muscle memory on heavy mules like CAS specialized aircraft or gazelles like high speed interceptors. It's also brilliant for RP. That's how I approach it at least, I don't know why but in my mind a training jet in DCS sounds absolutely perfect to learn and train. :)

Thanks for your input Maj, I've flown the Huey and the Ka-50 regularly in DCS for some time, I think they both make for great cooperative gameplay but I wouldn't recommend it as an entry point in DCS mostly for the points you mention along with a few other things. I'll update the original post to emphasize on the fact that it's a thread about the Jet trainer modules (which can engage in combat considering they are also used as light attack jets).

Well, everyone is in the sim for something, for me combat is an excuse to fly & train, I'm mostly having fun in the training and flying. Given the amount of studying and training there is in any proper sim I wouldn't want them to experience DCS through FC3 which is imho not where the fun is, that's a debate for another thread but I love simming because the difficulty makes everything that much more rewarding, not to take the fastest shortcut to instant action packed combat. Although FC3 can be nice, refreshing and perfect for some game sessions! Still, I for example, would never have sticked to DCS if it weren't for the complexity of the A-10C, being able to fly it effectively made for one of the most satisfying time I've spent behind a screen, that's what I want them to experience, that's why I come back to DCS. FC3 doesn't provide, imho, anything that plenty of other games that they already play already does considering they're not particularly passionate about aircrafts, nor am I. Thanks for your input thought! Still it's a thread about the upcoming Jet trainers, not FC3. :)

Yes, they most certainly are not interested in an SFM. Or would I dare to quote them lot "Why would I bother with a simulation that doesn't bother to simulate?". But I seem to remember reading both aircrafts will have their EFM ready for beta in a matter of weeks.

Ahoy, So both of these training jets are about to come out in a matter of weeks, personally I'll probably get both and support every 3rd devs that release a quality AFM/EFM/PFM but I am also regularly trying to drag in the DCS world several friends of mine. A jet trainer seems like the perfect first module for these friends to train on, cut their teeth on the sim and get familiar with formation flying. Still, I know they will only buy one module before some time, so I was wondering with the few elements that we have currently what you guys think would be the most appropriate training jet. I'm not asking which is "best" though, but rather what makes them different in terms of performance, cockpit & systems usability. I understand it might be a bit premature but I think some might still have some interesting thoughts to share on the subject. I'd have loved to bring in the ED's L-39 in the picture but considering everything they're working on suffers from delays upon delays I don't think it's yet relevant. Cheers! EDIT: Like the title says, this thread is about the upcoming Jet trainers, not all and every other DCS modules.

What's next? A third version of the aircraft without the clickable cockpit? Even cheaper? What VEAO is doing with its Hawk is a mistake, which I hope they'll correct as soon as possible, other modules shouldn't follow their example. It's going to be hard to properly communicate, support and handle all these flight model differentiation and probably will be more trouble that it's worth, my guess is ED might enforce unified versions down the road on such modules. Not to mention I don't think SFM is there to catter for the poorer or the less dedicated or the more casual players. I think it's just there because it's easier to develop and faster to get it playable, if coding and tweaking an AFM/EFM/PFM (ugh..) was as easy and cheap to develop as the SFM I doubt there would be any debate at all and AFM/EFM/PFM would be the default and only flight model. On top of that I bet there's a lot of people, including me, that want to support 3rd party devs early on but who absolutely aren't interested in SFM and as a result cannot support these 3rd party devs who chose to release SFM early on for that specific intent. Ironic. I could be wrong, but DCS World is one of the very few hardcore sim out there in a market that is full of more casual games, please don't take it away from us, it's one of the lasts sim/study sim bastions.

I agree, all these SFM & AFM/EFM differentiation are a nonsense. ED is working hard to get every "casual" FC3 aircraft up to AFM/EFM standards, it's not that it's much harder to fly, it's just more authentic. Selling SFM module only really feels like backward pedaling and can only create fractures within an already niche community. I really hope new modules simply all get sold with a fully functional AFM/EFM eventually even if at first only the SFM is available as a means to get the product in the community's hands sooner.

GTX 970 4Gb

I want a Hawk

The curved versions of these ultra wide monitors sounds nice but to be honest they are so much more expensive compare to their non curved version which is the same spec wise. These screens aren't large enough to really need to be curved, it sounds nice and logic to curve it, but I rly can't see it improving your experience unless you plan to use 3 of those. Especially since you tend to stand further from it considering the screen size. It's just not wide enough to benefit from it, far from it. The only use I could see is if the monitor has terrible angle vision. At least from my 34" ultra wide experience here, I couldn't see its curved version improving my experience in any way, in fact it would deteriote it considering I sometime am not the only one looking at the screen and having it curved sort of prevent that to a small extent. I would really advise anyone interrested in these ultra wide screen to stick with the much cheaper non curved version unless they plan on using 3 in the future.

No problem :)

I got me an AOC 34" lately @3440x1440 for work, running with a GTX670 FTW ed. (basically a GTX680). It definitely needs more graphic power but I just can't get myself to spend money on a new Graphic Card until the industry actually comes up with a decent upscale in Graphic power, Hopefully next year.

Very interresting! If that can help, I'm using the Crosswind for a year now and they're incredibly smooth, customizable, precise and solid. Not to mention the creator is reactive, reachable and keeps on working on the hardware and firmware. A no brainer imho. Feel free to ask me any question you might have on it. I've been searching for such a foldable stand setup for some time that would allow for a combo racing and flight sim installation to be ready or folded away in a minute of two. The GT Omega looks right according to you, sadly it seems impossible to acquire one these days, is it out of production? I've also noticed the next level wheel stand which looks also really great It even comes with a specific flight sim gear option on their official website. It's a bit on the pricey side in comparison but looks to do the job too. I just can't cope with the other wobbly regular wheel stand that have a bar in the middle and am not ready to dedicate the kind of space a true full cockpit requires.

A couple are reversed because I captured the side facing the light source (sun) so the textures are more visible and natural, to stay visually consistent I then mirrored the image. Sadly I didn't buy the mi-8 module, yet. They're all default liveries, no external skins or pack.

I do.

Hi guys, I find important the use of proper camo of the aircraft according to a zone & time. As such I created for myself a little preview of every livery for the ka-50 in a single jpg. I thought I'd share it as I know I'd have liked to find such a preview myself. Please note I didn't want to spend hours and hours so most of the placements and shot angles are a tad random but personally I didn't really care as long as I got to see what the camo looks like. A couple of liveries have been left out because they were just worn out versions which details only really show in-game. The image is about 2k x 6k resolution. Cheers

EVGA GTX 670 FTW. Upgrading by the end of next year (or as soon as DCS World v2.0 hits should it requires me to).

Very Informative. This sounds like a new year's company plans for the year, only we're only a few month's off the end of it. Thanks for the thorough update! Even if I'm not really into DCS WW2 I might be tempted to dive into it should the aircraft and map be of good enough quality & authenticity. Those ground level previews never gets old, I hope you guys are developing the ground aspect too. With such ground details and the new skeleton we're getting that much closer to integrating armor & infantry combat into this DCS World you are creating. Given how both FPS and Tanks are popular trends these days that sure could be a sound plan. Exciting times! Cheers

Not to do some thread digging but I just wanted to let you know that I also asked them if there were any chance of them supporting any flight sims other than X-plane in the future and their answer about my interest toward them supporting DCS World and/or Rise of Flight were that "the support of other flight sims in the next 12 months is likely" although nothing is certain. That is getting promising.

Good to know Thor, thanks for the update. I still find the choice between the MFG Xwind and the Slaw-device to be quite hard, it feels good to have choices in that price range though. Btw here's a color work I've done a few weeks ago to try out and see how colors would translate on the MFGs uhuh. Here's to hope one day he sells enough to order colored parts.

Tbh, I think cancelling that project is for the better for DCS. -If they would model the F-35 in DCS as it is supposed to preform on paper IRL then it would render any other DCS module rather pointless as long as an F-35 is in competition, which quite goes in the opposite direction of the whole DCS "World" ideology. -Maybe it's just me but I don't see any point in modeling an aircraft in DCS as long as said plane doesn't even performs the way it is supposed to in real life. -There not much point in modeling in a high-fid sim such as DCS a plane that is still in intensive development and far from being done IRL. I mean, the thing barely delivered its first training GBU a few days ago.. -We all realize some info have to be guessed and estimated but I think that necessary part in a DCS aircraft development should be minimal and a good ratio between actual intel and wild guesses should be enforced as much as possible. I highly doubt the F-35 would have had anything near a decent ratio. All in all it's a cool plane and module on paper but.. meh. I sincerly hope they adapt and hit us with another, more realistic (and less controversially over budget & under performing one) module.