Devil 505

Amen brother! And this is what I would love to see them do!!!! They are making the wrong Lightning for sure. We need the P-38. I should probably get off my soap box before it gets me banned from the forums. They will clearly press on with this F-35. But the dishonesty in how they are obtaining stuff really bothers me. It is not good PR and it is an insult to their customers who have clearly more knowledge about the aircraft than ED does. They will do what they will do, I just hope this does not become the new method of "impressing" the customers. Otherwise, ED and DCS are going to sustain a strong hit to their solid reputation. Bad business move brother!

Wont be and Cant be are 100% accurate statements. You have the ability right now to go find 100% of the information they will be using to make this module from people who speculate what the aircraft can do. In my opinion, that is not developing a module to reasonably accurate and high standards. Its developing a module based solely off of their opinions and others who have no ties to the real thing. If they say anything otherwise about how they have obtained information on the F-35 other than open source, its a lie or it what done illegally. FACT.

Well said brother! You have already had an F-35 maintainer on here speaking his mind about this bad call and got chastised for it, pretty sure an FMS customer from overseas with a Viper squadron that is working around the lightning was making similar comments, and several others who are all stating the same thing. But somehow our expertise and input are found to be off putting and inaccurate.

Funny you should say that. You actually have people in here commenting on this that worked/work with the platform, pilots, and companies that develop and operate the aircraft. All of these SME's that have commented in these forums over the past 24 hours have exponentially more knowledge on this aircraft than the open-source material ED has. But somehow ED believes they have obtained information career professionals did not have access to on the F-35 to make an accurate representation of the aircraft. Again, the reason for the backlash is to criticize the lack of transparency and honesty that is being presented in the F-35A FAQ's and what has been stated by ED in these forums. Do not present this module to the community as an accurate representation of the F-35A when you know without certainty it is impossible to do that. Present the module as ED's best guess at what this platform can do. The biggest problem I have with this mentality is that is not why I fly DCS. We come to DCS to escape developers pushing out aircraft that are not authentic to their real-life counter parts. ED prides themselves on a high level of authenticity and now they promise a platform they cannot deliver that on. You do not need a forum full of F-35 pilots to explain this. If I wanted to fly an unrealistic representation of a military aircraft, I would go somewhere else and NOT spend $70 on a module they guessed on. This is probably the most I have ever posted on the forums, but the ED really hit a nerve with this one. Honesty, transparency, and integrity is fundamental in maintaining the trust of your customers. All I have seen since this backlash started is beating around the bush about why they went this direction, not acknowledging the truth about what data they actually have to develop the F-35 and where it came from and chastising an F-35 maintainer for calling them out. This is not the direction I want to see ED going because now the door has been opened to make any and everything that is out there. There are times when you open pandoras box in a company and coming back from that bad decision becomes increasingly difficult.

All false. Lockheed Martin designs and develops the sim for the F-35, no one else. No military customer or SME is going to be providing anything to Eagle Dynamics about the F-35 unless they are doing so illegally. The public truly does not understand how classified this platform is and how many customers outside the United States fly the aircraft. SME's or military customers providing information on It would not only jeopardize the program but provide a means for our adversaries to gain sensitive/classified data on their largest aerial adversary. The DCS community is delusional if they honestly believe Eagle Dynamics has a backdoor to gain inside knowledge on this aircraft. It is flat NOT happening. There is an F-35 maintainer who worked on the aircraft in a separate F-35 forum who comments on his inability to obtain certain data while being in the military and was on the same page as I am. ED is pushing out false information about the accuracy of the data they are obtaining on this aircraft. Another guy in that same forum clearly works on a military base with Viper pilots and said those pilots don't even have any knowledge of or the ability to speak with F-35 pilots about the platform. To assume a civilian game designer can obtain the material to make this fighter jet to the standards they have always promised to the community is unachievable and flat dishonesty. This goes far beyond expanding DCS. This comes down to the honesty and commitment you made to your customers to provide the most accurate modules possible with valid and accurate information obtain through declassified documentation. There is NOTHING declassified on the Lightning. Again, EVERYTHING this company obtains will be speculative and their best guess. That is not what ED has always provided us, their best guess. They have provided us with an experience that mirrors the real thing based on declassified and accurate information to include SME's and pilots, none of which they can legally obtain for the F-35. You might as well convince me that Wikipedia is the prime source for this module. Again, I love DCS and everything they do. It is my primary hobby, and I have purchased literally every single product that has been pushed out just to support them. This was a hard pill to choke down because I personally know 100% what I am being told is not achievable. When the F-35 comes to DCS, it will not be an authentic representation of the real bird. It will Eagle Dynamics best guess at what the aircraft is and should be. Again, that is not what this company prides themselves on and it sets a tone to the community and customers that reduced accuracy in future modules could become the norm.

@NineLine How can you possibly say no to this request now that you are doing the F-35? This is what I am talking about. 0 chance in hell you have more open source documentation to build the F-35 than you would a Su-30 or Su-35. Your community have been screaming for these for years but the response was not enough information and no authority, it would never happen. How have you obtained the authority from Lockheed Martin and enough information on a plane more classified than Bidens bank account, but you cant do the same thing for these other aircraft?

NineLine, this would leave the community to believe you have inside knowledge of the F-35, resources not available to the public, or know people in the F-35 community that are feeding you information. That leads to one of 2 possible solutions, A: Everything you have is something we could acquire as a community because its open source and either in a book or online, or B: someone within a military branch be it US for FMS is feeding you information about the aircraft which I can absolutely verify would be illegal. The bottom line, you just argued with a REAL F-35 maintainer and told him you have resources he could not even obtain in the US Military working on this aircraft. Why is it so hard to acknowledge this aircraft cannot possibly be done to the level of the F-16, F-18, A-10C II and all the other aircraft ED has produced. THAT IS THE POINT. You are taking on a project that does not coincide with Eagles Dynamics core principles of creating authentic and realistic aircraft. You literally are taking away your own identity and trading it for a module that may come 15% close to the real thing if even that. Look at the backlash you guys are taking after revealing this today. I can promise you this is not a small 10% of total customers. I would typically be on your side with 9 out 10 things, but this module is not helping DCS. It is telling the community that everything you have told us from the start about authenticity, hard work to obtain data, realistic scans of the aircraft, speaking with real fighter's pilots about the performance of these aircraft, and recreating them to the fullest of their real counterpart is not your objective anymore. Its pushing out a product that look flashy but does not hold up to the core values of this company and what we love about DCS world. Leave the F-35 to MSFS and bring us something realistic to DCS. This is a bad move, you cannot possibly create this module to the level of detail you proclaim to you can and it will only burn ED's image, not help it. You have attracted so many former and current military men and women to your product, including this guy. You are going to have a very hard battle straight up hill convincing any of us that this will be an authentic representation of the F-35. I have said it a lot today, this is a bad move for Eagle Dynamics.

@NineLine Brother I get you want to expand DCS, but at what cost? The sacrifice of being able to put an authentic and realistic fighter jet out there. It's going to be speculative data at best. Eagle Dynamics absolutely prides themselves on authenticity of their modules and realism. You lose that edge with your customers AND your competition when take on an aircraft you cannot possibly provide a realistic experience with. If it's the goal of DCS to expand, we need more asset packs to match the number of maps we have out there. Not just one updated Russian troop, US Troop, or singular Insurgent. We have really no insurgent packs for Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria, or Sinai. I saw 3 different AI ground troops today in the 2025 video but nothing to indicate an actual asset pack. We have recreated the most volatile regions in the middle east in DCS and have virtually no authentic units for those time periods to put on the map. To me, those are the things needed to expand DCS. Where are the AI units for WW2? Virtually no AI bombers for US or German forces. We have a beautiful Normandy map and no HE-111's, Stukas, Hurricanes ect... We cant even do the battle of Brittain. But we have another map coming for Germany. DCS is a phenomenal platform, but if the goal is to expand DCS, we need to expand assets so we can take full advantage of what we already have to fly in game now. The F-35 is not going to expand DCS the way you think in my humble opinion. Even if it does come out, who are its adversaries going to be? What's its purpose in the game to expand the capabilities of DCS? I am being a harsh critic and please take the aforementioned as constructive criticism. I just feel like your community has been screaming for a long time now to flesh out what we have so it feels more complete and now here we are talking about a 5th gen fighter.

@NineLine @Wags @BIGNEWY Is Nick still the owner of ED or is this a transition to new leadership? The 2025 and Beyond Video has an absence of Nicks voice and his sincere gratitude for his customers and community and making your dreams come true. This year we had no voice representing ED and a promise of a 5th Gen fighter by 2026 that is still classified with current maintainers, pilots, and their crew unable to discuss how the aircraft operates, flies, or what its true capabilities are. I know for a fact there is NOTHING out there online legally regarding the HMDS the pilots use. This move with the F-35 is very uncharacteristic of Eagle Dynamics as a company. It goes against everything you have ever stated to your community about only doing modules you feel you can accurately and authentically reproduce. How can you genuinely expect the community and customers to believe you can make an accurate 5th gen fighter like the F-35 when you have turned down other modules in the past for a lack of documentation and the platforms classified nature. Or stated the company would not allow the rights to produce said aircraft. The documentation online regarding the F-35 is speculation and guessing at best. The entire project is going to be based on hypotheticals and assumptions. Lockheed Martin, BAE, Gentex, Rockwell Collins and the rest of the crew who design and develop the platform from the ground up do not disseminate their data or documentation online for people to see, even if it is outdated. This would be a federal breach of the contracts they have signed with Lockheed Martin and their Customers. There is no "older block" variant you will have access to. You will not have access to a real F-35 which leads all your 3D work to be done by hand or by images you find online or in books. Again, uncharacteristic of an ED move to have as much valid data as possible on the aircraft. I have been and always will be an avid supporter of Eagle Dynamics and your products, that will not change. However, I must say I am extremely disappointed the company decided to go down this path. It feels like a cash grab opportunity to me. ED is going into this module absolutely knowing without any uncertainty you will not be able to provide what you proclaim you have been researching for the past 2 years. Why not choose the Blackhawk, or the Cobra which has been promised since the Bell Simtek days? Why not a WW2 bomber? You just shot yourself in the foot as company in my humble opinion. The community will not believe you going forward if you ever say "we can't do that" again. My first question would be why can you not make a B-17, a B-24, or a B-52? Why can't you make the latest block F-16? You are doing the most classified aircraft in the US inventory right now with open-source material. This goes far beyond the F-35 module itself. It's about the trust we have in you as a company. There is no other competitor out there. You guys ARE the kings of Combat Simulators. I implore you not to go down this route. Stick to your roots and do aircraft you have access to. That is what your community and customers want. I want those aircraft that are dying in the museums, the ones people will forget about years from now if we do not have talented developers like yourself keeping them alive. Damn the 5th gen stuff. This was a critical review of you taking this path with the F-35 and I mean it in the humblest way possible. I just don't want to see my primary hobby and favorite sim turn into a situation where we lose the dedication and integrity of recreating these legendary aircraft to their fullest detail and authenticity. One more thing, Wags is not the voice of the ATC on MSFS2024 is he? If he is not, then he has a twin brother that sounds identical to him, or Microsoft used AI to copy his voice.

Thank you so much and I agree the OH-6 deserved a big shout out! Really appreciate the comments about Into The Jungle! It made our night. We just flew it as well tearing it up in the A-4 flying CAS over the Cayuse. I am looking forward to ViolentNomads @ViolentNomad Cobra more than anything on the 2025 and Beyond video today. Its little sister is missing her in ITJ! @tobi @Eight Ball Please keep up the great work and bringing us the amazing content you guys are pushing out. I will take anything Vietnam or Little Bird Era! You guys make our Vietnam dreams come true!

Man ED, you guys really got me going on this one! You claim to have this out "hopefully" in 2026. The F-6 Hellcat was announced last 2024 and Beyond video and we still have not seen an old WW2 Navy bird, but somehow you will find the resources and material to produce the world leading 5th Gen fighter sometime next year without any official documentation. All these block upgrades everyone is discussing is not like your traditional block upgrade. It's not like the F-16 where since it is an older block, we can produce it. I guarantee you just because it's an older block does not mean it makes it that less classified or easier to obtain data on. Guys, I hate to be the bad guy, I really do. I am beyond an avid supporter of every module you have ever made, and honestly got in trouble on the forums before defending you guys a little to firm. The claims you have made today might as well have included a date selected at my request to sleep with Taylor Swift upon my F-35A preorder. To even model the helmet for the Pilot accurately for the 3D pilot will be a long shot. I might as well try to convince everyone on this forum the war in Gaza just ended when this video came out.

You started with my primary point and proved it "There are sources that claim". That is all it will be. Hypothesized and educated guessing at how things are done. No NATOPS manuals, NO US Military pilot providing insight because it is prohibited with this aircraft. This is what other sims are for. Not DCS.

I cannot agree more with the statement above. We have been told for years the F-117 could not be made because the lack of documentation and the classified nature or its development and systems. However, we are led to believe that ED will pull off a very close to realistic F-35A? The F-117 used legacy F-18 avionics and damn near had the same start up procedure as the Hornet, same weapons implementation, same MFD's ect... The classified nature lied in the material used to build the aircrafts stealth capabilities. It could easily be argued that this could have been made a lot easier than the F-35A because of the amount of documentation out there for years now. It was introduced in 83 and retired in 08. It would also be a better fit to our current maps. The Helmet Mounted Display is the soul of the F-35 (The helmet). I highly doubt ED is going to be able to pull off the ability to accurately represent this in an authentic and realistic way. By all means, please prove me wrong. But that assumption here is a game designer can gather enough information open source to build a classified 5th Gen fighter very close to the real thing, but somehow the US military can keep that information from our adversaries. Do not get me wrong ED, everyone wants an F-35, but I feel like you guys just overstated your capabilities to provide what we have always loved and wanted from you, and that is the most authentic and realistic representation of military aircraft that can be found in a simulation. I know for a FACT, there is NO way, 0 chance in hell, you will obtain the information required for the F-35 to provide this level of detail to the community and I feel it is a step backwards when there are so many other iconic aircraft out there to recreate. I do not see Wags doing a cold start on the F-35A and honestly be able to say, this is how it is done. He will now have to say to the community, this is how we think it's done, and that defeats the purpose of your goal with this sim. I would like to say I hope you prove me wrong, but I know 100% you will not be able to accurately recreate this aircraft because it is literally classified. It will take a lot of interpretation on ED's behalf as to how thing work and operate on the aircraft and that is why we never begged for this from the start.

Any chance on getting some more Vietnam era statics? Digging the Caribou and Provider!!!!! They are going on our Vietnam server

Absolute rockstar man! Appreciate the heads up. I will go do that now. Just got back from Discord. When I launch the discord app and click on the link above, it does not take me there. Just a blank screen on discord.

Looking for some talented Livery designers looking for free work. LOL. The boys and I are in desperate need for some USMC Phantom liveries to go in our Vietnam experience in the video below. We created a section for the USMC out of Andersen with A-4 and will populate with Crusaders and Intruders when they release. I was hoping to be able to put client F-4E's along with some statics on deck until a proper USMC variant is released by Heatblur. I was wondering if anyone would be willing to make some USMC skins for Heatblurs F-4. Not to interested in the VSN mod. Below are a few examples of what we would be looking for but open to suggestions. You can see where I will be placing the F-4's in the video.

This past weekend I started working on cleaning up a few things and making some new additions to the North FARP, West Olof Airfield FARP, and adding a section to Andersen for the USMC aircraft. The Northeast side of Andersen is now reserved for A-4's, F-4s (when we get some USMC liveries for them), Huey's (Marines) and future aircraft. The idea is to have Andersen a joint operations base between the Army, Air Force, and Marines while the Navy primarily operates off the carrier task force. Two sections at Andersen, Northwest and Southeast, are dedicated to the USAF whereas the Army Helo units and fixed wing will operate out of the Southwest. With numerous 3rd party Vietnam Aircraft in the works, I thought Andersen would be a great place to house them as they roll out. As it stands now the F-100 Super Sabre, F-104 Starfighter, A-1H Skyraider, A-6 Intruder, A-7 II Corsair, and F-8 Crusader are all in the works. Really hoping to see the Super Sabre and Starfighter make it out in 2025. Both Airforce but we have some major contenders above for USN and USMC operations. Future content will be added for sure as we continue to beef up Andersen and ensure it is performance friendly while adding more and more assets. Take a look at the two videos below. The first goes into detail what I worked on updating and adding to the two FARPS and the second video is flying around Andersen showing off what is in the works. We will release an updated ITJ when we have completed some new scripting and other neat additions we are kicking up. No time frame as of yet, but we will work hard to get it out when it is ready. More to come.

Kandy, Just to back you up on this one, I am also seeing the glitches in the fog. It seems to have increased, albeit not terribly, after we changed the fog to dynamic. That being said, I say we leave the fog as is in ITJ. The immersion level is greatly enhanced with it and even with the minor glitches, it is worth flying in. Also makes navigation more challenging and increases the teamwork when scouting. I really need you or Zipper marking with smoke when I am overhead in the Skyhawk or F-5 because the fog makes very hard to locate targets. Digging the new effects for sure!

Well you can add this old dog to the pack that is sitting on Violentnomad's doorstep begging for a treat.

First flight of the new year gents! @tobi @Eight Ball If you guys need a fey boys to test the new/upcoming Little Bird in VR, we are intimately involved with the Cayuse every week. Would love to be a test bed if you need one for the Iraq or Afghanistan map. We also use the UH-60 mod so we could get some good shots of both in flight together.

First flight of the new year with the boys using the new fog. Kady updated the burn off effect after this flight so expect to see another video soon with that in full force.

@ViolentNomad Any New Years update on AH1? Looking forward to this release more than the 2025 and Beyond video. Still looking forward to the video ED! That was not a knock.

Merry Christmas Gents! @tobi @Eight Ball Really appreciate everything you have done for the community this year and what you plan on contributing in 2025. You have far exceeded what I ever expected out of a mod maker that provides free content to their community. You guys are stellar and all the hard work is beyond appreciated. Look forward to your future content. Happy New Year a little early!

Insane work my friends! And what a tribute to the gents who where part of Mogadishu! Gladly throw some cash your way when this gets released on GitHub! I cannot recommend to the community enough watching the following 2 Shawn Ryan episodes (broken up into 2) discussing the Blackhawk Down conflict with one of the Delta Operators. Hands down the best interview I have scene on the Army Special Warfare community and hell of a lot more gripping than the Movie. The second episode goes into Mogadishu. Worth a listen while you are able to listen, I promise you will get sucked in.