Tirak

I'm not talking about roadmap modules, I'm talking about modules currently receiving man hour time. It seems very strange that RAZBAM would want to swap out any of their current actives to dedicate on their first chopper. Dropping the Mirage 2000C is out of the question as it's already released and needs avionics and FM updates. Swapping the AV-8B(NA) would be nonsensical after the major 6 month crunch they just did on it. The Mirage IIICJ and the MiG-19P are complimentary modules and will boost each other in sales, so scrapping one is not really and option, and the MiG-19P team was brought on specifically for that module. Finally the Super Tucano is in such an advanced stage in development that ditching it after so much time was put into it seems completely absurd from a financial standpoint. None of the current active development modules are in a position where dropping them would make sense. So are they bringing on another team? I can't imagine that is a financially viable thing to do before they put out their AV-8B module.

The modules I'm referring to are their active development list, I've deliberately not noted roadmap aircraft as they require no personnel to work on. Once they do start drawing a significant enough portion of personel, then they transfer to the active list. With that said, VEAO clocks in at an absurd 9 modules under 'active' development, however in my defense, most of those modules represent a non-significant amount of dedicated resources, and thus the VEAO active roster is closer to 3, the Hawk, P-40F and Eurofighter Tranche 1 Block 5.

I can't imagine this is for anything other than an AI asset to support their ships. RAZBAM has a ton on its plate already, adding in yet another module to active development when they've got 5 on this list already, none of those finished, and a sixth on "indefinite hold", seems farfetched to me.

:megalol:

Seriously folks, links to a temporary library until chuck's back is one page previous...

If you actually watched his content, you'd know that wasn't true.

When posting in YOUTUBE tags, only copy what's after v=

I'm strongly against the 25T being included on Blufor. While yes it is a common module as it's free, its inclusion on Blufor is solely due to it being the only SEAD aircraft. When the Hornet comes out, that role will be taken over by the F-18, and the A-10A and A-10C can fill the precision ground attack role. The Community A-4E will also be a free module and can fill the ground strike role as the free Striker.

Oh for sure this is a pie in the sky list no doubt of that. The JF-17 isn't even a recognized 3rd party, however It's my view of how I think the game would end up matching up. I wanted to move away from any kind of mirror matchup, which is why I had separate recce/supply aircraft. In the future, I imagine a C-130 style aircraft will be created and will replace the fill in transports we have now, but that's so far in the future I didn't think it'd be worth including. You make a good point about the TF-51, though I would shy away from the Hawk being the Blufor equivalent of the L39. The Sabre might be a better choice for the Recce role in that case.

I hadn't considered the Viggen moving over, but now that you mention it, that's kind of interesting. Blufor: F-18C F-15C F-14B F-5E A-4E AV-8B A-10C A-10A UH-1H TF-51 (Recce/Transport) Gazelle Redfor: JF-17 Block II F-14A SU-27 SU-33 MiG-29 AJS-37 Mirage 2000C MiG-21Bis SU-25 SU-25T KA-50 L-39C (Recce Transport) Mi-8 Almost an even list, and the SU-33 and SU-27 are near enough the same aircraft that Redfor being up two doesn't matter much, though Bluefor would have 9 full fidelity modules vs Redfor's 8.

RedFor can get the F-14A and Blufor will get the F-14B. With all the oncoming Blufor goodies though, switching the Mirage to "Redfor Only" after the F-18 and AV-8B hits would seem prudent.

We have talked about this a lot. It was only carried on one platform and was very heavy and difficult to handle. AMRAAMs are smaller, can be mounted on pretty much anything and are easier to handle on the ground. It fills 80% of the Phoenix's capabilities, and the parts it doesn't is either an acceptable degradation, or the threat it was meant to counter isn't really a threat anymore.

The P-63 is one of the few WWII planes that I would be willing to buy. It's such an interesting aircraft and I love the sleek lines.

I know they are, and I'm not happy about that either. Those folks are being unhelpful and ignoring the Dev's explicit request. Their personal wants cause them to be selfish and instead of helping RAZBAM find cool liveries, they waste time and space. :mad:

Those are Day Attack Harriers, not Night Attack, you can tell by the lack of the FLIR sensor on top of the nose.

The F-16 and F-18 avionics are quite different, and at the end of the day, the F-16 is superior to the F-18 in all aspects bar carrier landing and ITR. There are pilots like me who couldn't care less about the Hornet, but would jump at a Viper.

Some A-4Es were modified with a nose wheel steering system though not all, so that discrepancy is no big deal. On a more practical level, the NWS was included because the SFM does not support differential braking. EDIT: You asked this before and Gos gave you a response too: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2970070&postcount=152

So what are the current development hurdles you guys are getting over right now? Or are you in polishing ahead of sending it to ED QA?

Congratulations, you've highhandedly given a point for the first C-130 module.

Well the GBU-12 is activated by a wire being pulled out, that causes the fins to deploy and the seeker to track, theoretically if you can carry a Mk.82 you can haul and drop a GBU-12. It's a little harder because there's no LST to help you get in on the target, but a good talk on would be more than enough.

Cobra released a statement saying that the LANTIRN Pod would not be simulated. He later hedged a bit and said that it wouldn't be released at launch if at all. So dumb bombs only fro the Cat.

DCS: F-16A would be a travesty. The aircraft grew to be so much more than what it originally was, it'd be a sad thing if we didn't get access to the superior capabilities of the new versions. For me its got to be 42 or up, the full on striker that the plane became. Ripping through the canyons in the middle of the night with the FLIR on and the TFR guiding you, before you pop up over the canyon wall, lobbing CBU-87s or Mk.20s at a SAM site before darting back down. There's no greater feeling in the world in the F-16.

Yeah, I turned up the book because I had been digging trying to figure out what kind of RWR the A-4E could use, I was worried it wouldn't be any type. The only picture I've found labeled as an A-4E is from a SF2 mod that includes a whole bunch of different Skyhawks, so I don't have high confidence in the accuracy of it, though the label on that SF2 cockpit eventually led me to the AN/ALR-45.

Will the AN/ALR-45 make it into the mod, or is RWR outside the scope of what can be done without the SDK? https://books.google.com/books?id=ubDgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA267&lpg=PA267&dq=A-4E+Skyhawk+radar+warning+receiver&source=bl&ots=zB8LGNAn_d&sig=2Pa98y-mWLU22iEqIBJG5O6C7JE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3xNjZ4arUAhUBYz4KHf_JDSoQ6AEIUjAJ#v=onepage&q=A-4E%20Skyhawk%20radar%20warning%20receiver&f=false

... Ok now look at the person you quoted, and look at my user name.