Jump to content

Kev2go

Members
  • Posts

    3927
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Kev2go

  1. its not just the ka50.... A10C recieved a 3d cockpit facelift and there are very much official development aims for a new A10C v2.0 module Its just that the Ka50 has been around the longer than any other module and has happened to get more updates. So there is no reason to think some years down the line other modules won't eventually get updates.
  2. its doubtfull it will be anywhere near as incomplete as F18 was at launch. There are lots of features that can ( and almost certainly will be) directly carried over from the current A10C.
  3. I agree. all of which you can still get with a newer suite. Which is in order since the current HOG isnt quite accurate anyways as ED went with a hybrid Suite 3.0 and 5.0 fraken hog https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=248167 So a proper simulation of the things you want would in fact bring it up to at least a proper suite 5.0 which ANG got at the time with thier DTC version of A10C.
  4. Not related to the P47 In the interview there were some very interesting tidbits regarding the A10C hog 2.0 (HMCS)
  5. :megalol:
  6. The DACT version ( especially the USAF one) happens to be also very comparable to the typical vanilla generic configuration F5E that many other nations utilized...... Its capabilities aren't unique to DACT exclusive aircraft. Although officially sold single player campaigns focus on DACT above the NTTR you are incorrect on your assertion on " very specific(F5E) version in DCS " is in fact not a very "specific" version of the F5E . It is something of a franken tiger actually. ( A hybrid of a Basic Vanilla F5E that the USAF also used, and the US navy F5N) and a proper DACT version(s) it would need to be split to two variations for the USAF and USN F5N's ( latter of which are buybacks of swiss modded F5E's) . kind of like DCS P51D was somewhat inaccurate for European theatre but was eventually split into D25 and D30.
  7. also to remember was against a Mig21F13 not a MIg21Bis.
  8. difference is developing a HMD doesn't require new API for this. Such particular function already exists on other aircraft, thus is not a fair comparison to make to those other mechanics.
  9. Any player can adjust fuel based on thier mission, but part of CAS isn't jut flying a to b to drop ordinance, but be able to loiter around ahead on standby to provide cover for the troops on the ground as new threats emerge. Anything less than max internal fuel is a joke.
  10. yup those silly responses already happening lol
  11. That's what the naysayers said about the eurofighter.... And relative to the mv22 that's frontline combat jet. Not a utility tiltrotor
  12. not exactly comparable considering the s97 is a prototype bird still in development and no in operational use.
  13. would be neat to see very unique aircraft
  14. Same But only because m one of "those" people that own nearly everything. ( minus civil stuff like christen eagle etc)
  15. yes multicrew is planned As of an official ED roadmap update (April 15 2020) of things to come they are aiming for a MAY 2020 implementation of Huey multicrew. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269757
  16. they mentioned enhanced capabilities in a newsletter https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4160206&postcount=232 To quote " Following the free A-10C cockpit update, we will be releasing A-10C Warthog 2 in 2020. This will be a dramatic visual and systems upgrade to our A-10C. Once the new features have been finalized, we look forward to sharing them with you. In addition to DCS: A-10C Warthog 2 being available as a new module that will replace DCS: A-10C Warthog, it will also be available to existing A-10C Warthog owners at a significant discount." This strongly implies the paid retail upgrade will include enhanced new capabilities not present for current version of A10C in game beyond a "weathered cockpit" More recently in an interview mostly focused on P47, Nick Grey mentioned helmet cueing system. a direct question to is asked by a GR member to expand and clarify on the earlier statement made at 10:05 ( specifically 10:54)
  17. Free to beleive what i want? Look whos talking. Your the one going round and round plugging your ears being dismissive of what was being stated in the interview. Your the one believing what you want. NOT the other way around. I don't know why you think HMCS is unbelievable for ED to develop for a paid upgrade of the Hog.
  18. says the one who bringing it up in the first place.... Its your perception that its been swept under the rug. But if you look at the re updated roadmap Multicrew has not been forgotten, they are aiming for May 2020. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269757
  19. thats quite a different thing to compare a implementing a new a product feature within a aircraft module vs engine FPS optimization. So please don't use such false equivalency fallacy. Besides There is no fixed date on that..... Just because that hasn't happened yet doesn't mean they reneged on thier promise.
  20. JHMCS can also do this in multirole fighters, but like that system you also have the option of not using it.
  21. Its like you did not even read my response, and are just copy pasting a generic retort from another thread...... All i simply said is that it would be unreasonable to expect ED to really be lazy simply slap on HMCS on Suite 3.0 hog we currently have and expect to call it A10C 2.0... HOWEVER since you bring it up, , that being said given the context of the interview it would be quite dismissive for your to say otherwise since the interview and answer given are very much pertaining to the DCS product. So if HMD came to the A10C, there clearly would be more on the HOG 2.0 than just HMCS
  22. why? cuse hes lucky enough so many hornets? :D
  23. i think its pretty easy to deduce that if it gets HMCS, it means an A10C suite 7b , which we can expect a whole slew of other stuff that came in between after suite 3.0 through to 7, and not merely HMCS slapped onto the current hog we have.
  24. I know there is no hard definition. BUt generally there are aircraft generations for the sake of generalization, so as too not spent countless of hours looking at specific aircraft, but simply a generalized comparison of a group of aircraft from a given time period. even if some aircaft are behind in certain areas, or ahead in others. There are certain categories that are universally agreed upon by various nations. So what the OP wants by gen 1 jets, IS simply looking at ww2- korean era aircraft. A time period in aviation where Jets are not able to break sound barrier in level flight, before any sort of guided missiles ( gun fighters ) and mostly are day fighters. Gen 4.5 isnt sketchy. Its a fine midway point to make for non stealth aircraft designs in a post cold war era due to considerable improvements to the designs and level of modernization made in avionics technology from 70s-80s. I mean especially as of late you can essentially stick comparable level of avionics seen in gen 5 aircraft in a gen 4 airframe ( IE network centric capability, Modern displays , processing power, AESA radars etc etc.) the only thing older designs cant be made into are the very low RCS, because that essentially mandates designed a new airframe from scratch. I mean even looking a design that isnt totally made from scratch, there is still quite a significant difference in capability between a F16V block 70 and a F16A. that even that sort of aircraft could be fairly lumped into such a generation.
  25. It really depends on the definition. most jets from ww2 to about korea are lumped as generation 1 due to falling under certain defining characteristics among various nations. Even though Mig15 or F86 are no doubt better than say a Me262.
×
×
  • Create New...