Wizard_03

Radar bump mode in addition to improved radar simulation is probably next, completion of smart weapons lofting profiles. MUMI page (requires an update for DCS as a whole as lots of aircraft in game need data cards), and some new MSI functionality should be coming next for the hornet. According to the roadmap. Eventually we should get napalm weapons (again needs an update to DCS as whole for new weapon effects) and possibly a more advanced decoy system. Which may or may not happen depending on open source data availability. But those features could be a while away.

LITENING has a much better camera and gyro system compared to LANTIRN which is a second generation pod. But they intended it for the F-16 and other ground based aircraft. The advanced capabilities that made it better then LANTIRN also made it unsuitable for CATOBAR. LANTIRN also for the record had lots of problems related to cats and traps because it was also not meant for the boat. It just wasn't too concerning when seen in the light of greater maintenance issues with the tomcat. And the capacity was desperately needed for active conflicts at the time. But it was always seen as a bandaid solution. The navy wasn't happy that LITENING wouldn't work, because they were then forced to design a new a pod specifically and ultimately only for the hornet. ATFLIR.

Too sensitive it can't handle traps. ATFLIR was designed specifically to give the aircraft a modern pod capability that is survivable in the harsh world of CATOBAR operations.

It could when the pods were new, however NVGs came around the same time and they made it obsolete pretty much out of the box. Fleet hornet pilots never trained on it and the controls for it most aircrews have never touched in their whole careers. The little green window on the pylon above the pod itself is where the feed comes from. Idk if they could even been turned on and work properly during the scope of the DCS hornet (in the mid 2000s) as that equipment was not maintained by ground crews either. Not sure about the legacy pods from way back when but for atflir the navflir functionality pretty much wasn't used at all as NVGs do the job a thousand times better. And USN is the only atflir operator. AFAIK ED has no plans do to the older pods.

The EULA doesn't state that or even imply that. And even if it did, that's not necessarily legal. "Everything subject to change" I'm pretty sure doesn't mean that you can take people's money and walk away. If it does then I say "Everything is subject to litigation"

If I were a dev I wouldn't charge people money on a project Im not committed to completing. And if I had to quit work for whatever reason, I would absolutely feel obligated to refund anyone who has paid. I would consider my store front description a contract that I have agreed to fulfill. Those are just normal business practices. Can you imagine if this was the service industry?

That ED can just take your money and bail? no honestly It didn't, in most countries that kind of behavior is considered criminal.

That wouldn't fix the issue. The issue is that early access is a good faith transaction that eventually the modules will be completed. However the devs can evidently just quit at any point leaving the module in an unfinished state. If modules can be abandoned in the early access period then we can't do business. I need a guarantee that what I paid for will be delivered now. At this point my trust in them has been completely eroded. I can stand delays, I can't stand having my money stolen.

Will not be pre-ordering anything from ED until work on DCS: F-15E is resumed AND an official timeline on development and release date is published or I'm issued a full refund for that abandoned module. Extremely disappointed and unsatisfied with the state of things right now.

What are: "Additional MSI functions?"

Depending on the outcome of this situation, the F-15E may be the last DCS module I ever purchase. Absolutely unbelievable, what a complete slap in the face to all the loyal supporters who really have no where else to turn for modern high fidelity study sims, many who have been here for more than a decade. My eyes are on both companies the EULA doesn't cover false advertising. The product page has a list of features that the module was supposed to ship with on release. So Either Deliver what I paid for or give me my money back. Period. Customers shouldn't be held hostage over disagreements whoever is right or wrong in this case or any case. Even with a best case outcome, this situation has seriously degraded my trust in both parties, and going forward I will be much more careful about supporting either side with my wallet.

Are patches on a multi month month cycle now? This year we have only had a single update to the game.

R-27 is never going to be competitive with AMRAAM period. So to the forum title question, I would expect to be shot down in a BVR situation facing anyone with a ARH missile, and super shot down if that missile is a 120C. R-27 should be more then competitive against early Aim-7s and the ER versions (if we get them for game play purposes, as the MiG-29A 9.12 historically didn't carry them) should be very competitive against late sparrows. R-73 should be about the same as a 9X with a little less resistance against flares.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/341517-mig-29a-ff-capabilities-and-how-will-it-fit-into-the-metagame/?do=findComment&comment=5363978

Now that makes perfect sense. Also Didn't consider asymmetrical loads from missile firing.