amalahama

Actually it's a very good idea. No needs for uber-realism here, just something generic to open the interface not only to Predators but to other UAS assets as well :thumbup: Regards!

Seriously, that would be awesome! I've been looking for a proper STS simulation since I was a kid Regards

I would even pay a PMDG-like price! ED can keep the change :beer: Regards!

I want Suite 8!!! It sounds so cool! Regards!

I really, really hope you have additional material to calibrate CFD results, like a performance flight manual. My experience with CFD, especially when computing drag, is quite disappointing. But I wish you the best luck. It's the first 3rd party project that really catches my attention. Regards!

TeamFusion in CLoD, Daidalus in IL-2, BMS in Falcon 4... you can count several examples... Regards!

Make the avionics code "open source" or pass the code to a high motivated group of developers for maintenance could be an option as well. This module has a tremendous potential in some areas, but needs improvements in others, and if ED discontinued the development I'm sure another group would be willing to take the challenge. Regards!

But the key point here is: Would RuAF allow a full-detailed module of a strategic bomber still in service...? Regards!

If it was not adopted in the M2000C I would rather leave MLWS out. Regards!

A pity it's not an AV-8B+ :( Regards

Is the VTB a colour display? Regards

Just let's ED finish the Hornet. Regards!

This request can be extended to the A-10C as well Regards!

SSW is doing an excellent work with its Tornado for FSX, so it'd be doable as well in DCS Regards!

Spain has never had F-5Es, only B's Regards!

Question, does APQ-159 have any sort of ground mapping mode? or A-A only? Regards

Is it the one developed by ED? Regards!

In fact, things don't have to 'necessarily' move in the same direction as wind if they spin... A good football fan would know that :) Regards!

Exactly, and because that I don't understand why your VVI and pitch ladder are perfectly centered in the HUD when lateral wind is present. Were you using your rudder? Regards!

Please note that CCIP pipper is indicating solution for rockets, while Gun cross does the same for guns. Different weapons with different ballistics. Also I don't understand why, if both cases have same WIND LASTE inputs, IFFCC provides differents solutions, albeit real wind is different for both. I would expect same solution in both cases. Regards!

Some time ago I was messing with A-10C lua files and found some additional functionality like you said that it's not activated in our version. I tried to uncomment the lines unsucessfully, the functionality should have been deactivated in the code I guess... Regards!

Honestly, ED should release A-10C and Ka-50 source code or at least part of them; they are not going to be updated anymore, mods could introduce new features and they would be a great learning resource for people trying to inderstand how 3rd party aircraft works. Regards!

BMS or VRS have done a pretty good job with their F-16 and F-18, respectively. And they don't have formal contracts with the USAF or US NAVY, beyond maybe some copyright arrangements with the aircraft manufacturers. With the public information available, support from operators and some educated guess to fill the 'gaps', some features can perfectly be done without formal support from USAF. I'm thinking about laser mavericks, for example. I'd pay for an A-10C 2.0 too but let's face it, probably it's not the case for the users majority. And ED is handcuffed about what he can do with the module, due to USAF arrangemets. But an independent party shouldn't face the same restrictions, since it doesn't have the same visibility to confidential data. Regards!

ED has stated A-10C is feature-frozen and except fixes, we shouldn't expect big changes in the module. And DCS A-10C is great, however there are many points that could be improved, like JDAMS, TAD display, Laser maverick, new SW suites... If ED doesn't have resources to keep improving the module, it would be nice to open at least some parts of the avionics code to allow interested parties to keep improving the module. I know it's difficult to balance open code with intellectual rights, but maybe ED can find a point in between that can satisfy everybody? Just wishing Regards!