Dr.SquirrelBoy12

This is not a game to be balanced. This is a simulator meant to accurately represent the various aircraft. I expect there to be advantages and disadvantages. One of the rewarding things is killing a “better” aircraft with an older “worse” aircraft.

AH-64A from ED from like ~2008 They had a bunch of other stuff too, you just have to know where to find it. This ancient post has a pretty decent compilation of some screenshots. EDIT: More specifically looks like it was an AH-64A Blk. 49A ^ That is from 10 years ago.

This... I was excited for the prospect of an AH-1 but then I saw we were getting the S variant and my anticipation died. I would at least like something a little bit newer... Also I dont think the gunner seat will have much to do in the Mi-24P that we are getting. Hopefully ED gives us an AH-64D, hell I'd be satisfied with an AH-64A at this point.

Pretty sure this is the intention.

Pretty sure they said on FB that everything can be operated from the front seat. I do agree it would be cool if Heatblur made Jester AI open source for projects like the Mudhen, Cobra, or Hind though. Granted the Mi-24P doesnt seem to have much for the gunner to do. :( That said I dont really expect them to make it "open source" to other 3rd parties at least, just saying it would be cool if they did.

Yea I personally would want a Blackhawk or variant EDIT: I've been convinced DCS PaveLow would be pretty cool too.

I think he was talking about the day / night modes and not necessarily anything to do with clutter. That said I second your earlier comment, I want to know how clutter will be modeled.

I think it is your argument that is weak, just because we got X for the M2000C doesn't mean we should get Y for the F-15E. The D2M could have been left off of the M2000C and I believe some people would have preferred it that way. Also there is the argument that adding something useful to the jet is more worthwhile than removing a key feature. Nobody here has demonstrated that the Mudhen can mount and operate missiles from the cheek stations under the CFTs. You are asking to get a quasi F-15D rather than a legitimate Mudhen feature.

By that logic an A-1 Module wouldnt be full fidelity unless you could drop a toilet. In fact no DCS module could be considered Full Fidelity if the bar was set so you could do everything you could IRL. I challenge you to find some evidence to back what you want and address the points I have raised. Find me a picture or video of a Strike Eagle without CFTs in a combat mission or something that isnt something like a demonstration, or test flight and prove that the cheek stations are functional.

I'm really tired of the arguing over CFTs. I have seen zero evidence to support the idea that the Strike Eagle would ever be flown into combat without them by any nation. Find me a picture or video of a Strike Eagle without CFTs in a combat mission or something that isnt something like a demonstration, or test flight. We dont even know if it can carry missiles on the cheek stations without CFTs. I doubt it can frankly. Right now I do not see any reason to implement the added complexity of removable CFTs. Just wait for a full fidelity F-15C.

Giving a 3rd party a full flight model is not the same as giving them an API. Also the F-15C is not comparable to a F-15E without CFTs even if you set the weight the same. We may not even have the same engines in the Strike Eagle. The F-15C uses F100-PW-100 or -220 engines. The F-15E uses F100-PW-220 or -229 engines. I am hoping we get the -229 version.

I would guess they are waiting for some sort of API for the ground radar rather than just something they can copy paste into the jet from ED. Using the API probably means fewer bug issues in the future and is most certainly easier than developing the ground radar from scratch. I am pretty sure though not certain that the A-4 mod ground radar uses raycasting on the terrain to get a simple radar return. I imagine this is not terribly difficult to do. But I think there is merit in waiting for the ground radar API from ED which will likely include this as well as more advanced functionality.

Let's not start asking them to gouge our wallets any more... I am fine paying normal DCS price for a Skyhawk if not a bit cheaper. Probably what ever the MiG-19P ends up costing. I mean if the FREE Community A-4 Skyhawk mod is good you will really have to have a competitive price and features to justify that price to make it worth it.

I really do not understand why people are getting hung up on whether we will be able to take CFTs off. I would be just fine if we couldn't. What is more interesting to me is knowing what capabilities our DCS F-15E will have instead of what the latest F-15E can do.

Do you recall or know what year or Block (do they use Block #s for F-15s?) they started switching to the newer UFC? I found this image from 2011 with what I assume is the new UFC: Also no more ugly velcro you mentioned in earlier posts necessary for the newer jets I suppose :megalol:

Seems like you are correct, I was thinking of a different post. If we got a 2010 Mudhen would that be the most up to date module we have in DCS? I thought the UFC was different on the newer Mudhens than what RAZBAM had modeled though. Maybe some of the real pilots in this thread can explain? But anyway there is no confirmation that we will be getting anything newer than 2005 when the SNIPER TGP was put in to service iirc.

So far only the SNIPER TGP is confirmed (~2005). JHMCS was not added to the Mudhen till 2017 at the earliest from what I can tell. So I doubt we will get JHMCS. Read a few pages back in this thread.

I'd take the Mudhen for the added versatility while still being a capable fighter. Being able to do Air to Ground adds a lot of value to the module. That said I'd still love to see our F-15C become full fidelity or perhaps a more modern F-15C added.

Not 100% sure but from what I have seen it seems like it might be that way IRL. I agree it isnt the best design though. But that is why you can turn the moving map off.

I meant for the module in DCS not the actual aircraft. If the pilot tries to move the stick left and the WSO pushes theirs right what happens? Who's input will take priority. Obviously in the real fighter the stick would move. But in a sim our HOTAS sticks will not move when the other pilot moves their stick. So it sounds like the rear seat will be better suited with a different setup than just duplicating the Pilot controls as best as possible for the rear seat. It will be interesting seeing how we can map certain controls.

Damn, I thought that second photo was one with the DCS cockpit photoshopped onto it for a second.

Your video did not embed. From a youtube link just take the last part and use that. so for this link You just need to put this OCFMX5z-ed4 in between the forum youtube tags. On the subject of FLIR though, I thought ED was revamping the way the FLIR works in DCS along with the radar and other systems. Pretty sure that was in the latest mini update.

I think this may be a bug, at least from what some people were talking about on reddit under a video of someone who was doing SEAD.

Belsimtek (ED) is making the F-4E Phantom II. But they said not to expect to see it till after the F-16C Block 50. It will be fun to fight this in the MiG-19. Sources: https://belsimtek.com/news/1787/ https://belsimtek.com/news/1792/

Probably the wrong model but if anyone wants to do a sick simpit and has $24K to drop check this out.