Mogster

Interesting. I hadn’t occurred to me that multithreading would be DCS V3.

Razbam have been saying the same thing. Less variants in future.

Discord is a piece of trash. The interface looks like it’s been designed by a pre teenage child with ADD. First it was Facebook, now Discord. Why can’t the dev’s just post regular updates in the forum…

On the face of it the Ki-43 would seem possible, there are several surviving examples unlike several late war Japanese planes that are pretty much extinct... Iirc TFC has some Ki-43 bits knocking about

ED replies to this random Twitter post implying that the new maps will form part of their “whole world” project. In this case are the new maps going to be created against a globe rather than flat as iirc the current maps are?

Aye, on the face of it it is a shame that we seem to be getting two separate adjacent maps. However Expanding “Syria” to the South may be a bit much for Ugra’s small team of part timers though. They are working on expanding “Normandy” according to ED. At least we will have more scenery available and scenery that will be a good fit for available (or announced) DCS modules. Any chance of a WW2 version with a bit more Western Desert modelled?

I get the impression that the map was intended from its inception to support 1982 content from Razbam. I have to say, what’s the point of it otherwise? That’s certainly how it appeared from the Ron Zambrano interview on the podcast. Zambrano loves the Harrier and RN Harriers in particular. The in game Harrier was intended to be a GR7 + RN carrier but it didn’t work out. It seems the 1982 content especially the SHAR has proved more difficult to realise than RAZBAM expected. Unfortunately the UK is famously cagey about details of its military hardware, even stuff that is 40 years old…

I still think MAC should feature aircraft ED wouldn’t touch normally through lack of data. F22, F35, Grippen, SU35, EF T4 etc. Decent close enough FM, simplified avionics. Why not?

There’s also the P80 and the Vamp, both could have been available before the end of WW2 but there was no pressure to field them. However I would prefer types that featured significantly in WW2…

You would assume as payware campaigns are being produced for the map and screenshots have been released that development is quite advanced

I assume we are expected to use this thread for Orbx DCS discussions now the announcement thread has been locked as routine? Seems best to keep all the discussions in one place?

You could write a book on this topic easily… Just a couple of points. Assuming your “fast” bomber force is extensive enough to destroy/disable large important targets you first have to identify what’s important to the enemy war effort. Industrial intelligence in WW2 was very limited, neither side really understood the others war economy in any detail and what was needed to really damage their military efforts. When Germany started to to build the V1 and V2 launch sites the USAAF and RAF was tasked with attacking them just because it had been noticed that the enemy was putting a lot of effort into building them. For a long time the allies were unsure what they were actually for. When operation Chastise attacked the Ruhr hydro electric dams the actual detail behind the raid and its objectives were highly sketchy. Just a vague “this is the power and if we turn it off then we can reduce the enemy’s industrial capacity”. No detail around how much of the Ruhr industries power was provided by the dams, which dams were the most important, what were the individual factories making? How long would repairs take etc etc etc. The results of precision attacks on specific targets tend to have been used for propaganda purposes and so are well known, but in reality these attacks were rare. The attacks were rare no so much because of a lack of capability but a lack of intelligence and the ability to identify suitable targets. If your real time knowledge of your enemies industrial strategy is poor to non existent then you are left with gross assumptions. “If I destroy this city where X is probably produced then the enemy industrial capacity will be reduced” you’re left with an area bombing strategy as was followed mostly. No “fast” bomber could carry the range of loadouts a heavy bomber could. Even if the “fast” bomber could carry a similar overall load the option to carry many small bomblets or incendiaries made area bombing much more effective. Also in WW2 no “fast” bomber could carry the heavy specialised ordinance to destroy hardened targets either. https://www.lancaster-archive.com/lanc_bomb_loads.htm

Or the A330 MRTT. Fast jets refuelling from a turboprop just looks strange

I can imagine you’d have a mini joystick type interface. They work very well in road cars and you wouldn’t have to take your hands off the HOTAS. Although you do get touchscreens that are compatible with gloves they’re far from ideal, from personal experience in industry.

Looking on the usual real time aviation apps there’s plenty of airfields in the area, all have +1000m of asphalt so would be suitable for jets in the sim. Some are clearly intended for military use if needed or have been used in the past. Really excited about the potential this map has

It would be good to include Archangel, as with Murmansk its a city so well know to English speaking people as well as within Russia. Including Archangel would mean adding another city to the map though which Orbx may be happy to avoid initially. There are lots of paved airfields in this area, particularly on the Scandinavian side, many on the islands. If not used as primary bases they could certainly be used as diversionary fields if need be.

It’ll even be nice scenery and airports for touring if you like that sort of thing, DCS bush trips … Obvious expansion possibilities

It’ll be interesting also as they will be starting with a clean slate this time, DCS doesn’t provide anything as a base. They have created Scandinavian scenery for aFSX and P3D in the past though and have current MSFS airport scenery packages.

Are we going to get a forum area to discuss this map? Will Orbx be added to the 3rd party dev section?

That was my thinking. If Orbx already have objects can they be used in DCS quite easily? For MSFS they have a nice freeware mesh for Iceland…

Great news. EF2000 map? Very interesting to see what the Orbx team can do with the DCS engine. Can they port assets, mesh directly to DCS if they want to? Also the Orbx presence in the civvie sim market is huge, this could make some MSFS users take more notice of DCS. We heard nothing after the A2A guys were pictured with Wags a few years ago and the confirmation A2A were talking to ED. Unfortunately the MSFS 2020 announcement and Covid came soon after and disrupted things. Hopefully next.

I’d be very surprised if 2 modules are released close together. Just makes no commercial sense.

And the annular radiator from the FW190.

All aircraft will have LAD monitors in future. The FA-18 upgrade will implement similar displays, the F-15EX has them. The advantages are obvious. Your information of interest or SOI screen can be full screen if you desire. Does it look ugly…. IMO yes…