bies

As Russian navy (understood as Russian Federation) are remnants of Soviet Navy it could be possible to model them better. Kuznetsov, Kiev, Kirov, Slava, Kara, Kresta, Kynda, Sverdlov, Sovremenny, Udaloy, Kashin, Kanin, Krivak and many more are all Soviet build and developed ships so there should be enough data to model them in more dateiled way than we have today in DCS when it comes to systems, sensors, weapon etc. When it comes to graphics and 3D model it's just a mater of money, Nick Grey said in the interview how much they need to pay for one good quality model, it wasn't exactly chap. Maybe it would be better to make 3 good quality models instead of 1 of amazing quality?

Yes, Cold War Germany map is arguably the most anticipated one together with Vietnam. But personally i think just one e.g. ~1970s would be ok. Changes in a decade were not that big, especially from flight simulator perspective. I would guess somewhere around 1960s all main NATO bases in Germany were already developed and functional, Berlin wall built. Civilian infrastructure developed obviously. Maybe two versions 1950s and 1980s at most. Germany 2023 vs. 1970s are massively different and it would be huge turn off for all this Cold War scenarios, but 1960s vs. 1980s would be ok.

My mistake. I assumed you are talking about official DCS modules - not fan made MODs. Rafale MOD, F-16 MOD, Mirage 2000-5 MOD, Jaguar MOD. This way we can make e.g. 2023 Taiwan Strait clash as well: F-22 MOD, F-35 MOD, J-20 MOD, J-11 FC3, J-10 MOD - voilà - we have everything covered, just missing the map...

I agree India-Pakistan borded map would be a good choice as there were many real life conflicts in this area with use of military aviation in 1947, 1965, 1971, 1999. Obviously after 1999 anything more than special forces skirmishes became impossible as Pakistan deployed its own nuclear weapon, ending India-Pakistan wars. But i don't know the post is sarcastic or i don't get it? But we literally don't have that in DCS. We don't have F-16 with F100 engines like Pakistani F-16A, we have the opposite - F110-GE-129. We don't have SEPECAT Jaguar, nobody even announced one so it is not even being work on. We don't have Mirage 2000-5, Razbam developers stated it's classified and impossible to make, we have early 1990s classic Mirage 2000 and Indian 2000-5 have different avionics even compared to French 2000-5. We don't have Su-30, Su-30 will never be modeled in DCS and it is not being work on, few developers already confirmed it's impossible.

Size you've proposed may be a stretch, but overall Korea map would be fantastic. As for now we have zero Cold War maps in DCS. All maps like Persian Gulf, Syria, South Atlantic, Sinai, North Australia, Kola Peninsula you name it - are modeled as modern day. All this 20-30 Cold War DCS modules should have at least one single proper timeframe Cold War map. Rural, little industrialized, mountainous 1950 Korean map would be awesome. Korea, Vietnam, Middle East, Fulda Gap, Kola, any of that.

I'm wondering if it would be possible/profitable to outsource cockpit graphics rework for Huey, Mi-8, F-5E, F-86, MiG-15. Without even engaging ED's resources.

There are many maps in DCS, available and in developement, but except for WW2, they are all modeled like in civilian simulator as 2020 modern day timeframe - and this takes away some of the combat simulator atmosphere and makes DCS feel like cockpit simulator/civilian simulator/sandbox etc. when you fly historical aircrafts like 1944 Bf109, 1972 MiG-21bis or 2005 F/A-18 over 'modern day 2020 civilian map'. Other military simulators had maps modeled as particular warzones with proper timeframe. All the maps like 2020 Persian Gulf, Marianas, South Atlentic, Sinai, Kola Peninsula, Australia etc. are proper only for fictional scenarios - there were no wars over them in ~2020. What is more even "modern" modules like F/A-18, F-16, Apache etc. are modeled as year ~2005. 15-20 years old standard of second Iraq war, not 2020. Fictional scenarios are not exactly bad, but there is a problem when all scenarios have to be only fictional. My wish is to have e.g. 1950 Korea map, or 1967 Six-Day-War Syria map, 1960s Vietnam map, 1973 Yom Kippur Sinai map, 1980s Libyan map, 1980s Iraq/Iran border map, 1991 Gulf War map. As they would portray real all out conflicts and match aircrafts we have in DCS. Or when fictional - at least some plausible like 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis map of Cuba, Cold War Fulda Gap divided Germany map e.g. during Berlin Crysis, Arctic Crisis 1970s-1980s Kola Peninsula map etc. cheers

It would be nice to have this features in the Viggen, adjustable mirrors like in F-14 Tomcat and kneeboard on pilot's leg like some modules already have. cheers and thanks for your work

Is there any guide what are optimal settings for Nvidia 3d settings?

Is this aircraft from combat squadron or they had some special one for demo?

But why "every single cockpit"? I-16 Rata, Bf-109 or F-86 Sabre flying with GPS navigation as well? Why? Why even spending time and resources to make GPS for pre-GPS era modules?

F-111 makes sense. It was phased out after USSR collapsed so it should be declassified with documentation available. HB will have experience modeling variable-sweep wings flight model and TF-30 engines for F-14 Tomcat, side by side cockpit interaction, FLIR turret and terrain following radar for A-6 Intruder, 1970s/80s USAF A/G weapon inventory for F-4 Phantom.

Quality interesting interview, he remembers a big amount of details, specific numbers, differences between different models, systems etc.

I also want to fly 1980s Cold War Kiowa. There is Polychp's quote:

I've seen HB announcement of FB: https://fb.watch/j9LAbYkvXl/ PS. The worst are low quality comments like: "why do you waste time working on modules already released in EA - throw all people to make next module F-4 or A-6"

Zulu is way more modern and way more classified than AH-64D, only in 2011 first unit achieved initial readines. It will never be in DCS. In the interview Zulu pilot didn't even want to talk about most systems. All others like "G" from Vietnam war or "W" from Fulda Gap would be possible in DCS.

This is basically a debt, you don't earn in hope you will earn more later on. As much as i would love to see an F-117 in DCS it was highly specialised aircraft - relatively poor choice to attract casual beginner who would want to rather try many things and make many mistakes. The only attractive feature for the average Joe would be unusual apperance and Gulf War legend. In case of F-117 you are eiter skilled/knowledgable to perform the mission or you are useless, it would be appreciated by more experiences customers though. I think FlyingIron simulations is the closest to model F-117 as they invested money to obtain the data and started to model it for XPlane.

All considerations, pros and cons, aside - ED, using some 2-3 years to license, research, obtain data, code, consult, debug full fidelity FREE module - might end up bankrupt and DCS project ended. I doubt ED has some huge financial margin to be allowed to work without payment - workhours needed to make full fidelity module/research/license etc. is comparable to making whole other genre full PC game for free. DCS full fidelity module is not WT-like copy-paste, change few parameters in Excel, new 3d model and low quality cockpit. Complexity is enormous. Regardless of whether it would be profitable in a long term or not, even if ED would like to make something like that for free. It may financially kill them and whole DCS project. And this would be a damn shame, a truly dark day. And then what?

Even more - ED stated they would never be able to model Eurofighter if not 3rd party company owned by real life Eurofighter Luftwaffe pilot Gero Finke, named TrueGrit. Let alone EF entered active service in 2006.

Add Iraqi MiG-21, Mi-24, Gazelle, later Su-17, MiG-23, NATO Tornado IDS, A-6E, A-7E, Mirage 2000 took part as well covering U-2s

They can't make 2006 era F-22. Even our 2007 era F-16C doesn't have some classified systems modeled. 2023 would be totally unrealistic fantasy, castrated from half of its real life capabilities, completely made up fiction. They did the very last standard they were able to model in reasonably realistic way.

Superhornet was typical product of its time - USSR collapsed, there was no threat to US air dominance anywhere in the world anymore, thus no money to develop modern new design. Expensive specialised aircrafts like F-14 or A-6 had to be phased out without replacement. Navy wanted to replace A-6 and F-14 with advanced strike A-12 Avenger or fighter NATF-22, but no opponent, no threat - no money. F/A-18 has been replaced by relatively cheap, low rsk, easy to maintain F/A-18E, without stealth, without high kinematic performance, without any radical design changes. USAF barely defended their F-22 program being forced to drastically cut the number of ordered airframes from 700 to 190. Cheap and easy to maintain, integrated with modern guided A/G munitions F/A-18E was perfect for low threat enviroment war on terror period. Not quite adequate for symmetrical air to air competition against China.

ED already stated choosing modules they judge many necessary factors, community intrest in particular aircraft, potential sales, access to declassified data, subject matters experts willing to cooperate, manhours needed to code it in realistic way, cost of the license and willingness of manufacturer to cooperate etc. They read this forum and they have really good idea which aircrafts people would like to see, but all other factors above have to be met. I.e. they've managed to negotiate and buy pack of licences from Boeing for highly anticipated, possible to model, with SMEs, well selling and declassified Hornet, Strike Eagle, Apache and Chinook so they are making them, giving F-15E to Razbam.

All earlier AH-64 simulations like Longbow 2, Team Apache, Enemy Engaged etc. were extremely simplified in every possible aspect, we wouldn't even call them simulations today, but arcade shooters, from flight model and flight control, through avionics, weapons up to 2-crew interaction, not even close to the current state of DCS Apache. Let alone finished with FCR, interferometer, Longbow datalink etc. To be honest it's incredible something so complex was even possible to be made in commercial non-military simulation. ED is doing fantastic job here, they have to have significant amount of experienced coders to be able to work on F/A-18C, F-16C, Mi-24P, AH-64D at the same time and still working on DCS engine.