Krippz

Agreed the Superhornet modeled by VRS is as true to an actual representation of the F/A-18E's system's as your going to get. Currently everything excluding an A2G radar and ACLS are modeled to a superb detail. The plane's flight model was made by an aeronautical engineer who works for BAE in Spain. Sure FSX is not a combat environment but how many times have you loaded up DCS Black Shark or Flaming Cliffs and wanted to fly outside of the scope of the provided terrain; well with FSX you can fly your bug anywhere. I hope ED approaches VRS to assist with a F/A-18E module because they are very talented.

Negative I agree with the thread starter 8+helo's on a FARP near a city will bring any system to a crawl.

Could you imagine how much additional performance we could be getting if the game was designed from the ground up to be a true multi-threaded app.

But if point aircraft have radar's and BVR missiles of equal parity. Then the difference in terms of a BVR engagement is negligible.

Can't wait to see the Plasma Stealth on this baby :lol:

This is an excerpt from an avsim interview that will explain: Avsim:Now that we are talking about development related stuff, can you reveal anything about the pro version? Like, will it be a paid upgrade for existing users (10 dollars extra and get the last bits of avionics, for example). I understand if you can’t reveal anything about this, just curious. Also, can you give in more detail what the pro version will include that is not included in the “light” version? The Pro version is primarily targeted at very serious simmers and training applications. It is not a consumer product in the normal sense and will feature no additional eye candy. Pro concentrates on very advanced control laws/FDs, navigation (INS), automatic carrier landing system (ACLS), and a wider and more flexible spectrum of damage modeling. Pro will certainly be near the $120 range, and yes, we will offer upgrades to existing customers at a 1:1 ratio. For example if a customer paid $45 for SE, the upgrade price will be the difference in price exactly. Avsim: Since I wasn't sure what the pro version was all about, I'm quite glad to hear this, and I now understand why you are making a difference between "light" and pro. Indeed, I guess most people will find the normal version to be complex enough. This does raise another question, though: You talk of an automated carrier landing. Does this mean the F/A-18 in fact does have an autoland feature, like so many modern civilian jetliners? And does this ACLS also work for "normal" (non-carrier) landings? The ACLS uses specialized datalink equipment usually only available on carriers. It compensates for deck heave/roll so that the aircraft will always touch down safely. There are two modes: one is a manual mode that gives cues via an ACLS display on a DDI, and the other is a fully automatic touchdown. We didn't simulate this in SE because it requires some quite drastic changes to the flight control system along with a custom flight director. Right now we have a custom autopilot, but we still use the MS flight director to drive it, and that's not fast enough or accurate enough to put you down on a postage stamp:) The ACLS won't work at normal airfields in the real world unless they have a special datalink. There's no system on the plane for VNAV such as that used in commercial airliners. But unlike the real aircraft, we will allow you to use the ACLS at any airport when we get the system built.

Awesome Tomcat pics.

Here I am on my way off of the USS Gerald R Ford into Iraq to provide CAS:

I think it has more to do with an individuals admiration for the aircraft ; I mean some people still believe that the F-14 is superior to the F/A-18E-F.

Yep for now it's a FS9 exclusive. As you said the FSX version will be out in March and the Pro version and F/A-18F a little later on. These guys did quite well considering it was a two man team.

Been having a lot of fun with this one:

The F-15 is based on 60's technology I would hope a Typhoon would be able to beat it in DACT.

My government did not procure more units not because of the systems effectiveness but because the rest of the world does not have anything of equal parity. I find it absurd to believe that a F-22's purposed combat ability is a "fairy-tale". On paper the F-22 is the deadliest fighter ever built; and the details released about the Raptor are what my government wants the world to know. This sentiment was validated by pilot's from your country who came to Red Flag for DACT.

Again I'm not seeing the logic in your statement. Mig's we're designed to use GCI as Eagle's we're designed to use AWACS. Both have their advantages and disadvantages; why should both fighter's have equal parity? Combat isn't fair. The IAF had 42 F-15A/C and downed Syrian and Lebanese jets who had a numerical advantage.

Oblige me with the interesting fact.

Your statement is based on the fact that an aircraft wins wars when in fact it is the pilot who sits in the pit is more instrumental than the aircraft itself. The F-15 faced Mig-29's in Iraq and Bosnia.

The F-15C enjoys a 100:0 kill ratio; so how is the F-22 maintaining the same unrealistic? Keep in mind guys that we are only talking about the unclassified Raptor facts! The fact of the matter is that stealth works. My government would not spend $2.2 billion on a B-2 if it didn't. And while current 4.5 Gen fighters may be closing the gap the Raptor will always get "First look, first shot, first kill".

Great idea. I approve

I don't see how the potential problems are any different than playing a FPS like ARMA or Left 4 Dead. Sure if you play with random people you will find that eventually you'll get an unprofessional person in either the front or back seat of a 2-seater; but playing with friends would foster consistently great gameplay. I don't think your argument is strong enough to not model the AH-64 or any other dual seater.

I thought it wasn't working but after 5 minutes I started to hear ATC calls. Thanks for the great find!

I would love to see a Mirage 2000 in the next DCS installment and a Mi-24 when the ground troop AI is more robust; it would be great.

Wags has already stated that a DCS Black Shark patch is in the pipeline.

Man that Blackhawk pilot has balls made of steel.

The engine could use more optimization but in the interim you like a lot of other mission designers need to find a balance between frames per second and activity on the battle field. So maybe cut the number of choppers to 4 and the amount of tanks to 25 with support helo's to add a interesting twist.

I couldn't agree with you more. Great suggestions +rep inbound.