jojyrocks

I can't seem to shootdown the F-117, even after lobbing 4x R-77 and 4x- R73 and 30mm cannon fire. It still keeps flying as if nothing happened. I encountered this strange issue flying in the SP campaign Red Knight, flying the J-11 mission 8 of campaign. Damage model issue...maybe?

At most we'd be seeing the F-4E, as it is the ONLY version that has seen so much combat with respect to our PRESENT maps that we already do have. This would only happen if any 3rd party developer does take up the F-4 series project...whichever versions. It is most certainly a combat rich iconic aircraft to just let it go as an afterthought... I do not know about the Naval Phantoms as to how they fit in other than our hypothetical cold war settings from Caucasus map or some fictional ME war. ED did say they have no plans of doing Vietnam map and as of present, it is not on their TO DO list. So...whichever carrier version we do get is fine, although, personally, I'd prefer the F-4 later carrier version other than B. Even still...anyone of those could be fine.

We're running out of modern aircrafts anyway (They did say Super Hornets are a no-go for them)...and there is a limit to it and third parties too. They can now mostly have option of century series planes and there are still more combat experience rich century series planes that can be developed. Considering the sales aspect as well, most would certainly get sales. About the Leatherneck simulation surprise plane...it could very well be Su-7 or Su-17...this is just my guess. It'll all take a while since they do have to iron out the Mig 21 that we currently have. ED has at present shelved century series as they maybe could be just going for more focus on DCS engine and its extra features aspect, they have a LOT on the plate as it is and they did say they need to rework a lot on the comms and EW plus AI aspect and several others... Do not know what is coming after Longbow other than the base version of the Mig 29.

As for the engine, I am not against it, but just noting that they have more on their plate. And it is important to optimize the engine plus extra features. For AI 3D models: I do not know WHY ED has prioritized updating GROUND assets than air assets that we already have from LOMAC era (it looks strange flying with gimp/paint graphics old assets). I mean, we hardly see the details and the visual beauty of ground vehicles when doing missions from aircraft/helo platforms. So, I find it confusing as to why they do not seem to give importance to the AI 3D Plane assets which we already have and needs updating. I am not saying ground assets don't' need updating, just the priority is something maybe I don't understand. I am not asking for a full fidelity Su-30 ( It would be nice if we got it, though and it will get hot sales) but the least they could give us is an AI 3D model to ogle at. Seems to me most of the 3D work is outsourced and is an afterthought on priority. Its been a LONG time from LOMAC era. The F-111 seems like complicated plane as is the Su-24 and those are originally made as deep strike or strategic bomber planes that may have some secretive ground pound complicated features and ground radar is not much interpreted in detail, plus some of its features could be omitted. Low chance of seeing F-111 and certainly not the Su-24. I guess third party devs will have to pick up the century series. They already have lot on their plate. Each module take like ~ 4 years to develop. There is PLENTY of module options. There could also be politics involved as to who'd get the permission to model and whatnot.

Well, ED has almost fully run out of MODERN DOABLE aircrafts. So, it could either be their bigger focus is on WW2 series, western theater or they would be mostly expanding on just the DCS sim engine itself, adding features etc than new modules. Personally, not into DCS WW2 planes (I use the IL-2 series for that) and I do not own any of those WW2 planes in DCS, except the freebee TF-51. I do, however, I do own all of the jet series minus the A-10. Also non on helos, need to learn to fly those. ED still has to UPDATE a lot of the OLDER AI 3D models that look odd from the old LOMAC series assets. Century series aircrafts are aplenty and most of them has seen very good amount of combat (M.E nations). Su-17 series or the 7 would be a good addition, at least its got SECONDARY air to air ability (Not the Su-7), having cannons and self defence short range missiles and that is plus. They've also stated Mig 27 is NOT planned. They also did state they've got no plans for a Vietnam map in the roadmap. So, pretty much, the Phantom is chucked from their plans and free for 3rd party to take.

But first we need to improve on the VERY OLD and GIMP/Paint graphic AI Models, like the Su-30, Mig-27, S-3 Viking, A-6 Intruder, B-52 Bomber, B1B, F-117, F-16A etc etc.... Mos of them listed in the OPs post are to somewhat acceptable levels...

They pretty much left the F-4 on indefinite hold for them, But also left it free for OTHER third party developers if interested to develop the module. Considering the fame of the F-4 series. I too would like to see it in DCS, primarily the F-4E that saw PLENTY of combat and as for Naval fun with all that carrier landings. We could see the F-4J or F-4B. UK did use F-4J modded a bit for their use, and may have been used to some extent in the Falkland wars and we are going to have Falkland map. However, ED did state no developers had planned for Vietnam map, at least to their current knowledge. Even still, 2 F-4 variants would sure be fun. On the Naval side, The J version. We could use the J version for hypothetical Cold war fiction scenario or even Falklands...maybe. If developed, Pretty sure it would sell like HOT cakes...with such great combat track record and that multi role ability during those times.

Su-27 and Su-33 need those vapours....currently only few FC3 Planes got it....like Mig 29...

But first! We need to update/refurbish our REMAINING AI 3D models like the AI 3D models; Su-30, Tu-95, B1B, C-17, SH-60, S-3 Viking etc etc...and several more before we proceed to add in NEW AI MODELS.

Well the NEW Kuznetsov model if priced as NEW DLC with big price tag. It SHOULD at the very least come with a Carrier ops free campaign with maybe the Su-33 which we already have. So with the Kuznetsov, we'd only be using Su-33 and maybe the Blackshark as well. I do not see any future carrier add-ons to this. Hope it does come with at SOME updated AI 3D assets as well. If not the case, Kuznetsov will not be worth much to spend on.

I believe this tranche 1 Eurofighter was more focused on air to air role as in, interception of Russian planes near their borders etc. So pretty much A2G will be limited or none at all. Only later versions of EF was given more focus on ground roles as they finally saw that any possibility of air to air fight, let alone with Russia is not gonna happen any time sooner.

It seems you are taking it rather too personally. Then you went ahead added....there are quite FEW OF US...and then you say, MY SQUAD, pretty much shows MULTIPLAYER oriented flyer. So for you, I get it, you like it and some other FEW also like it too, mostly multiplayer users. But again, I reiterate I am not against this, maybe you missed that part. Rest depends on the profit in accordance with the development of this plane and the buyers pool, and which all kind of buyers would want to fly it in SINGLE PLAYER vs MULTI player co-ordinated flying with Squad, team or some clan. So those also do come into play especially for a new developer such as this, now trying their hand MB-339. I myself just do not see it as VERY INTERESTING in Single player, flying point A to Point B just watching the scenery, dropping cargo and carrier landing etc vs Flying planes like MB-339 (light combat ability), F-104, F-8 Crusader and A-4 Skyhawk to name a few that can both fit will with BOTH Single player and the Multi player crowd. Making a DCS module is a costly task in itself and some modules do take around 4-5 years to complete. Even if they do decide on this. I was wondering about the cost of modules like these. Would it maybe cost the same as roughly to those like F-16 and F-14 modules? Or...would it cost even more...Would the costs be worth? For dedicated Multiplayer crowd, yes it is worth after all, its all about teamwork over there. But in Single Player it does not seem all that interesting flying point A to Point B. Maybe this third party developer needs to make a Poll and announce plus highlight it well and make a Poll list like. C-2 Greyhound among modules of F-104G or C, A-4E or F Skyhawk and AMX International. Rest of the decision is up for these third party developer to decide on. I reiterate again, I am not against this. Just neutral. The carrier landing does mildly interest me. ED did an interview mentioning their stance on this. You can go watch that as well to see what their stance is.

I doubt it. It is like the backbone fighter currently in service with IAF and as such. It would be almost impossible to get permission. I mean we don't even have an AI 3D model of the Su-30 even in the roadmaps mentioned. So if not even an updated 3D AI model, then hoping for the Su-30MK1 is pretty much...well, impossible. However...the MOST BASE version of Su-30 could have SOME sliver of hope....

The Indian Tejas Mk1 is still in development phase, not truly in a sense of fully operational and its production is seemingly stalled as they have decided to go for the MK2 version and MK1 now appears to be some form of learning experience and in regards with its international competitions like the Early Gripens, it lacks in terms of combat range. So, they appear to be moving forward for Mk2 and leaving MK1 on Low rate production. Chance of doing an Indian LCA model seems zero coz of the already present China and India tensions. I do not think its possible to model to DCS standards. If ED even plans or gets permission to building Indo-Pak or Indo Northern parts map, then we could only HOPE to add in the roster of possible Indian used planes like SEPECAT Jaguar, Sukhoi 7, Hawker Hunters and well...Mig 27s. I doubt Deka could get permission or access to build those. I can only see them doing Chinese specific planes that are retired or not in full use by them and the most they could go with their relationship with Russia is, their retired and not so secretive jets. So we can forget about Mig 25 and Mig 31 to be a reality. The most doable of Russian specific planes is as follows: - Su-7 -Su-17/22 series -Mig-27 -Su-24 early variants (low possibility) - Su-25 early variants - Su-30 early variants (low possibility)....

My REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS are as follows: - Any doable J-8 series - J-7 any some of the later variants, whichever is doable. - Q-5 Fantan (whichever version) The last two jets can also be, If ED does get a chance to build some India and Pakistan area specific map, then it can play out well with those to in the roster too. Anyways, that is all from my realistic expectations basing on the Big-MFCD PTSD. Happy New Year!

Even if it can be developed...it would take around 4-5 years and beyond from now for the development to start. By the time it reaches such time, the OTHER legacy Hornets would have enough sales. I mean...the development to start on that would take long and the current Hornet has got enough sales to go with.

Well since ED already did say they've got no plans for it and the permission too... Maybe some other 3rd party developers could...somewhere down after 5 or 8 years....

The Japanese is VERY secretive about their OWN military equipment and does not even do much on exports...I believe they are even worse than Russian when it comes to getting info on THEIR military jets...equipments etc...at least, hard info. The one we could even HOPE for would be the Japanese Mitsubishi F-1. The F-2 is too advanced and still in service, one can only hope for a AI 3D model of it.

I suppose one could hope... Personally, I do find the prospect of landing on carrier with this logistics plane, interesting. But aside from that...there is really not much other than flying from point A to B unless you are on a coordinated multiplayer hoping your other team will effectively escort you to point B for a logistic drop off. But...On the grounds of profit and better sales point of view, which of the follow do you think would get more sales on comparison and also in regards with Single player; Like a C-2 Greyhound vs or the F-104 series, and C-2 Greyhound vs or the A-4 Skyhawk series? Which do you think would get MORE SALES and PROFIT in accordance with their development effort? The way I see it, F-104 and the A-4 are both perfect fit for DCS as both are combat capable planes and both fit well with Single players as well as multiplayers. Lets not forget, that each of DCS modules will take around 3-4 years to develop. C-2 Greyhound would only mostly see sales for those who are more into multiplayer coordinated battle setups. I guess we'll see what this 3rd party developer team would do after the MB-339...

Since most of the western planes modules are almost all done and the seeming impossibility of getting the Redforce modern planes along with their Euro counterparts. Another Euro modern jet that could possible be done is the SEPECAT Jaguar series. So far, only India uses it. That leaves only the EARLY Cold war era jets on the pipeline...Like the F-104 and the Phantom now... Now ED has also said they've got no plans to even make a Mig 27 module and that plane had been retired pretty early. Currently, only Kazakhstan uses the Mig 27. I guess we will not be seeing even the cold war jets of Soviet era Russia like maybe even the Su-7/22.

There is some of those official interviews from ED on their take on why they would not be going for Cargo/logistics, AWACS kind of aircraft. They already did make a decision on it. I do not know if that would change, though... C-101, MB-339 and the I-16 CAN do combat, at least those on training and light attack genres. These planes are also quite nimble too... Christensen Eagle was pretty much from the devs perspective a simple module for them to create than with the usual combat capable planes of DCS.

ED did say (During some of their interviews)...they had no plans for Cargo, Logistics, AWACS, Aerial Refueler, EW dedicated planes etc...yes and those C-130 gunships too. Also, its not that marketable to many who do prefer fast combat jets, yes light combat trainers too and those combat capable helos. The thing is, marketability is not much when they do take into the consideration of development complications...It would also only be more useful on well co-ordinated Multiplayer and not many users do have good connection, and some do prefer just Single Player missions. Then there is the much better funded MS 2020 who do cater more for the Transport genre...

Any future expectations of the Tornado series and the Red force Mig 27 has now been VERY effectively shut down. There are not many planes down the pipeline on project for most to venture for, other than going for the Peak cold war era jets from the 60s and so on. So far, there is no mention or plans for Cold war era jets. The Iconic F-4 Phantom module itself remains on vague development note and appears to be push back to a much later unknown date...looks to me, its going take 2024 around for that to happen... I do not know what to feel about the Apache. Since I do not own any helo modules. Tried the Blackshark, found helos to be much more difficult to fly and be effective. I certainly do love to fly it...too bad I am terrible with helos. AH-64 was hinted during the Syria map trailer. But we thought it was those fast movers and not helos. Not many of us are helo flyers, even when I do find the Hind and the Apache so very iconic...yes, the Blackshark too, all of which are intensely combat capable. I do own all the Fast movers except the A-10C latest which I might purchase this Christmas. So, I too thought it was something that was marketable on an OVERALL spectrum for both fast and slow mover users when they hinted about the so called teased aircraft...

AH-64 was hinted during the Syria map trailer. But we thought it was those fast movers and not helos. The thing is, as you said, not many of us are helo lovers, even when I do find the Hind and the Apache so very iconic...yes, the Blackshark too, all of which are intensely combat capable. I PERSONALLY, find it VERY difficult to fly helos. I do not have any helo modules as I had refunded after trying the Blackshark and finding it too difficult to fly. I do own all the Fast movers except the A-10C latest which I might purchase this Christmas. So, I too thought it was something that was marketable on an OVERALL spectrum for both fast and slow mover users here. Any future expectations of the Tornado series and the Red force Mig 27 has now been VERY effectively shut down. There are not many planes down the pipeline on project for most to venture for, other than going for the Peak cold war era jets from the 60s and so on. The Iconic F-4 Phantom module itself remains on vague development note and appears to be push back to a much later unknown date...looks to me, its going take 2024 around for that to happen...

Its right now said to be the intended so called...secret aircraft to their understanding and they have teased the Apache at the 2021 and beyond video. And in the roadmap thread too it is mentioned as such. The only bummer for us is that, we WON'T or WILL NOT be seeing the Tornado made, the manufacturer itself has denied info. Also, we won't be seeing Red force modules like the Mig-27 which is now told to be not even planned or in the works. We have to settle for the bare baseline Mig 29 - 9 -12 (A) model which is planned to be clickable. The REAL MOST AWAITED module, the iconic F-4 Phantom has been set on indefinite hold and is given for development for SOME OTHER 3rd party developers who MIGHT be interested to work on it. For me, I wish to see the F-4E and the F-4J or B Phantoms. and these are the most iconic aircrafts. At least the E version has seen PLENTY of combat in the Middle east nations.