notproplayer3

This is amazing, brought a tear to my eye, my favorite DCS developer working on my favorite plane.

My aircraft kink is "big" aircraft such as the f14 that has heavy bomb payloads, thus, the f-111 being also one of my top good looking aircraft would be a dream come true if it were to come to DCS and much more so it it were also done by Heatblur. To be honest I don't even care about it's capability at this point, I just like that it's big and awesome looking.

I believe he is referring to the hornet.

Here's a track of my issue, the aim54 lock shows up correctly on the fa18 rwr for example, but the same doesn't show up on the f14 rwr as you will see. When a aim120 is fired at my f14 everything shows up on the rwr as it should. norwr.trk Edit: Just tested with the su27 and the aim54 doesn't show up either. norwr2.trk

Regardless of how he said it, the fact is I still want this bug to be fixed (I hope everybody does too) hence I very much agree with the OP's intentions. It's been a couple of months since this bug was reported and acknowledged by Heatblur so it would be nice to get a fix sometime soon.

I'm all for it, it's a very iconic helo that saw a lot of service around the world. Plus the huey already integrates itself very well in DCS so will the hh60

No, there are no instant action missions for the huey in the Marianas yet. You just pop the huey in the mission editor on the Marianas map and voilà. On the subject of crashing, I don't experience any issues when creating any mission in the Marianas, I don't know what could be causing the issue on your side.

meh, I don't care, the thread was about the ka52 not Apache vs ka52

Thanks a lot for your responses, I just wanted a believable campaign for the f14 so it's perfect !

Alright haha, I see what you mean. Though other than the unrealistic casual chatting, are the communications and procedures still real or is there none of that? Basically I'm asking if the campaign dialogue is anything like rising squall or not (if it is overall somewhat believable or not at all).

Quick question: top gun references are to be expected but is the dialogue still feeling realistic ? I still want to feel like I'm inside a simulator when playing this campaign .

Not from what I see, any ka52 is quite advanced, even the first models, much more so than the ka50 we have in game and even the BS3. So I doubt this big step up in systems is going to pass quietly through these new Russian laws.

You're not alone in being very keen for a ka52 . Unfortunately seeing how the BS3 is unable to have the president S system implemented, I doubt the much more system heavy ka52 will ever be done in the near future.

Well, seeing how the current DCS timeline looks like (fa18c, f16, hind, ah64, mig29a, mosquito), I do believe ED would have to work for quite some time before finishing those already present and upcomming modules without mentioning the parralel work for new modules. On the topic of new modules and the fa18d, I really am not convinced that it'll interest ED (neither does it interest me) but all in all I guess the petition is a very good way to show how many people are interested in this plane. Even with that, the number of signatures must be very huge to make ED consider since I'm sure there are other planes or variations many people rather see being worked on.

Well, a petition isn't going to change anything. I'm guessing ED has their hands full already (fa18c, f16, hind, ah64 and probably a lot more...).

Absolutely! No discredit to your thread and your request for new textures but I still wonder. Are textures really that important to people that already fly a lot in those helos ? Yes, I agree that the first time I flew the hip, I was kinda disappointed or at least surprised about the textures, but once I flew the helo and saw all of the systems that were working I was blown away to the point the textures didn't matter even one bit. Then I bought the huey and I knew I didn't even need to worry about the textures since I knew they quality of the underlying module was going to be amazing. Of course new textures are very welcome and it could give these two modules a well deserved popularity boost. I just find it interesting to see this thread since in my eyes, the textures I saw in the cockpit never even crossed my mind as in me being bothered or even noticing them being old. Moral of the story, I just want sling loading to be fixed

Firstly, personal preference, my country's airforce flies fa18's and I just find the fa18 to be cooler looking, bigger, more rugged and more of a workhorse than the viper. Other than that, in missions, I prefer the payload options on the hornet more than on the viper. The fact that the hornet is a bigger, dual engine plane with much more fuel is quite nice for what I like to do. Hornet low speed stability and handling is amazing when compared to the wobbling tendency of the f16 when landing for example, plus the the high alpha is simply great for most dogfights from my experience. Usability of the weapon related systems may be part subjective part objective, but I simply like operating the hornet more in combat, I do like things in the f16 more such as the radar but overall the hornet wins by a bit (third mfd, better stores page, better hsi/sa page, all my opinion of course). I know this is because it's wip for the viper but for A/G, with a targeting pod especially, the jhmcs on the hornet is a godsend, I literraly can't live without it at this point. The fact that it shows the target point in so helpful for general orientation to the target and the fact that you can at any point designate behind your shoulder if you needed it, a target you just spoted, then use your targeting pod from here is next level workflow in my mind. It is still quite far from the level of precision and usability of the a10c II but still amazing for A/G.

I guess this thread has become a wishlist section so here's mine: cold War Germany. Don't know exactly what location but I do know that the red side is looking good right now: MI-8, Mi-24, mig21, upcoming mig23 and ff mig29. Perhaps if the blue side were to get an F4 or tornados, it would already have the uh-1 and it'll already be pretty good aircraft wise. Another wish would be the Vietnam map, in my eyes it would fit so perfectly if the F4 (and perhaps the f104, f105 and others down the line) was added. Still very good at the moment, I believe it is near complete aircraft wise on the red side and the blue side would be missing the F4 but we've already got the huey and f5 (and the f14 if you consider it has flown during the Vietnam War). I guess those two popular maps (from my point of view) would really benefit from an F4 module. Another great map would be Afghanistan map during the soviet invasion. All the red air is basically here, it would be awesome for historical scenarios.

Yes, I'll also add that on the ai a10c II, when he fires the apkws rockets, the rockets drop like dumb bombs (meaning the rocket motor didn't fire at all), hence the fact he can't hit any targets.

Yes, exactly that !

I guess you're debating how you are going to fly the hind in combat. In that case it isn't really a debate as you are free to fly as you wish though I agree with WinterH in the sense that if we've got petrovich that does most of the combat related stuff, it only seems natural to me to have the option to disable him and do everything ourselves if we so wish to do that.

Not cool to you perhaps but cool to other people. Arrestor hooks may be pointless but come on, why not just model the hook to at least fall down. It's supposed to be full fidelity after all and we're paying for it. I know it's a small detail but small details add up, for example things like circuit breakers are awesome immersion wise. I love the fact that circuit breakers are modeled and present on most ED modules such as the fa18, a10c, huey, mi8 (f16c? F5e?), I don't know if other third parties do it but I'd be very happy and confident in flying a module that has those small touches. The fact that circuit breakers aren't modeled on the mirage 2000 of course isn't a deal breaker but in my head I can't help but think it's a bit lazy to not add those pretty simple things (relatively speaking) . So that's why I'd like to see the arrestor hook animated, we're supposed to be getting a full fidelity module and there's not much excuse for not having small touches like these (of course, I can wait till early access ends for small details to come).

I agree, he is the most unique and funniest DCS content creator in my eyes. I hope he comes back when the mi24p drops.

Hey, that's a very cool idea, did some "research" and found a couple of interesting photos. Mainly the ka50sh which I though was more modern than our ka50 but looks to be the opposite. So the TV screens are one per sensor (shkval and flir) I would guess ? I don't know if it has been discussed but are there legal problems with finding information and modeling the flir ? I believe the flir was western and not very much produced so perhaps it could be done ? The second pic looks to be an older ka50, I don't know if anyone could add any info to the picture. On a slightly different subject. I don't know if it has been cleared up or not but the ka50 has had some models with MWS but no Vitebsk L-370 system. Those protrusions in the nose are the MWS detectors but we see none of those L-370 balls near the landing gear. Also, it's number 25 just like on what ours is based too. Number 25 was also the number on the ka50 in your post Stratos. Are they the same helo but your pic was taken at a later time and with additional systems than the above pic ? So yes, the fact that ED has said they were making their own integration of the MWS already gives away then fact that it may have never existed. But I wonder how the cockpit and MWS integration of this pic's ka50 is and for what reason ED can't model it like how it really was. Does the 25 have a glass cockpit currently ?

Looks to be some new info about the mi24P armament and systems, coming from PilotMI8.