Tonker

*cough* Tornado IDS 80s-90s *cough* I'll see myself out...

Ah, found a version which permits embedding: High-rez version here. A GR.1 of the Tri-National Tornado Training Establishment, RAF Cottesmore, 1994. That one, please

Good of you to say. We all are (despite the impression some try to give...), but it's rarely acknowledged. All that can be said with any certainty is that we're all HB fans, and despite the recent announcement of a new flyable we're looking at future releases like a greedy kid holding a Christmas present in one hand whilst reaching for the next box under the tree... Hopefully HB see the compliment

Everyone has weird ways of spelling PANAVIA Tornado IDS More top comms @IronMike, thanks.

https://www.airliners.net/photo/UK-Air-Force/Panavia-Tornado-GR1/2135131 Half Viggen, half F-14. What could be more Heatblur, or fit better the single bit of info we have about a new module: that it makes use of HB-developed tech. That is all

F'sake, just deleted the important bit. Briefly: Thanks for the update @IronMike, and good luck to you and all at the new enlarged Heatblur. Maintaining focus and attention to detail, those hallmarks of HB modules, will be difficult; but the potential gains will be felt (and should be loudly praised) by the community. Each HB release raises the bar for immersion in a combat flight sim, and I look forward to seeing that trend continue over a long and profitable future. Nicely done on the roadmap - clear, informative and plenty of pretty pictures Well, it is the only EW suite to have successfully and comprehensively defeated US air defences. Twice from two attempts, sadly never invited back to make it a hat-trick...

Interestingly, the Phoenix is explicitly mentioned in the interview...as a total non-issue. There wasn't much detail, but the question is raised and answered. I make no defence of the aircraft as a warfighting machine, just note that there is more scope for an engaging (eg) DCS module than I had previously realised But, yeah, IDS/GR.1 please!

Okay, so nobody wants an ADV but this is a tantalising glimpse into what an F3 in a DCS environment could look like: TL;Didn't Bother Watching (shame on you): F-14 BVR parity-advantage, ACM disadvantage F-15 BVR parity-disadvantage, ACM run away F-16 BVR is there anybody there? ACM don't turn up. Overall? Sounds great! Disadvantage doesn't mean suicide, and successes were had all round with the watchwords "guile and cunning". This is where it could become interesting, and fun. A well-scripted campaign, or well organised online group, could allow a pilot interested in brain as much a brawn to have a properly absorbing and entertaining time. Which is, after all, what we're here for - the power-fantasy kill-fetishists are over on the ED forum wizzelling about their F-18 computer assist not assisting them enough. I imagine. Nobody will make an ADV Tornado because nobody wants an ADV Tornado, because it's seen as being a bit sh*t. I've just realised that's a pity because, as entertainment, it could be ace. Right, usual IDS (late GR.1 for my biases) fanboi service resuming. Cheers and gone! Ps. 800-830kts low level (c.500 ASL) to comfortably chase down F-111s in Salty Hammer exercises. Intercepter? I barely saw 'er! Pps. Inital radar contact vs B-52 at 120NM. Lols.

Not for me, but I thought I'd share some Tornados that others might want. A little something for the paintshop crews: ... (Wiki commons, embedding permitted) ...although the best look for a Tonka will always be: A low flying RAF Panavia Tornado aircraft, taking part in the NATO exercise Operation Mallet Blow, over the Otterburn range in Northumberland. 3rd August, 1987. (Photo by NCJ Archive/Mirrorpix/Getty Images, embedding permitted) Come on, we know how I feel about this thread not being somewhere on the front page...

Not just you @Toga10! Another Tonka thread...oh well, that won't stop us piling on in to show support Late GR1, (GW1 mods) would be the sweet spot for me - it's the most involved (and therefore fun) for pilot and navigator - and remains true to what DCS really is* - so would be my dream. *A late Cold War Simulator (c.1980-1990). It's where the simulator shines, and the Tornado sits right slap bang in terms of ethos and capabilites. Anyway... As to how likely...who knows. There's always been a strong crowd for the Tornado historically, and more recently a strong desire within that crowd for Heatblur to take it on for DCS. They've earned the trust of those who love the plane to do a good job of it. The same holds true for the fans of the A-6, F-111 etc etc too...it's just that they're all crap and the Tonka is ace Hat, coat...

Any news is most exciting from you guys! Wishing all at Heatblur a happy, healthy and productive 2021... ...and I look forward to finding out what you have to share with us as and when it's time.

Of course Wags isn't saying that a Tornado is on the way but nor is he saying that it's impossible, which seems to be the assumption here. Who would have thought that a Eurofighter would ever be cleared for a "study-level" sim? Who knows what concessions have had to be made to fidelity, but the point for Eurofighter fans is that there's one on the way. Is it so outlandish to hope that Tornado fans (there's a lot of us, and we're noisy ) may one day get the same? Congrats to Heatblur for grabbing the top two spots on the recent Grim Reapers top DCS modules list/video. The reason? The Viggen and Tomcat are the modules that keep their pilots most entertained - technically excellent, but then filled with character and charm which leads to sim pilots feeling the same way as real pilots do about their steeds. They become emotionally invested. Unmatched by any other dev, and Heatblur have done it twice. That's why we're all here. Who else could do the Tornado justice? ...and they've nailed swing-wing. And ground radar... ...and multi-crew... ...and reverse thrust... ...and and and... Happy Christmas y'all!

Excellent! ...one step closer to the Tonka announcement... :) More seriously, and perhaps it's a little premature to start throwing congratulations around, but Heatblur seem to have outdone themselves. As we all know, this is no mean feat! Early reports of the performance are very promising, and as we can all see in @IronMike 's invigorating trailer, she's a beaut! Well done to all involved, looking forward to her very much :)

EDIT 3rd December: Just noticed that the video link has disappeared from this post. I'll attempt to re-find it and edit again to re-embed.

Admins are always welcome to move threads, are they not? The discussion is pleasant, informative and well-intentioned. Where's the harm, and how is it causing distress? Of course it won't sway Heatblur (who may or may not be working on a Tonka - it fits their comments to date, but is not the only aircraft to do so), but that's not the point of the thread. This might be an odd place for the thread to live, but here it is... Who knows, maybe it will be of some use one day :thumbup:

That's handy, 'cos a home cockpit isn't gonna be a five minute job... :joystick:

:pilotfly:

${1}

Page two? Can't be having that.

Very true. I just wonder how reasonable the community is to equate desire to reality. Who but HB know :) Oh, absolutely none! It's just been picked as the 'best fit' (I'm excluding the AI A-6) to the, admittedly very scanty, information we have. That's why I orginally posted - the Tonka has been picked ahead of all others on this basis, by quite a margin according to the poll. But I wonder what we might have missed. If you flip it the other way round, would we ever have picked up on that HB were making a Viggen? We have no evidence for them making anything just yet, I wonder what the other 'best fit' options are apart from the Tornado and F-111 ...and, frankly, what good is a long-range strike aircraft on 500km maps? All agreed! What do you take to be HB's self-developed technologies? Interesting point I'd not considered, thank you. This! This is where I'd love to see DCS heading. I can see multirole being great for an individual - lots of bang for buck - but it's easy to be just alright at lots of things. Dedicated roles for aircraft do limit scope for varied tasking, but also encourage expertise to be developed and a role for everyone (and every aircraft) in online and the upcoming dynamic campaign, giving a much better sense of being a small part of a large whole. And with aircraft developed to HB's standard, every time you light the fires will be an interesting and varied experience :) Cheers all

This doesn't follow. Yes, HB are making an AI A-6; yes they would like to make a full module; no, the next module is not an A-6. We have no evidence of them making a full module. Nor a statement of intent. Just a statement of desire. I'm no programmer or developer, but my understanding is that the gap between AI and full module is so big as to make limited impact. It certainly does no harm, saves research time etc, but the work involved in making a full module is the work involved in making a full module. Particularly given HB's fantastic attention to detail. Somebody please correct me if I err, every day's a school day, but I simply don't understand the 'AI A-6 therefore flyable A-6' rhetoric. Am I misinformed? Forgive me for being blunt, but which reasons? I feel I've missed a memo... All the characteristics? Does it? As far as I'm aware, all HB have said is 'it will be a complex jet utilising some already-developed technologies'. Yes, they've said they would like to develop the A-6. I would like them to as well. I would like a pay rise. It may happen, it may not. But what I will get next is more certain. What HB are doing next is, I feel, l more certain and this topic may be more interesting if we pursued that with more intent. "...a complex jet utilising some already-developed technologies": A-6 ticks some boxes - twin seat. Also a nice fit wth the carrier, and arguably complements the F-14. F-111 ticks some more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing Tornado ticks still more boxes - twin seat + swing-wing + reverse thrust + terrain-mapping radar The 'AI = full module' thing is not necessarily true and so I think it's the Tornado next, as do many others. But are we right? What are we missing? What have HB spotted that we haven't? What era? What nation? There are probably other 'Western' (very loosely) aircraft that fit the bill - what are they? There are definitely Soviet (equally loosely) aircraft that do - what are those? Here's hoping for some education :) Tonk'er :pilotfly:

Genuinely surprised that the next Heatblur module is, by popular belief, going to be the A-6. Obviously the voting is irrational, willfully selctive in acccepting evidence, and only tangentially related to the question actually asked - but even so I wasn't expecting so much demand for yet another US and/or strike aircraft. Isn't there enough capabality for this already? Yes it's fun and it's cool, but it's already catered for. There are huge areas that are not, and I'd love to see these investigated in DCS and Heatblur have the chops to make the unusual interesting rather than irritating. Given that DCS should just come clean about really being a c.1980-1990 Cold War simulator and drop all other pretences, there are some glaring ommisions. I know that the narrative is America vs. Russia, but is it really acceptable for DCS to continue to cater only to these two nations? Thank you Heatblur for the Viggen, congrats on the F-14 (by all account a remarkable achievement), and please please let your next module be more closely related to your first rather than second release... What do I think will be next? The Tornado fulfils a much longer and more compelling list of criteria than the A-6, and I'd be happy to see it next. I'm sure the A-6 won't be far behind, because it is great, would be a good addition to DCS, has (evidently) a lot of support etc etc etc. What would I like to see next? Anything that wasn't used in Vietnam but would've been used in the Fulda Gap. There is so much to choose from, and it's all quirky and interesting and fun - like the Viggen and the F14 - and Heatblur are the only developers who might pull it off :) Anyway...

Isn't this just the most Heatblur thing you've seen? :) There's heaps of good stuff, but check out the input of waypoints via electronic cursor, c. 6'30', programming the flight information cassette, and feeding it into the aircraft at c.11'54'' Yes please... :)