WRAITH Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) ED-DCS F-35 A/B/C Supporter - Development Encouragement! Hi all, Well this being a Modern Air Craft "WANT" Thread, I would love to encourage ED-DCS Developers to seriously consider developing.............. I would love to see in development a ED-DCS F-35 A/B/C with a LHD Carrier Ops including a F-16C Block 50/52 + B2 Spirit Bomber to be seriously reconsidered as valuable Air Craft projects for the Future EDGE project release especially for "REDFLAG Joint Tactical Operations / Exercises" in the NTR MAP with the Cortex Designs F/A-18E Super Hornet with a CVN77 Carrier Ops! :smilewink: :thumbup: For its practical application. Also because I would "BUY IT" so would many others that did not get to see the (DCS F-35 Kickstarter - http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=108370 ) succeed even if its at a sub A-10C standard like the F-35 A/B/C FSX P3D version in a Combat Simulator! Also very much aware of Dino work efforts on the F-35 and updates just hate all this crap about how in-depth a module has to be there are "Ranges -Approximations - Guesstimations" for other systems that can be made for A-G Radar, Sensor Fusion, Data Link, ILS Approach, JHMCS etc Yeah, a little make believe but there is no competition here as to who makes more accurate flight avionics and systems for models between developers. Look I'm no developer but a ED-DCS Developer could easily build a F-35 A/B/C with mock systems as a DCS Module using general references as example found online.......... First FSX F-35 Dino Cattaneo's Manual........... http://online.simmarket.com/1/F-35A_FSXA_User_manual.pdf ..........there might be a new one with more info for Update 2.30. * http://www.mediafire.com/view/1a21aj8ytr8tmc5/JSF_F-35_Specification_Fact_Sheet.docx * http://www.mediafire.com/folder/34ur5uq8k3qkh/05._JSF_F-35_-_All_you_need_to_know * http://www.jsf.mil/downloads/down_documentation.htm * https://www.f35.com/about/capabilities * http://dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/TuesdayLandmarkADougHayward.pdf * http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/F35Lightning/Documents/asq242_datasheet.pdf * http://air-attack.com/page/48/F-35-Lightning-II.html * http://dsearch.dtic.mil/search?site=default_collection&q=JSF+F-35+documents&btnG.x=0&btnG.y=0&client=dticol_frontend&proxystylesheet=dticol_frontend&proxyreload=1&filter=0&tlen=200&getfields=* * http://www.lockheedmartin.com.au/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/f-35/collateral/f35_brochure_a11-34324e001.pdf ........all that bla, bla, bla..... with just general basic specification info on overall systems that can be implemented as mock systems it would simply be a great effort and a valuable air craft in a modern tactical mission especially for the NTR MAP release. Also a nice FM + AFM can be developed using............... http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/ I would simply be happy with a FSX / P3D version with a few more added mock systems in place like ILS so on. The point is you could use this as a "Tactical Fighter" as Developers improve systems by guess work if there is such a developer willing and understands the concept that I discuss here. Mind you Dino's F-35 A/B/C is........ "FREE TO USE!" Just "Try It" in TACPAC version and land STOVL on a Carrier and use its weapons systems and functions it a lot of fun! Watch.......... Really kool and could be improved for a DCS Module in a "Tactical Air Support Sortie Campaign Mission"! Unfortunately Dino is just one man power machine and he just does not have the time needed to improve his version further which is a shame. Although his working on other great stuff. His F-35 needs an experienced developer who would love to spend some time developing mock systems and symbology for its avionics that would somewhat work as real. Anyway let say that all modules are not 100% representation of the real thing, honestly its a game and we need more "Air War Study Sims" thats the point here, bring back the sims of the 90's! As SITHSPAWN said:- Guys, stay on topic... if you dont like an aircraft, and ED or someone happens to make it, you dont have to buy it, but no need for this... I also agree here with Exorcet............ :thumbup: The good thing about DCS is that you can avoid everything you don't like. The F-35 won't be as accurate as other models, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a place in the sim. Also, the limitations/abilities of this particular dev don't pertain to everyone. A reasonable F-35 model is well within the realm of possibility. I guess we have to wait for Update 2.0.0 EDGE + NTR MAP + HAWK T1 + Pillatus PC-21 + F-18E and hope for a DCS F 35 A/B/C + F-16C + B2 Spirit Bomber for Tactical Missions! Lots of fun to be had! I saw this a while back check it out............... Till then! Cheers, :beer: Edited September 11, 2014 by WRAITH 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 My current wishlist: 1) F-18C, which is being developed currently by ED. Not much interest personally for the E but Coretex has that under wraps already too. 2) F-16 3) Fully modeled F-15, I'd be happy with any model. 3) F-14 I'd love to see a F-22, Su-35, etc...I just (personally) don't have interest in them currently because I know they are too classified at the present to be modeled accurately. The bright side of that is that it gives me something to look forward to for the long term future though. VR Cockpit (link): Custom Throttletek F/A-18C Throttle w/ Hall Sensors + Otto switches | Slaw Device RX Viper Pedals w/ Damper | VPC T-50 Base + 15cm Black Sahaj Extension + TM Hornet or Warthog Grip | Super Warthog Wheel Stand Pro | Steelcase Leap V2 + JetSeat SE VR Rig: Pimax 5K+ | ASUS ROG Strix 1080Ti | Intel i7-9700K | Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master | Corsair H115i RGB Platinum | 32GB Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3200 | Dell U3415W Curved 3440x1440 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kazereal Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 ww2 plane development probably doesn't detract from other modules all that much Exactly. They are different teams within same companies. Those teams would be likely doing something else if the demand for WW2 wasn't so big. that said, i don't understand why they charge full price for ww2 content. They do take a lot of research and development and as well to simulate the oddities and quirks in them. This is also time-consuming since reliable information those days is hard to find. Detailing engine characteristics and aerodynamic modeling was not that advanced 70 years ago so it was not even possible to create that information then. And if there was that information finding it and comparing to numerous modifications and upgrades is plenty of work as well. "I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kazereal Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Why is it FSX gets everything when the "FSX Source Code" itself has reached "End of Product Life", going by developer online discussions. I dont get it! You need to understand that the simulation level is entirely different here. ED is pretty strict that each module must achieve certain quality level which is brilliant! Each module is quaranteed to fill demanding requirements. FSX simulation is not that advanced (at most SFM level in DCS) and there is no-one to act as quality assurance on them. This means that there are huge numbers of really low-quality modules for FSX and only some good ones. The flight model in FSX is pretty crude so they are simple to develop. There aren't many systems simulated in those. And even the 3D models don't have that much detail or accuracy. In summary: it is far quicker and cheaper to make "game-level" addons for FSX than actual study-simulation level modules for DCS. "I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRAITH Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) You need to understand that the simulation level is entirely different here. ED is pretty strict that each module must achieve certain quality level which is brilliant! Each module is quaranteed to fill demanding requirements. FSX simulation is not that advanced (at most SFM level in DCS) and there is no-one to act as quality assurance on them. This means that there are huge numbers of really low-quality modules for FSX and only some good ones. The flight model in FSX is pretty crude so they are simple to develop. There aren't many systems simulated in those. And even the 3D models don't have that much detail or accuracy. In summary: it is far quicker and cheaper to make "game-level" addons for FSX than actual study-simulation level modules for DCS. Hi Kazereal, How are you? Well to get to the point - http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2171647&postcount=128 Also, Yes, I understand all that above in your reply believe me I do. DCS has some real nice stuff about it, but also much to improve and lacking the Forum it self speaks of this everyday in threads, posts and replies to keep short and respectful. But in my opinion I am very sad without going into detail - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_flight_simulator :cry: I dont want to be disrespectful so if anyone wants to chat more on "Air War Combat Simulation - Concept and Design" just use the PM system I will explain more in very lengthy responses with many links to form the/my argument in a discussion! I really like chatting so your welcome to join me in a chat! Cheers, :beer: Edited September 12, 2014 by WRAITH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts