Interview with Leatherneck Studios

[Buckeye]

Like the F4A Phantom II?

 

How dare you give me HOPE! :)

 

I'm on my third heart attack already...

 

 

Isn't the E model the only Phantom never employed by the USMC? Also, if I recall correctly, the VF-101 Grim Reapers from Cobra's old avatar only drove the B model Phantom, which means the F-4 could theoretically be removed from the hat.

 

This is too much thinking, guessing, etc for a Monday haha.

[chev255]

USMC did not fly any of the USAF Phantoms: C, D, G, probably more that I'm forgetting

[TAW_Blaze]

Yes, but you're presuming that complete AI RIO is a must, while I had the way it was done in the F-14 Fleet Defender in mind. So, you'd switch to RIO position only to search and lock medium and long range targets (putting the plane on autopilot hold while doing that helps) and check the overall AWACS picture received via datalink. IIRC, the only AI RIO part in that old sim (but, still my favorite) was giving you cues on visible bogeys around you (something like 'Bandit 4 o'clock')..

 

Personally, I'd be more than OK with that, but can't speak for the rest and I'm not sure how much more can be done currently in DCS. Hopefully DCS will add MP multi-crew soon enough.

 

I don't think this is a viable option. It would add a massive disability to the plane against any other single seater fighter. You would be literally forced to swap seats constantly to adjust your radar while putting the autopilot on. That's just ridicoulus.

 

I would personally prefer not to bother with any stupid AI. It takes too much effort to build one and it won't ever be good enough.

[Charly_Owl]

Which ones were flown by the USAF and which ones were flown by other branches of armed services, exactly? I'm getting mixed up in what variants are flown by whom.

[Buckeye]

Interview with Leatherneck Studios

 

USMC did not fly any of the USAF Phantoms: C, D, G, probably more that I'm forgetting

 

 

Ahh, okay, thanks for clarifying.

 

Looks like the Grim Reapers also flew more than just the B model Phantom too (research shows that they at least flew the J as well...but it looks like the USMC flew both the B and J Phantoms). I give up.

Edited October 27, 2014 by =Buckeye=

[MBot]

Which ones were flown by the USAF and which ones were flown by other branches of armed services, exactly? I'm getting mixed up in what variants are flown by whom.

 

USAF:

F-4C

F-4D

F-4E

F-4G

RF-4C

 

USN/USMC:

F-4B

F-4J

F-4N (upgarde of B)

F-4S (upgrade of J)

 

USMC:

RF-4B

[Art-J]

1. Is the cobra person on the polish forum the same person as on the DCS forums? (Nicolas dackard?) And why is he typing in polish?

 

2. Is that wip stuff made by dackard and/or leatherneck for FSX?

 

1. Yep, that's the man (and he writes in Polish, because he did spend a few years in Poland some time ago and got a pretty good grasp of the language).

 

2. No idea.

[Dudikoff]

I don't think this is a viable option. It would add a massive disability to the plane against any other single seater fighter. You would be literally forced to swap seats constantly to adjust your radar while putting the autopilot on. That's just ridicoulus.

 

IMHO, it helps that it's an interceptor with long range missiles as the primary weapon. If the targets get too close than they normally should, you could always use ACM modes from the front seat. Worked pretty well in Fleet Defender, though I'm not sure how many switches need to be handled for these things (e.g. change radar mode, etc.) on a DCS level cockpit, but I'm sure it could be mapped to HOTAS either way.

[GeorgeLKMT]

2. No idea.

 

It's from Aerosoft, I doubt it's related in any way.

[TheLastDrifter]

New Guess... An F16.

[TAW_Blaze]

IMHO, it helps that it's an interceptor with long range missiles as the primary weapon. If the targets get too close than they normally should, you could always use ACM modes from the front seat. Worked pretty well in Fleet Defender, though I'm not sure how many switches need to be handled for these things (e.g. change radar mode, etc.) on a DCS level cockpit, but I'm sure it could be mapped to HOTAS either way.

 

Maybe. But you know too, that in DCS the poor Cat will be used for everything but fleet defense! :megalol:

[heroe]

pleaseee F16 :(

[KaspeR32]

Wonder if this stuff still applies to Leatherneck...

 

 

We have been asked alot about the Phantom and the Tomcat, This will be the only time I discuss these aircraft in this thread. Due to restrictions put in place by various governments and aircraft manufacturers we are unable to produce an ASM / AFM level DCS aircraft for either of these. With the current redactments that we would have to make we are of the belief that we would not be able to do them justice and as such we are not going to undertake any work on either of these aircraft.

 

As for the F-16, again its a case of access to aircraft and personnel, if a Military contract was to come up then we could consider doing a redacted civilian version as a side project, but as it stands we don't have the necessary information or access to enable us to complete such a project on the scale of the F-16, and that's not even touching the BMS issue.

 

Pman

 

 

It is currently impossible to make any high fidelity simulator for the Tomcat or the Phantom due to issues revolving around classification and other restrictions placed by various organisations and governments. I'm not going to get into what they are or what things are.

 

I know people want a Phantom and a Tomcat in dcs , however it is our feeling that with these limitations implanted upon us that we can not produce a consumer simulator that even remotely simulates these aircraft.

 

As such both of these will not be developed by VEAO

 

Pman

 

I know this doesn't mean anything for Leatherneck, but it just makes me wonder if there really is enough info about these jets out there..

Edited October 27, 2014 by KaspeR32

[Buckeye]

Wonder if this stuff still applies to Leatherneck...

 

 

 

 

 

I know this doesn't mean anything for Leatherneck, but it just makes me wonder if there really is enough info about these jets out there..

 

 

Yet VEAO is developing a Eurofighter, which is still heavily classified and in service...so their fear of "not being able to simulate it close to the real life counterpart" confuses me. Regardless, it's really tough to tell who is able to gain access to what and on what jets, but given the level of fidelity LNS strives to provide, I would assume they would only commit to a project they felt they had the necessary clearance and data on.

[NineLine]

Yet VEAO is developing a Eurofighter, which is still heavily classified and in service...so their fear of "not being able to simulate it close to the real life counterpart" confuses me. Regardless, it's really tough to tell who is able to gain access to what and on what jets, but given the level of fidelity LNS strives to provide, I would assume they would only commit to a project they felt they had the necessary clearance and data on.

 

Unless they have military contracts that afford them more data than the normal person...

[Buckeye]

Unless they have military contracts that afford them more data than the normal person...

 

 

Understood, and I think (read: hope) that this goes both ways here (VEAO with Eurofighter and LNS with Tomcat/Phantom). Obtaining a contract to get what you can in terms of hard data and then making educated guesses to fill in the blanks seems to be the name of the game in the simulation development world...or at least from what I have gathered.

[NineLine]

I would assume, and I am heavily assuming here as I havent built a module as of yet, that having the support of military contracts, such as ED had for the A-10C, would only help you in the long run, I am sure to what degree of help is dependant on the corp you are dealing with...

[Flycat]

f/a-18c is built by Northrop Grumman,f-14 was made by Grumman.

if bug could be, why not cat.

[Zakatak]

If they go with the F-4/14, I sure hope they have an excellent AI and convincing voice acting for the RCO. Having one person simulating two crew members is not a proper simulation, and most players do not spend the majority of their time online.

f/a-18c is built by Northrop Grumman,f-14 was made by Grumman.

if bug could be, why not cat.

The Hornet is currently owned by Boeing.

[TAW_Blaze]

If they go with the F-4/14, I sure hope they have an excellent AI and convincing voice acting for the RCO. Having one person simulating two crew members is not a proper simulation, and most players do not spend the majority of their time online.

 

No AI would be an excellent way to promote multiplayer. :D

[Buckeye]

Interview with Leatherneck Studios

 

If they go with the F-4/14, I sure hope they have an excellent AI and convincing voice acting for the RCO. Having one person simulating two crew members is not a proper simulation, and most players do not spend the majority of their time online.

 

The Hornet is currently owned by Boeing.

 

 

People that primarily fly offline are content with flying BVR against AI pilots that don't even try to properly avoid inbound missiles...they just fly straight into them. In BFM/WVR, they don't even jink and are highly predictable with their defensive maneuvers. Thus, I doubt these same people will demand a highly complex RIO model. As long as you can have the standard comms and have key commands to instruct them, I'm sure it will be fine.

Edited October 27, 2014 by =Buckeye=

[Flycat]

you can see lots of player in BF3/4 or arma2/3 work together in a vehicle on the server.

the player of morden combat simulator won't be a single wolf,should be do more team work .

I think Ed need to improve user's online experience,and let's poliet fly together and do more interesting.

[DocSigma]

Wonder if this stuff still applies to Leatherneck....

 

I think it applies to all the devs developing for DCS. Also, If I remember from the interview with Cobra, didn't he say that a member of the dev team was an ex-Mig21 pilot? I would think the employ of an ex-pilot of one of these jets would go a long way towards filling in any intel that is unattainable due to government and aircraft corp restrictions.

 

I think in any case a lot of parts have to come together to bring to fruition one of these modules, and I imagine the more modern the module the more parts to bring together. I think the actual number of aircraft that is actually doable is probably - to the chagrin of most - relatively small.

[TAW_Blaze]

Exactly the biggest potential of DCS is multiplayer. It integrates many extremely detailed simulations to one sandbox and to date there has never been such a thing.

[McBlemmen]

No AI would be an excellent way to promote multiplayer. :D

 

And a great way to lose a bunch of potential customers , too