How about the US side?

[Honest989]

This will probably get me a flame or two, but here goes:

 

ED are making some good stuff for lockon. In fact, it's all pretty incredible. While I have to wait another couple of weeks to get my hands on both Lockon and flaming cliffs in a gold bundle there's one thing that everyone and their mother has noticed:

 

The game is decidedly geared toward Russian air vehicles. There are only two US aircraft in the whole of the game (with realistic cockpits etc) and the rest is Russian kit. (not that there's much wrong with the russian stuff).

 

Now, I realise that ED is a Russian outfit, and the accessibility to information on their country's own stuff is probably much greater than being able to go find some stuff on US aircraft, but I see that some people want to have at least an f-18 or f-14 in addition to the Russian stuff.. Is there any chance of ED doing something like this?

[Shaman]

ED will develop fully realistic F-16 sim after Ka-50 Black Shark, that will put Falcon series to its knees (I hope ;) ).

Though I don't like F-16 so much, I'll be happy to fly Block 52+ in Polish Air Force paint scheme - that's for sure!

 

You can forget about F-18 and F-14 sims. Because tac manuals or whatever have not been declassified so far, that means that all the F-18, F-14 sims you've seen were fantasy sims actually.

Do some search on these forums. It has been discussed several times if not more.

[355th_Paulie]

We will get an AFM Hog in time aswell. Considering that the Hog will be flying, in real life, till 2027, I'll be in my 60's by then, I can wait another year or 2/3/6 for that to happen, and it gives me time enough to save up, in order for me to buy the CRAY computer.

[AJ.eightFive]

Just out of curiosity, what are the exact documents required? I imagine it would be something like a POH, with performance numbers, envelopes etc. I don't have a spare $20 to find out what these are, but maybe someone else is familiar with these documents and can explain what they are for. http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F18.html

 

Here are the one's available for the F-15A,B,C,D,E

http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F15.html

[britgliderpilot]

Just out of curiosity, what are the exact documents required? I imagine it would be something like a POH, with performance numbers, envelopes etc. I don't have a spare $20 to find out what these are, but maybe someone else is familiar with these documents and can explain what they are for. http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F18.html

 

Here are the one's available for the F-15A,B,C,D,E

http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/F15.html

 

The problem is the avionics data. That's combined in with the weapons data and as a result is just a leetle bit classified :p

 

 

And before someone mentions Janes F/A-18 . . . . firstly they had access to people who flew them, and secondly, they guessed. ED don't seem to be in the business of doing that ;)

[AJ.eightFive]

I would easily forgive ED for taking a few guesses for the sake of having some NATO carrier ops. It's not like the aircraft they do have data on are perfect anyway (see. F-15C Avionics Wishlist ;)).

 

I wonder, why is that technical information on the still active F-15C (and similarly the F-16, modelled in such detail in F4) is declassified whereas information on the F-18A,B,C,D,E isn't?

[Alfa]

I would easily forgive ED for taking a few guesses for the sake of having some NATO carrier ops. It's not like the aircraft they do have data on are perfect anyway (see. F-15C Avionics Wishlist ;)).

 

I wonder, why is that technical information on the still active F-15C (and similarly the F-16, modelled in such detail in F4) is declassified whereas information on the F-18A,B,C,D,E isn't?

 

USN vs. USAF doctrine apparently.

 

- JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

USN vs. USAF doctrine apparently.

 

- JJ.

 

I understood that it was a packaging issue, too - the USAF manuals have flight data and avionics data in one.

 

The USN manuals have flight data, but to get avionics data you need to refer to a manual with weapons data in as well - classified.

 

But then I can't remember where I heard that. Hmmn.

[Silent Warrior]

shamandgg: Ya know, if ED manage to bring Falcon to its knees... I'll be one delighted little bugger. :) 'Cuz then we'd have a SPECTACULAR F-16-sim!

But they'd better look over their UI, if that's to happen... And autosave... And FBW...

[Hawg11]

"Wags" stated that anything after Black Shark is still up in the air.

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=165091#post165091

[Andrew_McP]

Personally I very much hope ED keep away from the F-16. For a start I see no point whatsoever in competing with the only other serious sim still out there being worked on... it's not good for a struggling genre.

 

And there is no way on earth -- with the greatest repsect -- ED's small team are going to be able to offer the full compliment of aircraft avionics etc. offered in F4AF. And that's before we get onto the campaign. So there's bound to be some disappointment, especially as -- fingers crossed -- the F4AF project is going to be developing in the years "LOMAC2" is being worked on.

 

Much better for ED to focus on another aircraft or, even better, simply forget another aircraft and "simply" start addressing the mission design, AI, and gameplay features which have held back the Flanker series for so long.

 

This is an old subject though, I should shut up :-) But I really do feel very strongly that competing directly with F4AF would be something very bad for a hobby which brings me a lot of pleasure. So I find it hard to resist sticking my oar in.

 

Andrew McP

[Guest IguanaKing]

I've said it before...but I'll say it again. I would LOVE a Vark sim. Maybe ED can add a Vark to "Tank Killers" if it ever comes to be. That would make lots of Aussies happy, and it would certainly make a lot of us Americans happy as well. :D

[355th_Paulie]

I've said it before...but I'll say it again. I would LOVE a Vark sim. Maybe ED can add a Vark to "Tank Killers" if it ever comes to be. That would make lots of Aussies happy, and it would certainly make a lot of us Americans happy as well. :D

 

I remember the 1-11 deployed at Soesterberg AB back in the "old days" I'd happily sell my left nut, even to see it as an AI in future developments. :icon_weed

[Guest IguanaKing]

Right on! I know its a dual pit aircraft, but the pilot and WSO are right next to each other. Using PAVETack and plinking tanks with GBU-12s, THAT would be SOOOO satisfying.

 

Ah...so Soesterberg IS spelled with an E, so many of the af.mil sites have it wrong. Oh well...after all...the AF even uses "irregardless" as an actual word. LOL. I don't think I ever saw a Vark with a CR tail code before...I learn something new every day.

[355th_Paulie]

No, dont get me wrong, they were stationed here, temporarorly, comming from the UK for several times, followed by the notoious Aggressor squad F-5's, we had good times here back in the 80's-90's, so many visitors, so many different aircraft, and visiting the base on the 4th of July was a ball!! (ohohohoh, how I miss the cold war era..:icon_weed )

[Guest IguanaKing]

Ah...so they had either LN or UH on the tail then. I miss those days as well, dude. I still have my old MA-1 with a TAC patch on it. Some of my older AF brethren tell me I should get rid of it, since it shows my age. LOL. The old base commander of the former Lowry AFB is one of my customers now. Ohhh...how time is fun when you're having flies. :icon_weed

[355th_Paulie]

As a matter of fact, I'm visiting the base next week, a selected group is getting an indepth tour, we can bring our walking kane with us... hahahaha, time IS fun indeed!! ( sheit, were did I leave my teeth??:cool: )

[Guest IguanaKing]

Which base? Lowry? Nah...I knew what you meant. ;) But if you ever visit the old Lowry AFB, let me know. I'll come hang out with ya. :beer: A lot of my blood, sweat, and tears went into the old C-47 (actually, I'm not even sure the museum still has that one)...she's a damn fine bird.

[Alfa]

I understood that it was a packaging issue, too - the USAF manuals have flight data and avionics data in one.

 

The USN manuals have flight data, but to get avionics data you need to refer to a manual with weapons data in as well - classified.

 

But then I can't remember where I heard that. Hmmn.

 

Yes that may very well be the case too Britglider :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Kula66]

Personally I very much hope ED keep away from the F-16.

 

Agreed Andrew ... there are many great a/c out there - Mirages, Mig-21/25, Jag ... Or develop LO to handle 2 seaters ..

 

The last thing we need is a 'My FM is better than yours, but your DC is rubbish ...' --ssing match!

[Alfa]

Personally I very much hope ED keep away from the F-16. For a start I see no point whatsoever in competing with the only other serious sim still out there being worked on... it's not good for a struggling genre.

 

And there is no way on earth -- with the greatest repsect -- ED's small team are going to be able to offer the full compliment of aircraft avionics etc. offered in F4AF. And that's before we get onto the campaign. So there's bound to be some disappointment, especially as -- fingers crossed -- the F4AF project is going to be developing in the years "LOMAC2" is being worked on.

 

Much better for ED to focus on another aircraft or, even better, simply forget another aircraft and "simply" start addressing the mission design, AI, and gameplay features which have held back the Flanker series for so long.

 

This is an old subject though, I should shut up :-) But I really do feel very strongly that competing directly with F4AF would be something very bad for a hobby which brings me a lot of pleasure. So I find it hard to resist sticking my oar in.

 

Andrew McP

 

Well I would prefer an alternative choice for the US side as well - F-18C - but apparently the dev team can't obtain the documentation required for that aircraft while they have what they need for the F-16CJ(?). But I am confident that ED is fully capable of developing the avionics/WCS of an F-16 version given that the proper documentation is available......which it seems it is.

 

I don't know but I think you may have a point in regards to resources/man power when it comes to the development of a F4-style dynamic campaign engine though.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Guest IguanaKing]

They should just go with whatever aircraft the peeps want modelled. Do I care if they can't get a Dash One for an F-18 when the HSI in the current US aircraft doesn't even work properly? Nope. I like accuracy, but I realize its just a sim, I won't whine about inaccuracies in classified aircraft. How could I? If I spoke of it publicly...well...the OSI just might come a'knockin'. ;) I'm not sure why declassified info matters so much, when the basic functions of simple NAV systems aren't even modelled correctly in the current incarnation.

[AJ.eightFive]

They should just go with whatever aircraft the peeps want modelled. Do I care if they can't get a Dash One for an F-18 when the HSI in the current US aircraft doesn't even work properly? Nope. I like accuracy, but I realize its just a sim, I won't whine about inaccuracies in classified aircraft. How could I? If I spoke of it publicly...well...the OSI just might come a'knockin'. ;) I'm not sure why declassified info matters so much, when the basic functions of simple NAV systems aren't even modelled correctly in the current incarnation.

 

QFT

[upyr1]

Personally I very much hope ED keep away from the F-16. For a start I see no point whatsoever in competing with the only other serious sim still out there being worked on... it's not good for a struggling genre.

 

And there is no way on earth -- with the greatest repsect -- ED's small team are going to be able to offer the full compliment of aircraft avionics etc. offered in F4AF. And that's before we get onto the campaign. So there's bound to be some disappointment, especially as -- fingers crossed -- the F4AF project is going to be developing in the years "LOMAC2" is being worked on.

 

Much better for ED to focus on another aircraft or, even better, simply forget another aircraft and "simply" start addressing the mission design, AI, and gameplay features which have held back the Flanker series for so long.

 

This is an old subject though, I should shut up :-) But I really do feel very strongly that competing directly with F4AF would be something very bad for a hobby which brings me a lot of pleasure. So I find it hard to resist sticking my oar in.

 

Andrew McP

 

I'm thinking a sim set in the Nam Era with the F-4 and Mig -21 would be cool :icon_supe Phantoms Rock!!!

[Kula66]

I'm not sure why declassified info matters so much, when the basic functions of simple NAV systems aren't even modelled correctly in the current incarnation.

 

Lets be honest, there is almost no de-classified stuff on AMRAAM ... but that didn't stop the devs making an educated guess!