mattebubben Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 il most likley get this plane when the C-101CC comes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winfield_Gold Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 It's 12:30AM 01\15\2015 and no download link......:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26-J39 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 It's 12:30AM 01\15\2015 and no download link......:) 2:06am here in Melbourne, still nothing ! :mad::mad::mad: :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Dragon Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think has 01/15/2015 UTC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rrohde Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 An this is where the money gets important. Perhaps the developers don't have enough money to also implement the EFM? The devs didn't seem to have communicated that money is an issue. I don't mind supporting Third Party Devs - but with the "DCS" label, an advanced flightmodel should be part of the initial offering -- even in "Beta" state... See Belsimtek and Leatherneck for reference. :) PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X | MSI Suprim GeForce 3090 TI | ASUS Prime X570-P | 128GB DDR4 3600 RAM | 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD | Win10 Pro 64bit Gear: HP Reverb G2 | JetPad FSE | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk.III w/ MCG Ultimate VKBcontrollers.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontiuka Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 What kind of instruction / training material will be available as of release tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) ...with the "DCS" label, an advanced flightmodel should be part of the initial offering -- even in "Beta" state... See Belsimtek and Leatherneck for reference. :) BST have greater resources for AFM dev than any other 3rd party, and any comparisons with LN are bogus - they had more time and Kickstarter funding to get the expertise in place to start development on AFM earlier. Please do not underestimate the work involved in AFM development - it can be greater than the rest of the aircraft combined. Best regards, Tango. Edited January 14, 2015 by Tango Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cichlidfan Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 ... they had more time and Kickstarter funding to get the expertise in place to start development on AFM earlier. Interesting assumption. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 What kind of instruction / training material will be available as of release tomorrow? At this point, the Quick Start Guide should be available (I'm working like crazy on it :D ). Missions, and the complete flight manual, will follow. Please remember we are releasing a BETA product at this stage. Best regards, Tango. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricktoberfest Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think that the DCS title, now seems to apply to the clickable cockpit aircraft (if it means anything at all), where before it applied also to the advanced flight model as well. It's confusing with the changes in terminology lately (AFM, EFM, PFM, SFM, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think that the DCS title, now seems to apply to the clickable cockpit aircraft (if it means anything at all), where before it applied also to the advanced flight model as well. It's confusing with the changes in terminology lately (AFM, EFM, PFM, SFM, etc) Correct. Best regards, Tango. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted January 14, 2015 ED Team Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think that the DCS title, now seems to apply to the clickable cockpit aircraft (if it means anything at all), where before it applied also to the advanced flight model as well. It's confusing with the changes in terminology lately (AFM, EFM, PFM, SFM, etc) DCS title applies to being approved and licensed with ED, that the project will be released with the quality standards approved by ED. All the other terms you mentioned are means to break down the level of modelling being done for a module. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cichlidfan Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think that the DCS title, now seems to apply to the clickable cockpit aircraft (if it means anything at all), where before it applied also to the advanced flight model as well. It's confusing with the changes in terminology lately (AFM, EFM, PFM, SFM, etc) Correct. Best regards, Tango. DCS title applies to being approved and licensed with ED, that the project will be released with the quality standards approved by ED. All the other terms you mentioned are means to break down the level of modelling being done for a module. Things that make me go...hmmm. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaspeR32 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Things that make me go...hmmm. The bar has been set very high by BST and ED, so for me personally, I probably would feel the difference in a SFM immediately. I do with certain FC3 aircraft that haven't been upgraded and choose not to fly them because of it. I know for me then, there is zero point in purchasing a new module without some form of an advanced flight model. I'm sure there will be people that want/enjoy an aircraft with a SFM, and I guess that's who AvioDev/VEAO is targeting for the BETA release. Intel i5-2500k @ 4.4GHz w/ H70 liquid cooler, ASRock PRO3-M Z68 Mobo, 32G 1600Mhz Mushkin RAM, EVGA GTX970 4GB , OCZ Agility 3 128g SSD, SanDisk 240g SSD, Win7 64-bit --Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/livingfood -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontiuka Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 At this point, the Quick Start Guide should be available (I'm working like crazy on it :D ). Missions, and the complete flight manual, will follow. Please remember we are releasing a BETA product at this stage.No problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivoune Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 DCS title applies to being approved and licensed with ED, that the project will be released with the quality standards approved by ED. All the other terms you mentioned are means to break down the level of modelling being done for a module. Indeed, the Hawk for exemple has a clickable cockpit yet it's not a "DCS: product", it's instead "a produt for DCS" which is a big difference. FC3 are "modules for DCS", A-10C or Huey for exemple are DCS: modules (DCS: A-10C, DCS: Huey etc). [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted January 14, 2015 ED Team Share Posted January 14, 2015 Indeed, the Hawk for exemple has a clickable cockpit yet it's not a "DCS: product", it's instead "a produt for DCS" which is a big difference. FC3 are "modules for DCS", A-10C or Huey for exemple are DCS: modules (DCS: A-10C, DCS: Huey etc). Correct, I think once they get their EFM going and such that will change, but they need to meet all ED's requirements firsts, least that is my understanding, I would assume that will be the same here. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivoune Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Correct, I think once they get their EFM going and such that will change, but they need to meet all ED's requirements firsts, least that is my understanding, I would assume that will be the same here. That's what I hope too, for it mean it will have met other module's standard! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBlemmen Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 In my opinion "optional" AFM is a big no-no. I'm completely fine with SFM beta, but when its out of beta and released EVERYONE has to fly the same , AFM , version. DCS stands for quality and i would like to keep it that way. On a side note , any info on the steam release , or is that all arranged by ED? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team f-18hornet Posted January 14, 2015 ED Team Share Posted January 14, 2015 In my opinion "optional" AFM is a big no-no. I'm completely fine with SFM beta, but when its out of beta and released EVERYONE has to fly the same , AFM , version. DCS stands for quality and i would like to keep it that way. On a side note , any info on the steam release , or is that all arranged by ED? +1 about this statement. AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, GeForce RTX 2080Ti, 32 GB DRAM, HOTAS TM Warthog, FSSB R3 Lighting, MFG Crosswind, Win 10 Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rrohde Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Please do not underestimate the work involved in AFM development - it can be greater than the rest of the aircraft combined. Best regards, Tango. Well, Tango, I appreciate your information. That level of information is quite helpful to build an opinion. So, I've changed my mind and will buy the module asap. :) I was not aware that AFM development is such a big deal -- but then again, I am not a programmer, either. Would be nice if developer diaries could give us some insights on those things; that additional info makes a huge difference in my understanding of the process. So thanks for that. :) PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X | MSI Suprim GeForce 3090 TI | ASUS Prime X570-P | 128GB DDR4 3600 RAM | 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD | Win10 Pro 64bit Gear: HP Reverb G2 | JetPad FSE | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk.III w/ MCG Ultimate VKBcontrollers.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredo_laredo Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Yeah! This is a first day buy for me... But I hope you guys keep the DCS AFM standard for all users. A.K.A. Timon -117th- in game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F31x Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 As said - even FC3 has now EFM (expect two planes which will follow). Personally I would even buy an F-16 / F-18 or something with no clickpit but EFM (FC3 Standard). But for all those new Modules (which also cost 40-50$) the EFM Standard is a must! ED has established a very high standard for DCS and I think that we all want that this Standard will be hold. We "fought" all the years for the EFM Models for FC and I think we are all happy with this. So starting with SFM at this point again just doesn't make any sense (except for Beta release) ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontiuka Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 As said - even FC3 has now EFM (expect two planes which will follow). Personally I would even buy an F-16 / F-18 or something with no clickpit but EFM (FC3 Standard). But for all those new Modules (which also cost 40-50$) the EFM Standard is a must! ED has established a very high standard for DCS and I think that we all want that this Standard will be hold. We "fought" all the years for the EFM Models for FC and I think we are all happy with this. So starting with SFM at this point again just doesn't make any sense (except for Beta release) ;)Anything under ED would be classified as SFM/AFM/AFM+/PFM including FC3. Only 3rd party flight models are classified as EFM (external flight model). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 Indeed, the Hawk for exemple has a clickable cockpit yet it's not a "DCS: product", it's instead "a produt for DCS" which is a big difference. FC3 are "modules for DCS", A-10C or Huey for exemple are DCS: modules (DCS: A-10C, DCS: Huey etc). At release the C-101 will be a "DCS:" product, not "a product for DCS". :thumbup: DCS:C-101 ... 2 days to release... ;) Best regards, Tango. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts