Something Something...

[MBot]

Also, lets not forget that one of the hints is that the next plane would have a HUD and would help in the development of the Tomcat. With that information, the 21 and the picture someone found the F-4 seems likely.

 

The F-4 doesn't have a HUD* :)

 

*as always, this excludes after-marked upgrades

[King_Hrothgar]

Interesting point of view HeTzeR32. Why do you think DCS World should only be for jets when so far we have 3 helicopters & 4 WW2 prop airframes as well as 14 jets? That is only a ratio of 2:1, so really, I'd suggest DCS World has a foot in several camps. It could quite easily be argued that it is the only truly realistic attempt at modelling WW2 airframes, and IL2 certainly doesn't match it.

 

I'm sure you prefer jets, and I am also sure Leatherneck will take no notice of your suggestion, so why bother making pointless comments simply because you want to see more jet aircraft? You will see more, but unfortunately for you, you'll also see more props and helicopters.

 

I do like your suggestion that it may be a P-38 however.

 

I agree with him as well. WW2 has been done to death and if you're in the mood for more, I suggest giving IL2:BoS/BoM/XxX a look. Its damage modeling and AI (they use same FM/DM as players) are far superior to what DCS offers. Additionally, it is sold as a complete package instead of as single planes with no relevant ground units or AI planes to go with them. As such, I'd like to see DCS focus on post WW2 combat aircraft. DCS falls a little short on Korean war planes for the same reasons it falls short with WW2, but unlike WW2, there isn't a competing CFS around so I'll take what I can get. But where DCS really shines is in the more modern arena. The graphics, physics and AI work best with various sensors and guided missiles. DCS should stick with what it's good at rather than trying to be everything to everyone.

 

With all that said, I'm fairly certain one of the 2 unannounced planes is from WW2. I just hope they don't fall into the trap of doing a whole lot of WW2 stuff and skipping all the cold war and modern stuff. The WW2 crowd on here maybe vocal, but repeated polls have shown they represent a tiny minority, most want more modern aircraft.

[Wizard_03]

DCS really shines is in the more modern arena. The graphics, physics and AI work best with various sensors and guided missiles. DCS should stick with what it's good at rather than trying to be everything to everyone

Well I think your right most people play DCS for the modern aspect like A-10 and FC3 Black Shark ect. But to make a model as realistic as A-10 or F-18 literally takes years even for a professional team of Devs. But relatively simple WW2 planes, where there is a whole lot of data mind you on them, is far more easy to produce quickly. Plus I think its nice having a verity of things to mess around with, like the 190 or 51 but hopefully if people rally support DCS will the best simulator for everything, ww2, Vietnam, Cold war, whatever. But I understand their reasoning for releasing old school stuff, in trying to keep people interested whilest we wait for Hornet, Mirage, Typhoon, and Tomcat.

[Badger1-1]

Dont get me wrong here, I love WW2 Planes, I flew Il2 since it started and now the BoS Version, but DCS just doesnt offer a good "feeling" for Visual Combat..YET, maybe.

 

But for now, Radar is a must have OR you fly A2G(which many do)

 

So the Visual Spotting needs to be improved and MAYBE this will be done with EDGE.

[Wizard_03]

Dont get me wrong here, I love WW2 Planes, I flew Il2 since it started and now the BoS Version, but DCS just doesnt offer a good "feeling" for Visual Combat..YET, maybe.

 

But for now, Radar is a must have OR you fly A2G(which many do)

 

So the Visual Spotting needs to be improved and MAYBE this will be done with EDGE.

 

Yeah that's true, well with the addition of FC3 and Mig21 and the WW2 friends, were sorta just now exploring A2A, but Flanker and lock on were all about that, but DCS was really meant for CAS hence A-10 and KA-50 So I'm sure that with edge, NTTR, and F-18C they are going to focus more on the A2A aspect, and with that hopefully improved visual spotting.

[ChoSeungWan]

Right now I'd say it's meant for flying seeing as missiles aren't modeled and bombs don't have shrapnel. Still better than anything else.

[Farlander]

Right now I'd say it's meant for flying seeing as missiles aren't modeled and bombs don't have shrapnel. Still better than anything else.

 

Missiles aren't modeled?

 

 

Anyways... I do not have anything against ww2 planes in this game, but i do fear that it's going to flood over because its easier to make them. And looking at all the upcoming ww2 planes that are approaching so fast is nerve wracking for my wallet unless the price per module goes down.

[AceRevo]

One word: COMBAT! What does that mean to yall? Most warbirds have seen far more combat then most modern fighter smh..

 

I wont go further on this, and it really shouldnt be that hard to understand why DCS should have everything you'd want within a combat simulator.. A pool large enough for EVERYONE, if you want DCS to stay alive for a long time and improve with it!

[NeilWillis]

If you want to play games, get IL2, and admire the wonderful damage modelling. If you want to fly close renditions of real world aircraft, then it simply doesn't cut the mustard.

 

Visibility needs attention in DCS World, very true. However, to say it should concentrate on one genre simply because it is lacking in some areas is missing the point.

 

It is a sandbox, into which aircraft are added, and that can mean anything from a Bleriot to a B2 bomber. What restricts it is the availability of licencing and data, nothing else.

 

Does it need improvements - hell yes - but then again it is still far far better than anything else on the market for all its gaps at present.

 

Why should it be restricted by your bias simply because you want to play games and IL2 works for you? Pick any number of experienced fliers from IL2 BOS and sit them in the Fw190 D9 here for the first time, and see how long it takes them to get it into the air. There is simply no comparison between the two, and yes, I do have both.

 

So, first, see it for what it is, and stop trying to use comparisons that simply don't match up. And then, stop trying to compartmentalise the sand box simply to suit your own viewpoints. It can, is, and should be, covering all periods. The developers are working towards a goal, and it will take a while before it reaches all its objectives, but that doesn't detract from it being streets ahead of the rest.

 

Nothing else covers WW2, or anything else for that matter, to the detail DCS World does. It is however still evolving, and will continue to do so, hopefully for years to come. It makes the other combat "sims" feel like they belong in amusement arcades - to me at least, and there is far far more to come.

 

Everyone has preferences, just don't try to imply that only you should get what you think you want here. WW2, Korea, Cold War, 4th Gen, all have their place here, and quite rightly so.

[Farlander]

If you want to play games, get IL2, and admire the wonderful damage modelling. If you want to fly close renditions of real world aircraft, then it simply doesn't cut the mustard.

 

Visibility needs attention in DCS World, very true. However, to say it should concentrate on one genre simply because it is lacking in some areas is missing the point.

 

It is a sandbox, into which aircraft are added, and that can mean anything from a Bleriot to a B2 bomber. What restricts it is the availability of licencing and data, nothing else.

 

Does it need improvements - hell yes - but then again it is still far far better than anything else on the market for all its gaps at present.

 

Why should it be restricted by your bias simply because you want to play games and IL2 works for you? Pick any number of experienced fliers from IL2 BOS and sit them in the Fw190 D9 here for the first time, and see how long it takes them to get it into the air. There is simply no comparison between the two, and yes, I do have both.

 

So, first, see it for what it is, and stop trying to use comparisons that simply don't match up. And then, stop trying to compartmentalise the sand box simply to suit your own viewpoints. It can, is, and should be, covering all periods. The developers are working towards a goal, and it will take a while before it reaches all its objectives, but that doesn't detract from it being streets ahead of the rest.

 

Nothing else covers WW2, or anything else for that matter, to the detail DCS World does. It is however still evolving, and will continue to do so, hopefully for years to come. It makes the other combat "sims" feel like they belong in amusement arcades - to me at least, and there is far far more to come.

 

Everyone has preferences, just don't try to imply that only you should get what you think you want here. WW2, Korea, Cold War, 4th Gen, all have their place here, and quite rightly so.

 

I don't believe anyone here has said that their opinion should be the only opinion :P

Other than that i completely agree. 1+

[Tirak]

Missiles aren't modeled?

 

He means properly. Check out the Missile Mod, they've got some really cool information about it.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131806

[some1]

 

Nothing else covers WW2, or anything else for that matter, to the detail DCS World does.

 

As of now, DCS does not cover WWII at all, just 3 warbirds flying over modern Crimea in an engine that was not designed for close dogfighting (visibility issues, ai issues, damage issues, fps issues and so on).

 

There's a bit more to cover a subject like this than a nicely modelled airplane with a clickable cockpit and difficult to fly FM.

[Solty]

Will they ever reveal it? Its been some time now. At least give us more clues :)

Edited May 18, 2015 by Solty

[Cobra847]

Will they ever reveal it? Its been some time now. At least give us more clues :)

 

No.

[ESA_maligno]

I sincerely believe that the company is able to introduce DCSW, maps, aircraft modules, objects on land, boats, etc ..., the period of WWII, will attract the great community that are currently in the IL2 series.

 

It's just my opinion.

 

And because the learning period (both as in reality as in the simulation) is much lower for WWII aircraft sales capacity will be higher.

Remember, there were pilots in WWII for example, flew from P40 up to a P51, P47 .... going through, the ability to acquire several modules and fly with them with an apprenticeship of two months media, can not compare with purchase F18, spending a year learning to use it with a good level, then go to F14 (two years), then move to a MiG31 (two years ....), comparing acquisition capability in both cases ...., business is in the WWII. Unless someone wants to buy them and have them in your PC ... hangar mode .....

 

Another thing is that some users may not want to develop in WWII module DCSW .... that's another discussion.

 

It's just my opinion.

[Roadrunner]

if you want to find out about a japanese WW2 bird, you might try a different way.

 

let's see, the leatherneck website tells us some locations from the team, maybe even the ED forum does like cobra's location note does.

 

so now you may think: "most will do a WW2 bird if they can get their hands on it".

 

now you might take those locations, see what museums are in acceptable range and check what birds they have.

 

maybe you find some japanese WW2 birds that fit ;)

 

or this idea might be totaly wrong :P

 

regards,

RR

[ChoSeungWan]

No.

Your new av...

 

http://imgur.com/vSa6fc8

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RB_04

 

So the gear is from the Saab 32 Lansen?

 

EDIT: I swear you just removed some letters from the av after this post :megalol:

Edited May 18, 2015 by ChoSeungWan

[MBot]

Your new av...

 

http://imgur.com/vSa6fc8

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RB_04

 

So the gear is from the Saab 32 Lansen?

 

EDIT: I swear you just removed some letters from the av after this post :megalol:

 

 

Nice find! How did you do that?

 

So modern airplane + air-ground radar + HUD + RB 04 = AJ37 Viggen?

 

The gearstrut is still probably from the WWII aircraft.

Edited May 18, 2015 by MBot

[Roadrunner]

not bad cho, avatar is fitting quite good, grey control surfaces, white line, and of course the TR....

 

[PB4Tazman]

LOL

 

I was just about to post "No pressure" to Cobra!

 

Cheers!

[ChoSeungWan]

Nice find! How did you do that?

 

So modern airplane + air-ground radar + RB 04 = AJ37 Viggen?

 

The gearstrut is still probably from the WWII aircraft.

Yeah maybe you're right! Air to ground radar on a cold war strike aircraft would be a day one buy for me. And anti ship missiles? That opens up so much.

[ESA_maligno]

I do not understand why not make an official announcement .. ; unless they are planes IA .....

 

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

Cobra reduced the size of the picture, before completely TRYC was read .....

Edited May 18, 2015 by ESA_maligno

[ChoSeungWan]

New new av confirms it's a saab right? :P

[Roadrunner]

i think it goes into the right direction, think about it:

 

hint:

- F-14 with very cold oceanic theater

- this anti ship missile used on swedish aircraft

- F-14 & lansen/viggen in service at the same time

 

it would all fit together in an norwegian sea scenario :)

[ChoSeungWan]

i think it goes into the right direction, think about it:

 

hint:

- F-14 with very cold oceanic theater

- this anti ship missile used on swedish aircraft

- F-14 & lansen/viggen in service at the same time

 

it would all fit together :)

I wonder if we get a Whiskey on the Rocks gone sour scenario? :)