FAQ: VEAO Typhoon for DCS World

[VTJS17_Fire]

Only A2A is boring.

Than, you didn't fought air to air combat on a higher level, such as many vs. many. And I don't think of airquakes at public servers. I mean coordinated fights with a flight (4 ship) or more, which work together. ;)

 

 

As we like realism, we prefer real Tasks, for the planes?

As pilots actually fought an "Air combat" in the Gulf War to my knowledge.

 

So apart from a nice red Flag now and then, the realistic scenario would be pretty boring?

So, you like realism? Ok. You get an simulated aircraft from 2007 (?, IIRC). Do a little research and look, what the tiffy could handle at this time and with this Tranche/Block. Maybe, use one of the open-door days at one of the several airbases in Germany and talk to the pilots.

 

Our own (German) Eurofighter couldn't use A/G munitions until 2014/5, if I remember correct (see Flug Revue). I don't know exactly when the britisch Tiffy had it's A/G debut in combat operations, but as someone wrote before, they were limited, as well.

 

 

I and may be a lot of others prefer deep strike missions over flying in circles.

No idea, what you understand by air combat, but flying CAP is only one of their missions. You can perform QRA, Sweeps, Escort, Intercepts and so on.

 

CAP is only boring, if nothing happens. But Operation Southern Watch/ Northern Watch are done. :D

 

I know one of the Tiffy pilots at Wittmund and believe me, they find air to air combat anything but boring. They are happy, if they can fly BFM/DACT all the day, every day. That's real. And you like it real, right? :)

[QuiGon]

Public capability vs what VEAO will be allowed to model will be different. For example I point you to the A-10 module we have. We know that Laser Guided Mavericks exist. We even have, in publicly sourced documents, a good understanding of how it works. However we do not have the option to use it in game anymore because ED was instructed to remove it by the US ANG. Just because we have good numbers and public statements about a capability, does not mean it will be modeled.

 

This!!

 

@microvax

I would be very careful with all that open source PR-stuff and its promises. Reality might be different in some aspects. They are two different things. And the DCS module will be another thing as well. So better wait what we really get, before praising all the capabilities that are written on public paper. ;)

[Aginor]

Than, you didn't fought air to air combat on a higher level, such as many vs. many. And I don't think of airquakes at public servers. I mean coordinated fights with a flight (4 ship) or more, which work together.

Nope, still boring. :D

 

Ok,ok, boring might be the wrong word, I admit that. I still like diversity, and A2G adds a completely new level of diversity. Same as A2A. Pure ground pounders are as "boring" if they only have 2-3 weapons available.

 

I am not talking tactics here, (which is what you meant but wasn't what I meant, and what you described is fun only in MP anyway).

 

I am seeing it from a systems point of view:

Roughly speaking: There are two viable weapons, and since DCSW is lacking some important features that are limiting factors in real life you don't even have to really use all that stuff in your cockpit. That makes the "systems switchology" (that I like so much, especially in complex planes like the A-10C) relatively boring. The F-15C shows it. HOJ? Useless. Radar management? Almost useless. There are,like, two modes that make sense for all practical purposes. AIM-7? Useless. AIM-120 is great, but the launch parameters are almost always the same. AIM-9 is a complete no-brainer. Aim it and shoot when the plane tells you.

 

Totally different in A2G, because the diversity of the ground itself, the different types of threats with their different ranges and different placements, the types of the targets that require different weapons and different ways of deliveries. All of that has to be done by the pilot.

 

Now I am really not saying that A2A is easy, if you want to do it properly it is challenging and complex (and to be honest I feel kinda offended by you implying that I don't know A2A fights). But IMO not from a systems point of view.

And even if it is completely different for the upcoming Eurofighter: A2G STILL adds much more systems complexity. I am by no means saying that a pure fighter cannot be fun, but I still think that more is better.

If the selected tranch could do it (even if it was a field mod type of thing) I'd like to have it. No need for fighter vs. ground pounder elitism when we can have both. :)

[VTJS17_Fire]

The F-15C shows it. HOJ? Useless. Radar management? Almost useless. There are,like, two modes that make sense for all practical purposes. AIM-7? Useless. AIM-120 is great, but the launch parameters are almost always the same.

Ok, I see. You didn't. ;)

 

 

AIM-9 is a complete no-brainer. Aim it and shoot when the plane tells you.

Which doesn't mean, it hits nor destroys the target. :)

 

 

Totally different in A2G, because the diversity of the ground itself, the different types of threats with their different ranges and different placements, the types of the targets that require different weapons and different ways of deliveries. All of that has to be done by the pilot.

But at the end, it's an static (or slow moving) target without a chance to escape. Even, it's a human player with CA. What's not boring on such an duel?

 

But I agree with you. The overall complexity with multi-task missions are, what I'm waiting for. And the Hornet we get, will be great for that. :D

[Aginor]

I was talking about systems. Not about dueling or tactics. But I think you got the point by now. ;)

 

And yeah, those are the exact reasons why I am eagerly waiting for the F/A-18C, too.

The thing that makes me sad is that we will get a cool jet from VEAO, but in a version that lacks exactly those things that would make it as interesting as a Hornet. Saying "but it is perfect for the fighter role, why do people complain" doesn't help a bit when what you expect is a cool multi-role jet that could have become your primary sim plane for years if it had all the stuff you are aiming for in your style of flying (which for me is multi-role. I like to do A2A and A2G)

[shagrat]

Which doesn't mean, it hits nor destroys the target. :)

That is correct. I'm still not a big fan of "Dogfight only".

 

But at the end, it's an static (or slow moving) target without a chance to escape. Even, it's a human player with CA. What's not boring on such an duel?

 

But I agree with you. The overall complexity with multi-task missions are, what I'm waiting for. And the Hornet we get, will be great for that. :D

Well, if you go against one(!) target, you are right, but against a well organized frontline, with SAM cover and AAA, that is in strong defensive position, that is a totally different story.

 

Now add teamwork, tactics, and a well planned ingress/egress to the mix and it is as boring as a tight turnfight against a couple MiG-29.

 

If we could have a combination, where you need to fend off the MiGs (maybe 2 jets in the flight drop their ground load and engage the jets, while the other 2 engage the ground target), that is what I remember from EF2000 back in the 90ies.

 

MULTIrole in one platform.

 

Even in one sortie if you do it right.

 

...and just for the record: that is exactly how the Eurofighter Corporation advertises the Typhoon (and of course I am aware it is an advertisement and most, if not all shots of the instruments etc. are... well, lacking reality :D )

 

 

[Pman]

Yeah I am not going to comment on that video other then to chuckle lol.

 

We realize that you want the latest and greatest, I would love to be able to do Brimstones and all the other lovely things but we have to respect the wishes of our partners. The fact that some information is in the public domain does not mean that we are have the authority to simulate in in a publicly available flight sim.

 

So yes there is information on MIDS and all the other systems out there from various sources, some more reliable then others. This doesnt mean we can do them.

 

At most we are talking Paveways and that is it. SEAD and other standoff roles are not in scope for this module.

 

But it will be one kickass A2A platform

 

Pman

[Aginor]

I think we all got that, and it is understandable. As sad as it is.

 

Dumb bombs and Paveways are allright, a possible TGP would be awesome.

But I'd like to repeat QuiGon's question about dumb bombs just to be sure (if you are allowed/able to answer it):

If so, does it have CCIP/CCRP?

[DerekSpeare]

I am ready to purchase the plane in whatever form it's released. I will be happy just to fly it around.

[microvax]

... well wont answer some memelordz here that obviosly didnt get the memo.

 

I know that for some reason MOD/DOD dont like some things implemented, even if a state level attacker would laugh about the peanuts it would cost them to do the same without even caring.

[And most of the stuff I mentioned is stoneage Tiffie capabilites, stuff it was supposed to have since the 90s, so by far no top notch ultra advanced stuff.] So far so good.

 

What I implied all the time is the assumption, that VEAO would not have started developing the typhoon if they didnt get to a agreement with the RAF which would allow them to make an up to A10c standard module for DCS. And I mean if they were developing a meme worthy fc3ish standard plane, really the typhoon should have been released for a year or so by now at least. :D

 

What we get, I dunno, but if it doesnt blast the f15/su27 into orbit in the hands of a competent pilot then the module is simply a meme and I do not expect that. :D

 

And there it is, PMAN said we get a kickass A2A platform. And thats what i am looking forward to. :D

 

Honest question though, how does it look in terms of AIM2000/some kind of datalink, plane identification by Radar/IRST signature and sensor fusion ?

[Pman]

Its looking good actually, We have to write some principal tech for some of the weaponry and its a little early to go into specific behaviors and how they work for the moment :)

 

Datalink is at the core of some of the principal technology in the A2A environment and as development continues we will give more details on the workings within DCS.

 

That's about as much as I can say at the moment ;)

 

Pman

[QuiGon]

Its looking good actually, We have to write some principal tech for some of the weaponry and its a little early to go into specific behaviors and how they work for the moment :)

 

Datalink is at the core of some of the principal technology in the A2A environment and as development continues we will give more details on the workings within DCS.

 

That's about as much as I can say at the moment ;)

 

Pman

 

Sounds good :thumbup:

 

Looking forward to what will come :)

[microvax]

Its looking good actually, We have to write some principal tech for some of the weaponry and its a little early to go into specific behaviors and how they work for the moment :)

 

Datalink is at the core of some of the principal technology in the A2A environment and as development continues we will give more details on the workings within DCS.

 

That's about as much as I can say at the moment ;)

 

Pman

 

Okay that sounds like we get some kind of datalink, micro happy. :D

Tiffie bought. :D

[shagrat]

We realize that you want the latest and greatest, I would love to be able to do Brimstones and all the other lovely things but we have to respect the wishes of our partners. The fact that some information is in the public domain does not mean that we are have the authority to simulate in in a publicly available flight sim.

 

So yes there is information on MIDS and all the other systems out there from various sources, some more reliable then others. This doesnt mean we can do them.

 

At most we are talking Paveways and that is it. SEAD and other standoff roles are not in scope for this module.

 

Pman

...:cry: I just asked for a TGP. Not even standoff weapons, just a TGP, pretty please.

 

I mean, can't the MOD just have a look at the DCS: A-10C TGP? It is old, seems to be no problem with the US military and is pretty much not revealing any magic, right?

[QuiGon]

...:cry: I just asked for a TGP. Not even standoff weapons, just a TGP, pretty please.

 

I mean, can't the MOD just have a look at the DCS: A-10C TGP? It is old, seems to be no problem with the US military and is pretty much not revealing any magic, right?

 

I think discussing simple stuff like this with officials from the MoD (or wherever) is not as simple as it might sound. I imagine it can be quite frustrating sometimes.

[Aginor]

Ok, time for a shocking statement by me:

I'd even be generous with the realism and say: The Litening II that's in the game right now for the A-10C would be enough for me. No need for a Litening III (whatever its capabilities might be), but perhaps you could license the TGP from ED if that's possible.

 

Of course it isn't the end of the world if we have no TGP if we can do it M2000C style.

 

Will I buy a Eurofighter even if it hasn't A2G capabilities? Perhaps. I'd even say it is pretty likely. Still....

[QuiGon]

Ok, time for a shocking statement by me:

I'd even be generous with the realism and say: The Litening II that's in the game right now for the A-10C would be enough for me. No need for a Litening III (whatever its capabilities might be), but perhaps you could license the TGP from ED if that's possible.

 

Of course it isn't the end of the world if we have no TGP if we can do it M2000C style.

 

Will I buy a Eurofighter even if it hasn't A2G capabilities? Perhaps. I'd even say it is pretty likely. Still....

 

Even if they could just take the TGP from EDs A-10C, it might be against VEAOs contracts with the MoD, RAF, or whoever. So let's just wait and see what we will get and be happy that we will get such an advanced aircraft at all :)

[Aginor]

Yeah, I am aware of that. I meant it from a technical point of view, because I assume that the work of implementing such a system is also a factor for VEAO.

But I agree that waiting and keeping our fingers crossed is probably the only thing we can do now.

[hubson]

In terms of A2A, does this radar version have some kind of "expand" mode (raid assessment?) for sorting out tight grouped targets? Also, does it allow to sort targets easily (one click targets toggle, creating shooting list). Useful tools for kicking asses.

I think regardless of capabilities, EF is going to be one of most popular modules anyway. Can't wait!

Edited August 16, 2016 by hubson
Typo

[Pman]

In terms of A2A, does this radar version have some kind of "expand" mode (raid assessment?) for sorting out tight grouped targets? Also, does it allow to sort targets easily (one click targets toggle, creating shooting list). Useful tools for kicking asses.

I thik regardless of capabilities, EF is going to be one of most popular modules anyway. Can't wait!

 

Its a little early to go into Radar specifics :)

 

Besides its Chris' bird to announce, I am not going to steal all his thunder, big grey noisey thing ;)

 

Pman

[hubson]

Fair enough, thanks.

[PrototypeBayu8]

Question:

Are you going to add some features to the eurofighter as updates ?

 

If yes:

what types of additional features ?

 

If no:

Can you at least tell us what is possible for you guys to add ?

[rajdary]

The fact that the eurofighter module is going to be mostly A2A, will give us the chance to get proficient with it and by that time Veao hopefully will unveil a new upgrade to the module or a new module itself with a fair amount of A2G:D lets keep positive, at least there is a eurofighter of some sort coming:thumbup:

[Xenovia]

Maybe VEAO will make it so they add A-G features later on like how the real Typhoon did.

[Cedaway]

.... No need for a Litening III (whatever its capabilities might be),...

 

Litening III capabilities (Link to a PDF);)