F35 A/B/C Versions

[Eliree]

heya there guys,

 

i know there was a kickstarter project a few years back to implement the wonderfull F35 into the DCS world and it died because of lack of funding.. however since the real project hasgone further now (and i for a fact have seen the F35-A from the RNLAF in action today at an airshow) we could get the project started again and implement the F35-A and maybe even the B and C version aswell..

 

Greetings, Eliree

[Flagrum]

I am pretty sure that the status of the RL project was not the reason why the kickstarter failed ...

 

But if you want to give it a try, well, set up a kickstarter project ...?

[cichlidfan]

...we could get the project started again and implement the F35-A and maybe even the B and C version aswell..

 

Who is we? That is a lot of work with little, or no, real world data available.

Edited June 11, 2016 by cichlidfan

[Eliree]

thing is that i myself am not good with modeling nor with the DCS coding , i've learned myself some code editing but it's not like i can do this and be happy with the result

 

hence i was more in the key of rousing support here and maybe get the company who tried the first kickstarter to pick it back up or maybe even get eagle dynamics to do it themselfs

Edited June 11, 2016 by Eliree

[Flagrum]

Hrm, so it seems that there is some important part missing in the "we" for a successful resurrection of that idea then.

 

edit:

to be more clear: it was never really the lack of interest that caused the KS to fail. It was rather the lack of confidence that a/that developer could produce a DCS level representation of a F-35. For several reasons. And some of them would still apply, even if ED would do it (i.e. lack of information).

Edited June 11, 2016 by Flagrum

[Eliree]

Hrm, so it seems that there is some important part missing in the "we" for a successful resurrection of that idea then.

 

the point is that i am willing to look into it if i know the project would be welcomed in and stuff

[Flagrum]

the point is that i am willing to look into it if i know the project would be welcomed in and stuff

see my edit of my prev. posting.

[cichlidfan]

the point is that i am willing to look into it if i know the project would be welcomed in and stuff

 

The problem is that most of the things that need looking into are things that the U.S. Government is not going to let you look into.

[Darkbrotherhood7]

Sorry buddy, but I doubt that an DCS level F-35 is possible, and the reason is simple, lack of information and license.

 

Edit: Of course, I would love to see the F-35 in DCS, but at the moment, I think only AI F-35 is possible.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Darkbrotherhood7

[Eliree]

True there guys , you have a point

 

hope to see if in the future though cause the plane is friggin awsome

[Buzzles]

As a person, or even a small group, you have 0% chance of getting information and/or licences for an F35.

It's brand new and barely operational, and when it does finally get properly delivered, it's going to be the premier precision strike aircraft in the airforces that bought it, and for some, it'll also be their premier air-superiority platform as well! Any and all information required to make a study level aircraft will be under lock and key.

 

There's only two companies relating to DCS that have a non-0 chance of even having a discussion about the F-35:

ED and VEAO, who both have had/got contracts for other aircraft/sim-related stuff, with militaries using the F35.

 

You'd probably find they'd have to be asked if they could do an F35 by the respective militaries for that discussion to begin, and that would be for a military only version for sure.

 

In short, chances of getting an F35 in the next 10 years is pretty much 0.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Buzzles

[Rangi]

If someone had good contacts in PRC they could probably get enough info for a DCS level F-35 ;)

[Raynos]

Shouldn't be to hard to model the f35 just make a plane with nothing working

[Hyperion35]

There are good reasons why DCS:World is sorta in a mid-1990s setting. That's about the latest that they're going to be able to get realistic modeling for anything. We should be glad that we've got an F-15C, considering that it's still a frontline air superiority fighter for many allied nations.

 

I'd rather see more focus on 3rd and early 4th gen fighters and attack aircraft, stuff that they can fully model because it's no longer classified, or at least enough of it is declassified to be possible. And since there are new 4+ and 5th gen aircraft that have been put into service recently, it makes that far easier. For example the Swedes are less concerned about realistic modeling of the Viggen now that it's been replaced by the Gripen, and I can't imagine that anyone is going to be upset about the mid-1970s bis version of the MiG-21 being "compromised".

[Home Fries]

It really depends on what is considered "realistic" modeling.

 

In order to do a F-35, we don't need to know exactly how the radar works, or what protocols are used to share data, or the exact RCS of the plane. What we need to know are capabilities; we can model capabilities with the understanding that the "how" under the hood is abstracted due to its classification.

 

We know the big thing on the F-35 (aside from stealth) is the sensor-data fusion that basically displays to both the HMD and a giant monitor that can be customized to display what the pilot wants. How all of that data is acquired and integrated is classified, but it can be abstracted; if the sim knows that the F-35 would have that data, it can provide the data (because it always knows the whole truth), or parts of the data without having to understand how the black box is made. In other words, it doesn't need to model the radar; it needs only to model the capabilities and the output of the radar. The hard part would be learning how the systems integrate from a pilot's perspective, i.e. what do I lose if I get hit here, or if I turn off this switch? NATOPS or a Dash 1 should be able to provide most of that.

[lanmancz]

Well I remember back then during the horrible backlash against this project when the kickstarter was announced that even Wags was saying that "we'd be surprised how much data is actually available". I trust he knows what he's talking about. I think at least some FC level F35 might be possible and even fun. It's a shame it didn't get done.

[Hummingbird]

Just ask the Chinese, they hacked their way to all the F-35's secrets long ago ;)

[PiedDroit]

The problem is that most of the things that need looking into are things that the U.S. Government is not going to let you look into.

This reminded me of this Chinese character in American Dad:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2reh7p

:D

[Vedexent]

True there guys , you have a point

 

hope to see if in the future though cause the plane is friggin awsome

 

If by "in the future", you mean in 30-50 years when it's an old warbird that has been long out of service (and wouldn't stand up against the modern autonomous AI air superiority drones anyways ...) you might have a shot. :pilotfly:

[Ripcord]

Shouldn't be to hard to model the f35 just make a plane with nothing working

 

Yes, but we want DCS quality hi-fi 'inoperability'. The flight model has to be advanced, even if it doesn't really fly.

[cichlidfan]

Yes, but we want DCS quality hi-fi 'inoperability'. The flight model has to be advanced, even if it doesn't really fly.

 

Agreed. Anything that doesn't work must not work realistically. :)

[Vedexent]

Agreed. Anything that doesn't work must not work realistically. :)

 

click the switch, there's a snap, and it falls onto the cockpit floor?

[FoxHoundELite]

i wonder if any Wags or any ED's staff member has plan to add 5th-gen aircrafts (F-22/35, PAK-FA..v...v) to DCS as AI models, it shouldnt be that hard right? Skatezilla already planned to add his Super Hornet AI pack to DCS so i think other high-end planes would be possible