ED module selection process

[Nemesis44UK]

Hi everyone,

 

I'm dipping back into DCS after a long while away.

 

I get occasional emails and I get really excited to see which new module is being released. Then I get disappointed. There are (to my mind) some real strange decisions going on.

 

For example:

 

I hope for MIL MI-24 Hind*, we get the MI-8 (what?)

I hope for Cobra gunship, we get the Huey (fair one)

I hope for the record-breaking Lynx, we get the Gazelle (which hasn't done anything).

 

Add to that the fairly weird selections of the F5, F86, MIG 15, MIG 21, Albatross, Hawk and Aviojet.

 

I'm sorry, but is anyone really clamouring for these modules in place of fan favourites such as the F-14, F16, F-117, FA-18, AH-64 Apache, MI-24, Eurofighter Typhoon or even the Comanche?

 

There seems to be a wealth of well known, well respected aircraft out there with tonnes of research material available, yet have never been simmed to the depth of DCS.

 

Instead, we get a pair of cold war fighters and a bunch of planes that no one but afficionadoes even know exist. (I'm excluding the MIG-21).

 

So, to ask my question - how do ED select which modules they are going to do? I'm assuming licencing fees are astronomical for the more well-known planes, which must have an impact.

 

*My all time favourite helicopter and the most recent sim to cover it is probably Digital Integration's "Hind" - about twenty years ago.

[BIGNEWY]

A few of the aircraft's you mention are being developed.

 

But if you want, as you say " simmed to the depth of DCS " it takes time, and we are not talking months, we are talking years of development.

 

We all have to be patient.

[Cibit]

I feel your doing huge disservice to both Polychops and Belsimtek regarding the choice of choppers.

Also these are 3rd parties developing things off there own bat and ED has little to do with the aircraft they choose to develop.

 

Personal wishlists are neither here nor there unless you choose to start up a project yourself. Then you can model whatever you like

[FSKRipper]

Hi everyone,

 

I'm dipping back into DCS after a long while away.

 

I get occasional emails and I get really excited to see which new module is being released. Then I get disappointed. There are (to my mind) some real strange decisions going on.

 

For example:

 

I hope for MIL MI-24 Hind*, we get the MI-8 (what?)

I hope for Cobra gunship, we get the Huey (fair one)

I hope for the record-breaking Lynx, we get the Gazelle (which hasn't done anything).

 

Add to that the fairly weird selections of the F5, F86, MIG 15, MIG 21, Albatross, Hawk and Aviojet.

 

I'm sorry, but is anyone really clamouring for these modules in place of fan favourites such as the F-14, F16, F-117, FA-18, AH-64 Apache, MI-24, Eurofighter Typhoon or even the Comanche?

 

There seems to be a wealth of well known, well respected aircraft out there with tonnes of research material available, yet have never been simmed to the depth of DCS.

 

Instead, we get a pair of cold war fighters and a bunch of planes that no one but afficionadoes even know exist. (I'm excluding the MIG-21).

 

So, to ask my question - how do ED select which modules they are going to do? I'm assuming licencing fees are astronomical for the more well-known planes, which must have an impact.

 

*My all time favourite helicopter and the most recent sim to cover it is probably Digital Integration's "Hind" - about twenty years ago.

 

The funny part is that all of your examples except the Albatros are made by 3rd party developers and not ED so they have no influence on the decision. Furthermore as it was stated above the F-14 and the F-18 are in development.

Regarding your other ideas, the AH-64 was developed but it stopped due to a commercial agreement with the military. The Comanche is nothing more than a prototype and I have serious doubts you will find enough reliable sources of Information.

[Silver_Dragon]

Hi everyone,

 

I'm dipping back into DCS after a long while away.

 

I get occasional emails and I get really excited to see which new module is being released. Then I get disappointed. There are (to my mind) some real strange decisions going on.

 

For example:

 

I hope for MIL MI-24 Hind*, we get the MI-8 (what?)

I hope for Cobra gunship, we get the Huey (fair one)

I hope for the record-breaking Lynx, we get the Gazelle (which hasn't done anything).

 

Add to that the fairly weird selections of the F5, F86, MIG 15, MIG 21, Albatross, Hawk and Aviojet.

 

I'm sorry, but is anyone really clamouring for these modules in place of fan favourites such as the F-14, F16, F-117, FA-18, AH-64 Apache, MI-24, Eurofighter Typhoon or even the Comanche?

 

There seems to be a wealth of well known, well respected aircraft out there with tonnes of research material available, yet have never been simmed to the depth of DCS.

 

Instead, we get a pair of cold war fighters and a bunch of planes that no one but afficionadoes even know exist. (I'm excluding the MIG-21).

 

So, to ask my question - how do ED select which modules they are going to do? I'm assuming licencing fees are astronomical for the more well-known planes, which must have an impact.

 

*My all time favourite helicopter and the most recent sim to cover it is probably Digital Integration's "Hind" - about twenty years ago.

 

Nemesis44UK check the "unofficial" roadmap for modules on develop / Planned.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

 

Mi-24 and AH-1 has "on hold" by Belsimtek.

F-14 on progress by Leatherneck

F-16 has "in progress" by ED.

F/A-18C has in progress by ED, (test bed of ground radar) expected release late 2016 / 2017 (with carrier operations in the future).

Eurofighter has on progress by a RAF military contract by VEAO to build followed a commercial module.

Comanche never reach IOC and only was a prototype.

 

As other can talk, has two options.

- Wait to ED, Belsimtek / 3rd parties build modules (That take our time and actualy has our propel roadmaps)

- Builld new serious and dedicated develop teams and present to ED a functional prototypes to get 3rd party status and SDK tools.

 

I recommend if you like start a "project" get dedicated personal (3D modellers, C and Lua Coders, Texturizers, etc) get comprehensive info about a start aircraft / helo module and study the documents for MOD / edition in the forum available (That is not a easy task).

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=89164

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116901

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=95985

 

I dont recommend F-16, AH-64, etc, except you have a "strong" team and great quantity of info. Remember a point, before start a project, contact with the aircraft / helo builder if you require some type of license to build a module (legal issues).

Edited August 24, 2016 by Silver_Dragon

[will-]

There just needs to be sticky thread that states why we don't have such modules. ED has to develop the bases 1st. Then the 3rd party's can make them.

 

For example. You will not see any air to ground attack planes that use a air to ground radar, until ED makes the air to ground radar 1st.

[Ragequits]

There just needs to be sticky thread that states why we don't have such modules. ED has to develop the bases 1st. Then the 3rd party's can make them.

 

For example. You will not see any air to ground attack planes that use a air to ground radar, until ED makes the air to ground radar 1st.

 

This is not entirely true. Leatherneck is developing the AJS Viggen, which will (supposedly) realease before the F/A-18. Their are simply coding their own air-to-ground radar. But true some things like multiseat seems to be a thing that ED needs to implement.

[Silver_Dragon]

This is not entirely true. Leatherneck is developing the AJS Viggen, which will (supposedly) realease before the F/A-18. Their are simply coding their own air-to-ground radar. But true some things like multiseat seems to be a thing that ED needs to implement.

 

the L-39 was the "test-bed" of multiseat / multicrew features. Polychop was release the firts "beta" multicrew to the Sa-342 Gazelle some days ago and belsimtek have in progress to implement multicrew on Mi-8 module.

[WinterH]

First off, direct reply to thread title itself : module selection process involves :

- Available declassified information

- Depending on aircraft, permits from IP holders or military authorities of aircraft and it's systems

- Developer's own passion for aircraft type

- If it's profitable to build from a commercial point of view (amount of R&D and resources necessary to fully develop the module vs potential sales it has).

- Lastly, if it fills a niche in DCS

 

Also, majority of the modules you listed are NOT modules by ED, therefore not chosen by ED, rather various third parties that built them, which too follow above listed criteria mostly.

 

Now, if we look on your post :

 

Hi everyone,

 

I'm dipping back into DCS after a long while away.

 

I get occasional emails and I get really excited to see which new module is being released. Then I get disappointed. There are (to my mind) some real strange decisions going on.

 

For example:

 

I hope for MIL MI-24 Hind*, we get the MI-8 (what?)

I hope for Cobra gunship, we get the Huey (fair one)

I hope for the record-breaking Lynx, we get the Gazelle (which hasn't done anything).

 

 

So how is Huey is fair but Mi-8 is "what"? Lynx, not being that much different in role from a Gazelle is OK, but Gazelle itself is not. Gazelle did see service in a very diverse amount of places and conflicts over the world, so I feel like we should chalk this one up to "UK" being in your nickname.

 

Mi-8 and UH-1 are a matching pair of east / west modules, which is a good practice. They also were Belsimtek's first modules, so they wanted to go utility choppers first. Mi-24 and AH-1 require fairly well developed multicrew functionality that is compeletely ready both single and multiplayer, this feature is just barely having it's infancy DCS lately. Last we know of subject, both the Hind and Cobra are still in Belsimtek's pipeline.

 

 

Add to that the fairly weird selections of the F5, F86, MIG 15, MIG 21, Albatross, Hawk and Aviojet.

 

I'm sorry, but is anyone really clamouring for these modules in place of fan favourites such as the F-14, F16, F-117, FA-18, AH-64 Apache, MI-24, Eurofighter Typhoon or even the Comanche?

 

 

I myself MUCH prefer MiG-21, F-5, F-86, MiG-15, various WW II warbirds over F-14, F-117, Typhoon, and even F-16 to a degree. I may get F/A-18C, it is something I am interested in. But like mentioned I much prefer those planes. As for the trainer / light combat aircraft, they also have been something I wanted to fly in a very good sim, and I am glad we got a few. While you haven't listed, I also much, much prefer Viggen over those.

 

This is just me though. Still, I am sure I am not alone in that, AND, even most of the people who would prefer said 4th gen aircraft would still not say no to them. If you see forums of all those modules, you can see they are teeming with activity.

 

Comanche would probably cause a big backlash in community, majority of people here wants things that are realistic, and has at least seen service, even if without action.

 

Finally, among the stuff you have listed :

- F/A-18C

- F-14A & B

- Eurofighter Typhoon

 

Are in development, also ilke mentioned Mi-24 and AH-1 also are very likely. F-16 may or may not be in development, at least military version "The Battle Simulator" website lists it under development, it may or may not arrive to DCS too.

 

 

There seems to be a wealth of well known, well respected aircraft out there with tonnes of research material available, yet have never been simmed to the depth of DCS.

 

 

F-16 and F-18 are probably only 4th gen fighters with real public and declassified first hand information available, and at least one of those are being made. Information being available on web does not usually equal to an airframe being available to being developed. Even old A-4 had to be abandoned from development as IP holder only suggested a financially infavorable solution to developer of module.

 

 

Instead, we get a pair of cold war fighters and a bunch of planes that no one but afficionadoes even know exist. (I'm excluding the MIG-21).

 

So, to ask my question - how do ED select which modules they are going to do? I'm assuming licencing fees are astronomical for the more well-known planes, which must have an impact.

 

*My all time favourite helicopter and the most recent sim to cover it is probably Digital Integration's "Hind" - about twenty years ago.

 

Well, I guess I've answered my opinions for these too somewhere above :).

[will-]

Fsx has f-15e, harrier, f-35, f18, f-4, f-15, and so on... Not buying the whole classified info. Once ED releases the ability to have said systems. We start to see those planes.

 

Would love to test my theory of I had the spare cash and have them develop it for there other battle sim and then see it show up in dcs...

[TorsteinE]

Will, making aircraft for FSX and DCS are two very different things. The first and third party developers for DCS take pride in simulating everything a switch does and how it does it. This requires access to an aircraft and assosciated manuals and documentation, often requiring a license from a manufacturer, especially with modern aircraft. The closest you'll get to what DCS simulates in FSX is something like PMDG's 777 and similar aircraft. These take YEARS to simulate, and are civilian!

 

If you're going to use your spare cash I hope you have a lot of it. Even older aircraft, like the Bf-109 cost over $100K to develop.

[Buzzles]

Fsx has f-15e, harrier, f-35, f18, f-4, f-15, and so on... Not buying the whole classified info. Once ED releases the ability to have said systems. We start to see those planes.

 

Without getting into too much details and as per a posting by a third party dev:

FSX approximates the systems.

DCS actually tries to replicate them through simulation.

 

The latter slams into the classified data and licencing issue (replicating a system basically infringes on IP).