For next Fast jet Study SIM, what would you like it to be?

[Pilotasso]

Thats a smart atitude. Next time dont forget to watch the political campaign before you jump directly to the voting.

[Galaad]

Thats a smart atitude. Next time dont forget to watch the political campaign before you jump directly to the voting.

 

Better for you to say all thinks when you make a poll...

"political campaign" ??? explain, please

[Pilotasso]

Better for you to say all thinks when you make a poll...

 

I did but not all of it in 1 post. Thats my point. If others had the same doubt why are you too lazy to read?

 

 

"political campaign" ??? explain, please

 

metafore.

[Pilotasso]

no, hes just too lazy to read. :)

[Trident]

Just so yall know...

The french do build em right too.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=96ddeb2833&c=1

 

I wouldn't mind a Mirage2000C (as an add-on) either, I like that jet alot! But first things first ;) I'd sure prefer it to a Falcon (the USAF variety, not the Mirage's civilian sister ;) ) though.

[Laud]

More flyables the better:thumbup:

 

Usually it's: The more flyables the worse quality. The idea of 2 planes, 1 from each cold war party plus (maybe) 2 further planes seems to be absolutely the best concept.

 

What I further don't understand is why so many people voted for F-16 vs Mig plus F-18 vs Mig. Why only one type of fighter (even if they're of different standards) for the russian side?? The Su-27 (especially the SK/SM(?) or Su-30) is such a great plane which I would really miss!

[Pilotasso]

Usually it's: The more flyables the worse quality. The idea of 2 planes, 1 from each cold war party plus (maybe) 2 further planes seems to be absolutely the best concept.

 

What I further don't understand is why so many people voted for F-16 vs Mig plus F-18 vs Mig. Why only one type of fighter (even if they're of different standards) for the russian side?? The Su-27 (especially the SK/SM(?) or Su-30) is such a great plane which I would really miss!

 

its unlikely that the lates standard in indian and russian services will ever have their info disclosed enough to simulate them. Thats why I didnt go too wild with the avaiable options.

 

Might as well include the F-22 raptor or the Eurofighter because at least with those types theres avaiable info on their basic MFD/radar modes (that is, by early 90's specs).

 

F-22 ADF did an awsome job in that even if at the time I wronlgy believed that those avionics simutated were totaly arcade. It turns out the real plane was indeed that way even if the current models in service may include 3 times more modes and MFD funtions we dont know. Thats still better than the Su-27SM/30. we dont know at all but pretty engine represented dials in 2D.

[SUBS17]

I got a hunch that we will never see as many fliables as in LOMAC.

Next few SIM's will probably feature less, like 4 or 2 aircraft at a time.

 

There were a few sentiments left in the forums by ED testers/personell that they will want a smaller terrain like Israel or some other place of the mediterranean/middle east.

 

The purpose is to cut on time needed for terrain development and large collections of fliable aircraft to focus on a dynamic campaign, cockpits and FM of the planes and missiles.

 

ED has stated that the terrain was what robbed off the most of their time to get LOMAC launched. They wont admit this but IMHO its also aimed at having the SIM more complete than LOMAC was inside the objectives drawn at start.

 

Thats not what I read, I read whole world terrain for their fighter project. Having a sim with just 1 flyable aircraft and regular addons released afterwards would be better.

[SUBS17]

hmmm...Pilotasso, this poll is nonsens

what do you do with su25/su25t/ka50. Do you think that Ed will forget this planes, after lockon ?

I think No. I hope no.

And 2 planes is to much time and ressources (and 2 planes for an add-on) ,lol, its a joke

What we have have actually with AFM and good avionic .. su25/su25t, soon ka50 with advanced avionic

Then A better choice is

1) a western counterpart a10(for exemple)

or, and its better,

2) a russian multirole fighter mig29sm/k, su 27smt and then we have a complete simulator

 

oops, sorry for my english, lol ...

 

Those aircraft are in the sim before fighter called Tank Killers.

[f-16fighting.falcon]

I'd like to see F/A-18, F-16 and newest MiG-29SMT as flyable. It'd be good sim:).

[Pilotasso]

Thats not what I read, I read whole world terrain for their fighter project. Having a sim with just 1 flyable aircraft and regular addons released afterwards would be better.

 

The first news about the fast jet SIM included both the MIG and the F-16, because the mig has already somethings in common with the current one in LOMAC and the f-16 has a wide array of info about it.

 

ED could very well include the 2 as they seemed to make us understand, plus theill have more time to do it than an addon such as black sharks Ka-50.

[GGTharos]

I'm not sure why people are for 'two lights and two lights' ... You just want more planes with 'similar capability', naval ops aside - forget naval ops, right now ED doesn't care to simulate naval ops as they should be AFAIK.

[Stealth_HR]

What I further don't understand is why so many people voted for F-16 vs Mig plus F-18 vs Mig. Why only one type of fighter (even if they're of different standards) for the russian side?? The Su-27 (especially the SK/SM(?) or Su-30) is such a great plane which I would really miss!

 

Here's why I voted for it: the F-16 versus MiG-29 (say, B or C) seems a natural choice since they're both melee fighters and excel in turn fights, and they can both carry A2G payloads if neccessary. On the other hand, the MiG-29K has different enough standards to warrant a different flight model and a different weapons model (due to A2Sh weaponry), and again, it shares carrier-launch capability with the F-18, making for a broadened in-game arena, not to mention the F-18 does, like the F-16, act better in the close-combat arena.

[GGTharos]

Yep ... and again ... you have a whole bunch of 'similar' fighters. :) The only difference there is naval ops, which is pretty much a non-issue given the lack of attention that part has received.

 

I suppose some people are content with 'similar fighters' :)

[HungaroJET]

NAVAL OPS !

 

1st OF ALL : F-14x FLEET DEFENDER ! ! !

 

ps. ...x means > up2U E.D. which version

 

BTW...thx 4 the FUNtastic 3 years in LOMAC :D

[ViperEagle]

I'm going to be honest,

 

I think that a F-14 sim, while fantastic, would be somewhat dated now. Yes I know "but WW2 sims have done great!" yes, they have. I simply think perhaps we need to look forward instead of back. Mind you, this is coming from someone who has an almost fanatical love for the F-14 in all it's forms. I simply have to wonder if perhaps we should concentrate on something that is new and in-service now. Mind you, I would love it to death, with a kickass A2A and A2G role.

 

Personally I would LOVE to see a F/A-18 E-F sim, simply because it IS current, much like what ED has done with Blackshark, it is what is popular at the time. For the F model there would have to be an AI script for the backseater, but not a whole lot.

 

I dare anyone to say they wouldnt love flying this badboy in a game:

 

[Stealth_HR]

Yep ... and again ... you have a whole bunch of 'similar' fighters. :) The only difference there is naval ops, which is pretty much a non-issue given the lack of attention that part has received.

 

I suppose some people are content with 'similar fighters' :)

What can I say, I'm a simple man. A flight-sim with just Hogs and Frogs would suit me fine. :thumbup:

[Shaman]

I'd vote Su-27/30/27SMK... with AFM as next sim, and then some addon...

 

but there's no such option so I voted for F-15E cuz since Jane's there was no F-15E sim.

[SUBS17]

I'm going to be honest,

 

I think that a F-14 sim, while fantastic, would be somewhat dated now. Yes I know "but WW2 sims have done great!" yes, they have. I simply think perhaps we need to look forward instead of back. Mind you, this is coming from someone who has an almost fanatical love for the F-14 in all it's forms. I simply have to wonder if perhaps we should concentrate on something that is new and in-service now. Mind you, I would love it to death, with a kickass A2A and A2G role.

 

Personally I would LOVE to see a F/A-18 E-F sim, simply because it IS current, much like what ED has done with Blackshark, it is what is popular at the time. For the F model there would have to be an AI script for the backseater, but not a whole lot.

 

I dare anyone to say they wouldnt love flying this badboy in a game:

 

 

 

There is a good Hornet addon in development for FSX, maybe ED could possibly have a look(such a waste not being in a sim like EDs)

 

 

I saw this in Sim HQ

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=101;t=002835

 

There would be only one problem though the Superhornets radar absolutely kicks ass IRL, there would alot of angry Mig drivers out there as this bird can engage 8 air targets at once.(unless they opted for an SU35 which would even things out)

[D-Scythe]

There would be only one problem though the Superhornets radar absolutely kicks ass IRL, there would alot of angry Mig drivers out there as this bird can engage 8 air targets at once.(unless they opted for an SU35 which would even things out)

 

The APG-73? It's a great radar definitely, but it's smaller size compared to the radars on the F-14/15 and new Su-27/MiG-31s still puts it at a disadvantage.

 

Anyway, wasn't the entire F-15C fleet fitted with APG-63V1 radars (an update with APG-73 tech) in the early/mid-90s? IMO, the APG-70/63V1, the APG-71 and the Zaslon phased array radar are probably the best radars to be found in any fighter within the timeframe of LOMAC.

 

You don't need the APG-73 to get a bunch of angry MiG flyers ;)

[ViperEagle]

Actually, around this timeframeish, due to the fact that the timeframe has been porked to hell and back by the addition of the KA-50 and the Su-25T, there might even be V2 radars on the Eagles.

[brewber19]

I voted for Harrier vs Mig because, imho.....

 

• Harrier has never been simulated with any serious degree of fidelity
  
• Its multirole
  
• Its not space-age....its a very "hands-on" aircraft, like the Frog
  
• Classified material should be "less" of an issue compared to other options listed.
  
• It opens up interesting mission scenarios
  
• Its one of my favourite aircraft (yup, I'm a Brit)

I'd like the Jaguar and Tornado as well but...that'll never happen, its not a "RAF" sim afterall ;)

 

My second choice, if I were allowed one, would be the F18/Mig29K.

 

I'll get back in my box now, crashing my Frog in to mountains etc, waiting to do the same in BS ;)

[Tompax]

Frankly, no. And I'm not trying to mock you or start a flame war or something, but F/A-18E/F wouldn't really be my first choice. Gimme an F-14 or an Su-24, and I'll be happy...

[Alfa]

 

There would be only one problem though the Superhornets radar absolutely kicks ass IRL, there would alot of angry Mig drivers out there as this bird can engage 8 air targets at once.(unless they opted for an SU35 which would even things out)

 

Subs,

 

The current "Superhornet radar" is the same as that of the F/A-18C - namely the AN/APG-73 for which the capabilities are all but an exact match to those of the N010M of the MiG-29K - same type, same antenna size, similar operating modes, similar weapons capabilities. :)

 

Aside from the common naval multirole fighter theme, similar size, payload and operating range, the above is in fact one of the best arguments for a F-18 versus MiG-29K - you wont find a closer match in terms of systems between any US and Russian fighters :) .

 

Besides, I think the ability to "engage 8 targets at once" is something of a misconception in regards to the Hornet - the radar can track 10 targets, "stack" 8 of them for engagement, but AFAIK it can only guide missiles towards two of them simultaneously. For the "Zhuk" radar of the MiG-29K the corresponding figures are: track 10 targets, stack 4 of them for engagement and guide missiles towards two of them simultaneously.

 

P.S. nice shot of the Hornet with the buddy-to-buddy refuelling pack.....the MiG-29K has this capability too("UPAZ" pack) :) .

 

- JJ.

[Dudikoff]

I'm going to be honest,I think that a F-14 sim, while fantastic, would be somewhat dated now. <cut>

I dare anyone to say they wouldnt love flying this badboy in a game:

 

Don't get me started ;)

 

Call me dated, but I for sure see no thrill in flying that fat and slow hi-tech weapons delivery platform. Plus that the VF-103 markings simply don't mix with this overgrown Hornet version (IMHO).

 

Also, modern smart weapons are rather boring because in a way they do most of the work for you. Take for instance an attack on the bridge. In the old, "dumb" weapons days, you needed to go down and dirty making an iron bomb run or to guide LGBs in bad weather exposing yourself to the flak, SAMs, fighter cover, etc. The modern version is: approach from very high altitude, get close to 50 kms (at most), press button since the weapon of choice is already preprogrammed with coordinates, turn back, RTB, the only danger in the matter being not pulling the eject handle while straching yourself from boredom.

 

Now, this is all rather generalized and simplified view at the matter but I hope you get my point.