Some info cross posted from the Russian Forums

[GGTharos]

This is NOT a list of what ED /WILL/ do. It is a list of what ED potentially /COULD/ do, so don't look at this and hop on some sort of 'model me this' bandwagon. ED's roadmap is already made up - Ka-50, then a fixed wing, be it the A-10A or F-16 variant.

 

This is Olgerd's list of planes from this post:

 

http://www.forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=281943&postcount=118

 

The lists of aircraft are as follows:

 

1. Not gonna happen for 5-10 years

2. Not enough info to model right now, but maybe soon?

3. Aircraft that can be modelled with a reasonable degree of realism.

 

1. Rafale, Mirage-2000D (2000-5), Eurofighter, F-22A, Gripen, Su-33, Su-24М, MiG-31 (М/BМ), Su-27SМ, A-10C

 

2. Su-24 (не M), MuG-31 (early versions), Mirage-2000C, Mi-24 , Su-25T (early export version), Su-25, F-14A/B/D, AV-8B, Viggen, Draken

 

3. МiG-29 (9-12, 9-13, 9-13S, maybe SМТ), Su-27, F-16 (A, C, CG, CJ, CCIP, MLU M1/M2/M3), F-18A (maybe even C), F-15A/B/C/D, F-15E, A-10A (LASTE 4.0, LASTE 6.0, Suite 2), AH-64A/D, AH-1 (different versions), OH-58D

[britgliderpilot]

I'd be interested to find why the Su33 is classed in the "not for 5-10 years" section - I thought it was really very similar to the Su27 in terms of systems?

 

Is there something that's been overlooked, or should that perhaps read Su35?

 

 

Either way, useful list, cheers :)

[GGTharos]

Apparently there is a lot of secret information concerning the Su-33 still, so who knows :) There might be a lot of missing 'war reserve modes' that it received over the Su-27 ... basically, info on the Su-33 is pretty scarce.

 

In the same thread, Olgerd also replied to the question:

'Are you working on Tank Killers in parallel with Ka-50'?

 

He said, 'We're making slow progress towards this project'.

[Cosmonaut]

Well at least the F18 is being mentioned again as a possibility. :thumbup:

[cheetah]

... AH-64A/D, AH-1 (different versions), OH-58D

 

Pilot/CPG multiplayer fun. Definitely something id enjoy :)

 

... F-18A (maybe even C)

 

Wohoo!

[Fudd]

Can I assume that talk about projects in the future is an indication that BS is almost ready for release?

 

... I know when its done...

[GGTharos]

BS is not ready for release, no ... I couldn't really guess how close it is - as you all know, there's the matter of the new editor, that alone is time consuming.

 

The Helicopter has a lot of subsystems that must be properly modelled and -thoroughly- checked. If you guys saw how much of a pain it is to check ABRIS functionality you'd faint ;D

 

The Ka-50, as a flyable, is a very complex model, and I don't mean in terms of a 3D shape. There are electrical systems, hydraulic systems, fuel pumps, and so on and so forth. I'll let you imagine up what this means for the heli :)

[Stealth_HR]

To all listed planes, I say "yes please".

[Kusch]

This is Olgerd's list of planes from this post:

 

3. Aircraft that can be modelled with a reasonable degree of realism.

 

 

3. МiG-29 (9-12, 9-13, 9-13S, maybe SМТ), Su-27, F-16 (A, C, CG, CJ, CCIP, MLU M1/M2/M3), F-18A (maybe even C), F-15A/B/C/D, F-15E, A-10A (LASTE 4.0, LASTE 6.0, Suite 2), AH-64A/D, AH-1 (different versions), OH-58D

 

I dont see MiG-21 on this list, and other... ;)

[Trident]

Wohoo!

 

I second that about the Hornet. And the Mirage2000C atleast made it into 'might be feasible soon' category :)

 

No word on the MiG-29K though?

[GGTharos]

MiG-29K is probably too classified. I don't think naval operations are on the radar right now. That would be a whole new ball game and I don't think that ED is interest -right at this time-.

[tflash]

Wow, thanks for the info GG! I would already be more than pleased with F/A-18A! I made some SEAD/CAS missions today with Hornet, F-16 and A-10A and indeed F-16/F-18 class aircraft seem the logical choice for a Lockon sequel.

[GGTharos]

I think we for -sure- need an F-16 or F-18 (we know we'll likely get an F-16) for the SEAD role if nothing else.

 

Anyway thank EvilBivol for bringing this information to me. I scour the russian forums myself now and then but babelfish makes it a difficult job.

[Kula66]

There are some GREAT a/c in that cat 3 ... I'd go for all of them and happily pay £200 per copy! But if not, please do them in pairs 27+15, followed 18 or 16 or Mirage + 29, 15E + 24 ...

 

Good news, thanks GGT + EvilBivol

[MBot]

Interesting update on the reference front. I am glad that the Mirage-2000C and Tomcat have advanced in the 'maybe soon' category. Gives us hope to see them sometime in a sim ( from whatever developer ).

 

The 3rd category is surprisingly big. The F-15E there is a real surprise, the other we more or less knew about.

[MBot]

I have been browsing the russian thread with a translator a bit and noticed the following statement:

 

Originally Posted by dinix

Why is not listed MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-27, Su-17?

As if to choose between MiG-29 and MiG-23, the first wins.

 

I am aware that online translators are not perfect and I don't want to put words into Olgerds mounth, but this sounds a bit as if ED is not very interested in doing any older aircraft. While this is not particulary surprising, it is still a little dissapointing for me personaly as I have allways advocated to move the timeframe of the sim back into the cold war ( or create a well defined timeframe in the first place ).

 

 

 

On a different note. Since references are available for aircraft that were considered unthinkable only a couple years ago, I wonder if the reference situation has changed for the Tornado, Jaguar or Mirage F1CR/CT.

[GGTharos]

MBot I think your impression is right on, and I got the same impression with respect to older aircraft.

 

However I don't see anyone really flying the older aircraft when they'll just get pounded on by more up to date fighters.

[MBot]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. In Lock On I always fly Su-25 or MiG-29A and all my online buddys do aswell. Flying to older jets has just so much more charm. And for us ground pounders competiveness doesn't realy matters that much. I would sure as hell enjoying bombing to crap out some ground troops in a Su-17 :D

 

And the point with creating a well defined timeframe is that age doesn't matter. In a 1985 cold war sim, the "old" MiG-23 is competitive against "old" F-16A, because they weren't old then :) If you see what I mean.

But anyway, this doesn't seem relevant as ED wont make a historical or semi-historical sim.

[SwingKid]

Thanks for the update.

 

as you all know, there's the matter of the new editor, that alone is time consuming.

 

I think I missed this topic - do you have a link? What was said about this?

 

-SK

[GGTharos]

Here SK.

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=20432&highlight=mission+editor

[Pilotasso]

BS is not ready for release, no ... I couldn't really guess how close it is - as you all know, there's the matter of the new editor, that alone is time consuming.

 

The Helicopter has a lot of subsystems that must be properly modelled and -thoroughly- checked. If you guys saw how much of a pain it is to check ABRIS functionality you'd faint ;D

 

The Ka-50, as a flyable, is a very complex model, and I don't mean in terms of a 3D shape. There are electrical systems, hydraulic systems, fuel pumps, and so on and so forth. I'll let you imagine up what this means for the heli :)

 

Well, next time you should discuss with them, for the next project if such in depth of secondary apects of aircraft operation should be modeled with that precision. With a credible simplification you can get much much less time wasted for and effect the player will rarely even notice it.

 

FM sensor and weapons modeling, is of paramaount importance. Anything else will only be noticed with secondary mission aspects and IMHO would be a shame to delay the project for years after the difficulty those systems present to coding.

[GGTharos]

Well, next time you should discuss with them, for the next project if such in depth of secondary apects of aircraft operation should be modeled with that precision. With a credible simplification you can get much much less time wasted for and effect the player will rarely even notice it.

 

Um ... no. That's their plan, not mine, and I have no real impacton it. Besides, I like the way all the systems are modelled. This means propagating damage and so on, hopefully.

 

FM sensor and weapons modeling, is of paramaount importance. Anything else will only be noticed with secondary mission aspects and IMHO would be a shame to delay the project for years after the difficulty those systems present to coding.

 

 

Yes well, everyone else is workingon them too, and they -were- present in JF18, so if ED wishes to be competitive -and- realistic, they must model all these things to some degree.

 

They intend to model MORE than just an airborne shooter, and as such all those secondary systems are required for the flight simulation.

 

That's my opinion.

[Pilotasso]

That also means that they are going to model much less planes like LOMAC. just 1 per side...or 2? Can they do it?

[GGTharos]

They're putting in the basis of all this code right now. Once they start reusing it, it'll be faster I imagine.

[Pilotasso]

It will be interesting to follow this, Personaly Im crossing my fingers for F-16 :D (though I would be happy with the hornet as well)

 

Infact I hope the other side gets Flanker. It will make things all the more exciting :D