Yak-52B?

[Nero.ger]

great another boring old Prop Plane...

cant wait to not buy this.

[BeR1]

A promise to ed: I will buy it when all the other modules are finished.

[FragBum]

Gotta say I first experienced (near) zero G in a YAk-52, it's surely will be a fun fly in VR. :D

[dali]

Me reading the weekend news......:

 

[David OC]

This will be fun to fly, looking forward to it.:thumbup:

 

The commercial contracts do work the other way around too it seems.:)

www.flymig21.com

[Trueno]

Won't do comparisons since it's been ages since I've last flown any MSFS aircraft, but I think the Yak has got to be as true-to-life as possible regardless. This was an outside contract job and I'm certain the client, whoever they are, knows their stuff and thus wouldn't have accepted anything substandard.

 

So yah, I'm gonna get this bird, rockets or not, because it'll most likely be of high quality. And one can never have too many prop AC in one's hangar anyway 8)

 

:beer:

[Bogey Jammer]

Agreed, same here, Schmidtfire and cichlidfan!!

I may never purchase the DCS Hornet, but this (Yak-52) I would,

or a DCS level WWI aircraft(s), and a Western Font Map, I definitely would!

Thanks Eagle Dynamics Team!!

 

You know, there are other sims for this. It would be irresponsible to ask ED for splitting the workforce and community again while the main core is still waiting in frustration for the main raison d'être of DCS: modern jet combat. Hornet first please.

[cichlidfan]

You know, there are other sims for this. It would be irresponsible to ask ED for splitting the workforce and community again while the main core is still waiting in frustration for the main raison d'être of DCS: modern jet combat. Hornet first please.

 

I happen to agree that modern aircraft should take a priority. However, if a similar situation were to arise where a private contract produced a Sopwith Dolphin or an S.E. 5a then I would certainly enjoy the chance to purchase either. They would be awesome.

[msalama]

It would be irresponsible to ask ED for splitting the workforce

 

But that indeed is the point. Because us the great unwashed didn't ask ED to do (or not do) anything, but a moneyed private customer.

 

You know what? You said you're interested in modern jet combat. So do you have any serious money? Because if you do, why not contact ED and order some goodies for your private enjoyment? Provided that the deal includes us on at least some level too, like with the Yak... :P

[ponhard]

I think this is only good, nice to have a broader set of planes. People tend to forget what dcs really offer to us. I mean which other simulator offers this many planes witch such high quality? And we have a Hornet, Harrier AND a Tomcat on the way. I really don't think this little plane take that much time from merging 2.5. And if it even takes a little time so be it. We have a new plane that lots of people gonna enjoy. Probable even bring some new people to the sim. Thanks Ed! :) Keep up the good work!

[javelina1]

..... or an S.E. 5a then I would certainly enjoy the chance to purchase ......

 

^^^^ THIS! :thumbup:

[msalama]

^^^^ THIS! :thumbup:

 

Ohhh yes. Or how about an Albie D.III? *drool*

[javelina1]

Ohhh yes. Or how about an Albie D.III? *drool*

 

that alone deserves the "around the world and back snap!" :thumbup::lol:

 

[Bogey Jammer]

But that indeed is the point. Because us the great unwashed didn't ask ED to do (or not do) anything, but a moneyed private customer.

 

You know what? You said you're interested in modern jet combat. So do you have any serious money? Because if you do, why not contact ED and order some goodies for your private enjoyment? Provided that the deal includes us on at least some level too, like with the Yak... :P

 

No, let me tell you exactly what the point is: ED made that out of the place module for a private customer, that's OK it's their business. ED makes it available for the public, that's OK too why not, it's a bonus move and it sounds fair depending of the price. Take note that I'm personally not interested at all by such a plane.

Now the problem is this loud sound asking by perverting this context for even more out of the place modules, coming for the loudest part of this community here exposing overenthusiastic attitude reflecting their over-consuming behavior which turns out to be felt as a lack of respect. Like if everyone have to buy whatever stuff is presented to them for bogus reason (because it's the only radial… seriously :doh:…), or like if I have 200k$ to spend for the making of a module of my personal wishlist. Thank you for that stupid suggestion but please talk about the Yak-52 or keep away your WW1 fantasy elsewhere.

[msalama]

:D Indeed!

[mjmorrow]

I happen to agree that modern aircraft should take a priority. However, if a similar situation were to arise where a private contract produced a Sopwith Dolphin or an S.E. 5a then I would certainly enjoy the chance to purchase either. They would be awesome.

 

That would be epic. Maybe Sir Peter Jackson and his crew would be interested in joining up with ED, creating simulated versions of the WW1 planes that are part of the Vintage Aviator LTD Collection? It would be awesome to have a DCS World S.E.5.a study sim add-on.

Edited November 25, 2017 by mjmorrow

[msalama]

for that stupid suggestion but

 

Thank you for taking both me and our shooting the carp too seriously. Do you _honestly_ think ED would divert their resources for an Albie D.III?

 

And no, I'm not going to "keep" my virtual flying fantasies anywhere else. But thanks for asking all the same.

[Jester986]

Man... You guys are terrible. "Work on my wishlist and nothing else!"

[funkyfranky]

Would be nice to see some pics of the interior at some point :)

[zxrex]

I think this will be good for the environment. Everyone should get the Yak. DCS co2 emissions should drop dramatically.

:)

[Spudknocker]

From what I am gathering from the negative response to the Yak-52 is people say it will delay other modules, however I have a response to that.

 

In any software company from Paypal to AAA videogame dev studios to ED, projects are done in stages. Not all teams can work on the same project at the same time. For example if the art and 3D model teams are done with the F/A-18 and the coders are implementing systems; it doesn't make sense for the art and 3D guys to be twiddling their thumbs doing nothing, they can move on to other projects.

 

That is why we see pics of MiG-19 parts from Razbam because the 3D models are done with the AV-8B while the art team and coders are putting finishing touches on it.

 

As for the Yak I think its awesome that ED is taking those assets and making them available to the wider DCS world player base.

 

You have to keep in mind tho that instances where ED has put out commercial sims ie the one at this museum by my home http://pacificcoastairmuseum.org/discover/flight-simulator has to be oversimplified for the general public that is why there is an F/A-18 in the sim there and is even more simple than even our FC3 jets. Its the same thing they did to show off DCS's beautiful cockpits and terrain graphics at E3 2017. Some bloke who's never been to an airshow wont be able to handle even the simplicity of a FC3 aircraft in these types of commercial sims.

 

Long winded but in Summary thanks ED for making the Yak available to the wider DCS audience and the F/A-18 is usable in these watered down commercial sims for aviation "neophytes" but wouldnt be up to par yet for those who demand full fidelity modules here in DCS World.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Spudknocker

[msalama]

Wise words Spud. Upvoting.

[vparez]

I think the most troubling issue for me with all of this is that announcing a project such as Yak, puts an even bigger question mark on what ED's plans and goals are. While I can suspect or even understand motivations of ED for some decisions, none of those motivation nor the decisions themselves are giving me any hope that DCS is going to become a coherent product in any near future.

 

So, I have no beef with any type of an airplane because I need to haz X in my game. Not at all; I own almost all of the modules and enjoy learning about every single plane and helo which has ASM. But! When you are done learning a module, you want to have a well-developed and supported sandbox environment to test yourself and your skills within.

 

This is where DCS fails all of us, whether you want to admit it or not. The sandbox has been neglected for years now. I am not going into the discussion if that is justified or not, I am simply stating a fact to the best of my knowledge. So every time a new module is announced, I consider this future release only from the standpoint of "how does it improve the sandbox?".

 

For example: the only reason I am excited about F/A-18 is that it promised to bring with itself a new A-G radar code. That's a new feature, and one we have been missing for a long long time. The F-14 is going to bring the first true multicrew AI + CV deck ops. Again, (if it comes true at all) these are huge new features. That's the stuff we should all care the most about and support with our money.

 

So every time an announcement goes out about a plane which is not bringing anything really new to this game, is a further delay from the true issues DCS should prioritize (no matter how much I like the plane, these issues are vastly more important).

 

If ED announces stuff like: advanced electronic warfare model, realistic turbulence, ground effect, dedicated server and similar, I will be "properly ecstatic"... correction "when" they announce it. ;)

 

Why am I being a whiny little bitch about this and do not partake in the glorious enthusiasm usual for a new plane module announcement?

 

Because I am afraid of where DCS is going and who and what will be left behind. We already have one 3rd party dev who is suspending future releases due to the ever-changing nature of the DCS engine. We have another dev team which may easily disappear from the scene (in spite of their assurances they are going to continue) which would leave one of the best effing DCS modules unsupported and falling into buggy incompatibility.

 

So, let me ask you friends: when you buy a module do you expect that module to work as long as DCS works? What if it doesn't? And, by this I don't want to bash neither the 3rd party devs nor the ED, nevertheless, this business model is very dangerous for a product which we would all want to see alive and growing for years to come. If there are no new sales of a module and the dev team decides to shut down, what happens? Is ED going to take over the support of that module? Not very likely!

 

The only thing I can see saving this business model is the speed of development; improve core features of the game while there are still 3rd party devs around to update their products. Otherwise, say bye-bye to many 3rd party modules in a couple of years. Or keep a legacy 1.5 install of the game around forever.

[some1]

In any software company from Paypal to AAA videogame dev studios to ED, projects are done in stages. Not all teams can work on the same project at the same time. For example if the art and 3D model teams are done with the F/A-18 and the coders are implementing systems; it doesn't make sense for the art and 3D guys to be twiddling their thumbs doing nothing, they can move on to other projects.

 

ED has so many open projects going simultaneously, that it's simply not the case here. 3D guys could work on assets for Caucasus and Hormuz, finishing the WWII assets pack or simply upgrading those 15+ year old aircraft models we have in DCS. FM guy could do that MiG-29 PFM that was announced two years ago, carrier physics, etc. Systems guys could help on the Hornet instead of dropping this task on Belsitmek, which in turn delayed BST projects and updates to their products.

 

There's one primary reason why this Yak took priority over the other stuff and that is simply money. :) But don't get into delusion that it didn't affect other things for DCS that we're waiting for.

[John Hargreaves]

From what I am gathering from the negative response to the Yak-52 is people say it will delay other modules, however I have a response to that.

 

In any software company from Paypal to AAA videogame dev studios to ED, projects are done in stages. Not all teams can work on the same project at the same time. For example if the art and 3D model teams are done with the F/A-18 and the coders are implementing systems; it doesn't make sense for the art and 3D guys to be twiddling their thumbs doing nothing, they can move on to other projects.

 

That is why we see pics of MiG-19 parts from Razbam because the 3D models are done with the AV-8B while the art team and coders are putting finishing touches on it.

 

As for the Yak I think its awesome that ED is taking those assets and making them available to the wider DCS world player base.

 

You have to keep in mind tho that instances where ED has put out commercial sims ie the one at this museum by my home http://pacificcoastairmuseum.org/discover/flight-simulator has to be oversimplified for the general public that is why there is an F/A-18 in the sim there and is even more simple than even our FC3 jets. Its the same thing they did to show off DCS's beautiful cockpits and terrain graphics at E3 2017. Some bloke who's never been to an airshow wont be able to handle even the simplicity of a FC3 aircraft in these types of commercial sims.

 

Long winded but in Summary thanks ED for making the Yak available to the wider DCS audience and the F/A-18 is usable in these watered down commercial sims for aviation "neophytes" but wouldnt be up to par yet for those who demand full fidelity modules here in DCS World.

 

 

Great post, and I would add to this, for anyone who thinks that the work on the Yak draws ED away from completing their own personal wishlist. By working on an extra project like this, it is an extra revenue stream for the company, which results in greater strength and security longer term for ED which in turn means more work can be done on more modules down the line for the rest of us.

The Yak wouldn't have been made as a standalone module if it had to pay for itself just by us buying the module, so think of it as a kind of bonus extra. In terms of company resources, it will be neutral in that it has already paid for itself, and whoever commissioned it has agreed to share it with us. I don't think ED have even said what the charge will be yet, you never know, it might even join the TF-51 and the Su-25T in the base game.