F15 Stand Alone module

[Ropay]

Here we go...another one.

 

The F15C is my favourite jet of all time - a beautiful aircraft with such an elite air to air fighter status. It deserves its own module and when I read recently that one of the next fighters on the ED/Belsimtek calendar was the F16, I almost cried actual tears...

"We already have BMS!!".

For the love of God, why have we heard nothing of the F15 development when surely the update from the Standard systems model to the Advanced systems model is easier than developing an entirely new F16 module?

 

My question is this, what needs to be done to the EXISTING F15 (Flaming Cliffs) module to turn it into a stand alone DCS module? i.e. something like the recently launched F18 equivalent?

 

We already have the Professional Flight model so if the upgrade is only the systems model then what exactly does this involve?

Assigning actions to mouse clicks in the cockpit?

Radar?

 

I only have the A10-C module and, as you can see, this is my first post, but just to hear some mention of the "F15" after the amazing release the of the F18 recently, would have been nice. Am I alone in this sentiment, please tell me if so as I don't want to come across as ungrateful?

 

Also, I am not interested in the F15E Strike Eagle development by RAZBAM. I want the single seater F15C (and eventually the incredible and majestic SU27), the Flaming Cliffs US fighter that put ED on the combat flight sim map.

Let's pay it its due respects.

[Saintan]

Hey Ropay.

 

I'm also new to the group and glad to have company at the newb lunch table. ;-) I've dabbled with my shiny new Hog-C, Hornet, and Eagle. Personally, I'm more partial to expanding the "for DCS World/FC3" lineup, as long as they have advanced/pro flight models. I have too short an attention span to commit to full-on study of every system and subsystem for more than one or two aircraft. ;-)

 

I remember flying coop as Pilot and WSO in Strike Eagle III and would LOVE for the Mud Hen to get THAT kind of love in DCS. I think currently you can MP in the Huey, so I don't think it's a stretch. :-) Cheers!

[feefifofum]

The F-15E is being actively developed by RAZBAM.

[Wizard_03]

I want both :)

[Ropay]

The F15E is a two seater and therefore will require some kind of dual co-op gameplay surely?

 

I want to cold start an F15C with switches, taxi, take off, intercept other aircraft, then land again. I've dropped enough bombs with the A10C. Let's take it to the sky...but with the Advanced Systems Model.

Am I missing something, is it more complicated than this or are ED/Belsimtek happy to leave the Eagle as a Flaming Cliffs module?

 

Saintan, I hear where you're coming from regarding more FC3 type modules. Sometimes it is just great to fly the jet with the Professional Flight model and be done with it. Since I can't understand Russian (and hence a Russian cockpit), the SUs and MIGs in Flaming Cliffs are perfect in this regard (please Russian friends don't take offense to this, this is only in my naive, English speaking case).

However, I have put off buying Flaming Cliffs for years because I am waiting for the F15C to be released as a full simulator module.

[Mars Exulte]

Yes, it's more complicated than just making clicky buttons, which should be pretty obvious.

[Saintan]

"The F15E is a two seater and therefore will require some kind of dual co-op gameplay surely?"...

 

In Strike Eagle III you could switch between the Driver and WSO consoles in single-player. I always considered it a 'head-down' toggle to additional MFD's; usually used during the ingress/setup phase...with AP on. ;) The Apache is another "killer" example of a great co-op bird. I recall doing single-ship multiplayer in Longbow 2.

 

..."However, I have put off buying Flaming Cliffs for years because I am waiting for the F15C to be released as a full simulator module."

 

Yeah, I'm still on the fence regarding FC3. I snagged the standalone F-15, but there are still 6 birds in the package I don't have. I enjoyed Flanker and Flanker 2.0 back in the day and suspect I'll eventually cave; especially once the Mig-29 gets some pro-flight-model love. :)

 

I respect you wanting to go deeper into the F-15C. I love its singular "clear the skies" purpose...one bad-ass bird. Cheers!

Edited June 7, 2018 by Saintan

[Alfa]

My question is this, what needs to be done to the EXISTING F15 (Flaming Cliffs) module to turn it into a stand alone DCS module? i.e. something like the recently launched F18 equivalent?

 

ASM - Advanced System's Model.

 

We already have the Professional Flight model so if the upgrade is only the systems model then what exactly does this involve?

 

Developing every single missing part of the system's package, that has not already been done(or is in the process of being done) for other aircraft.

 

Assigning actions to mouse clicks in the cockpit?

 

Yes but to assign "clickable" actions, the functions they activate must be implemented first.

 

Radar?

 

Yes the F-15C in FC3 lacks many radar modes/functions of the real aircraft and uses the old radar logic, while a more advanced(realistic) radar model is being introduced for the F-18C. But then this should also provide a good basis for upgrading the F-15's AN/AGP-63, given the relationship between this and the Hornet's AN/APG-73.

 

I want the single seater F15C (and eventually the incredible and majestic SU27), the Flaming Cliffs US fighter that put ED on the combat flight sim map.

Let's pay it its due respects.

 

Well the fighter "that put ED on the combat flight sim map" was the Su-27 :) ...and that doesn't seem to be on the table for a "full DCS module" either. But other than that I agree - I think most people would like to have at least the "iconic" fighters; F-15C, Su-27 and MiG-29 upgraded from FC3 to full-spec DCS modules.

[probad]

Let's pay it its due respects.

if emotions were all that was needed we'd already have every airplane that has ever flown under the sun.

but emotional appeals are meaningless in the face of monetary, legal, and human resource budgets.

 

why dont you take a jaunt down to the modding section and take a look at the attempts made by people who believed they had what it took to build a dcs module.

[Ropay]

My question is innocent enough in the fact that we already have an F15C with a professional flight model; for years I've wanted to know what needed to be done to the standard systems model to upgrade it to an advanced systems model.

 

From an emotional perspective, perhaps I am too much of a cowboy or not enough of a sim head to appreciate something like the L-39 Albatros for example (understandably a lot easier to develop in terms of red tape, avionics etc, I know). However, in the recent newsletter (1st June 2018), the bottom bit about an exciting future and the mention of the F16C, I was like "that's a typo right, they mean the F15C surely? But there's no Block 50 F15...hang on..".

 

Hence why I created this thread. I am so happy about the release of the F/A-18C (admittedly I haven't bought it yet) but what got me going was the mention of the F16 when it just seems like a bit of dig at Falcon BMS.

 

Saying all this, I don't know what's going on behind the scenes and I don't want to come across as naive and ungrateful. It just seems a shame as we have this existing F15C on the shelf (or Eagle in the cage rather) with amazing financial potential (I'm sure you'll agree) for ED/Belsimtek.

 

Alfa, you are indeed correct about the SU-27 being the genesis of ED flight sim. As incredible as a fully simulated SU-27 may be, until I can read and understand Russian, I would feel unworthy to click around the cockpit of such an amazing aircraft. Haha.

 

Sorry, forgot to say thank you for the info.

Just to return to details, is it just the "Flight model" and "Systems model" that constitutes the flight simulator? i.e is there anything outside of these two models that needs to be taken into account or, in the case of the F15C, is it JUST the Systems model that needs upgrading (since we already have the Professional Flight model)?

Sorry to ask such a specific question but I'm trying to understand how these simulators are built.

Edited June 7, 2018 by Ropay

[Mars Exulte]

The flight model involves all the physics side of things and how the aircraft actually flies. PFMs are effectively a virtual wind tunnel, including mass of the aircraft, structural limitations, individually simulated control surfaces, hydraulics, fuel systems, hardpoints and their structural and aerodynamic characteristics. This is a 'including but not limited to' sort of list.

 

Systems modeling is focused on the aspects of how YOU interact with the aircraft and its systems, especially avionics, power systwms, navigation, weapons, electrical, etc etc etc. Think of it in the sense of all the wires, cables, lines, computers, switches, etc and how they interact with each other and you with them. This is the most time consuming and resource intensive part, as it boils down to reconstructing the aircraft from schematics into digital form. The flight model makes sure it flies like the real thing, the systems,model makes sure it works like the real thing.

 

These two aspects often take 3-5 years from start to completetion, and they are the parts you as a player care about and interact with.

 

 

 

 

NEXT, behind the scenes stuff

 

1. You actually need to be able to find all the infornation needed to do that stuff. ED has had trouble with the P-47 apparently simply because they couldn't find all the data they needed. Things that complicate this process : availability, cost, legality which brings me to next point

 

2. Every aircraft of this detail level requires a license from the manufacturer and/or government that controls the IP. Just,like you can't slap Star Trek on any old thing and charge money for it, you also can't use Boeing, Mikoyan-Gurevich, or ''F/A-18 Hornet'' without permission. Governments may place restrictions on the information you can use. For example, the F-18 module required two years of negotiation with the Department of Defense.

 

3. Financial prospects. How much will it cost? How popular will it be?

 

4. Existence of pre-existing assets. The A-10C was originally made for the National Guard, and they were allowed to make a civilian version. L-39? Former military project. F-16? Former military project (based on other stuff I've seen). Being able to reuse even part of the work on a previously made project saves a lot of time and money.

 

 

 

Probably other factors, too.

[Alfa]

Alfa, you are indeed correct about the SU-27 being the genesis of ED flight sim. As incredible as a fully simulated SU-27 may be, until I can read and understand Russian, I would feel unworthy to click around the cockpit of such an amazing aircraft. Haha.

 

Well there are ways around that - you can already download cockpit mods with every decal in the cockpit translated into English :) .

 

Sorry, forgot to say thank you for the info.

Just to return to details, is it just the "Flight model" and "Systems model" that constitutes the flight simulator? i.e is there anything outside of these two models that needs to be taken into account or, in the case of the F15C, is it JUST the Systems model that needs upgrading (since we already have the Professional Flight model)?

Sorry to ask such a specific question but I'm trying to understand how these simulators are built.

 

Well "systems" is a wide term - a full DCS module comprise advanced modelling of everything that makes the aircraft fly; hydraulics, pneumatics, electric system, fuel system, engines, aerodynamics etc. as well as all onboard devices for controlling it; flight control system, instrumentation/displays and associated sensors, navigation system, radios etc. Then there is all the combat related stuff; weapon's system, radar, IFF, RWR, ECM etc.

 

Edit: sniped by zhukov032186.

[DeathRaptor5]

Currently the F-15C in the game is a Late 90s to early 2000s eagle system and avionics wise. All cockpit switches have been animated and just need to be coded into DCS. But ED may wait for razbamb to finish the f-15E and port over some of its system Since it has a lot of systems in common with F-15C. Mainly the the flight control system and air to air radar modes. the flight model should relatively similar with minor differences.

[SkateZilla]

DCS: F-15C Was being looked into by BST when they did the PFM.

[Ropay]

Zhukov, that is really in-depth information, thank you. I wonder how much of that is already in place with the existing F15C or if it just uses a generic systems model shared by all the Flaming Cliffs 3 aircraft?

I can understand this would take ages and, as DeathRaptor mentioned, maybe ED IS waiting for Razbam's F15E or even Belsimtek to pick up the C again.

 

This kind of leads onto another question I had about how ED determines the 'quality' of a partner's project and how they could really 'use' the various pieces. Say Razbam release their Strike Eagle and then ED come along and release the F15C. Would people honestly buy both? The answer is probably yes but I fear we will start to over saturate the sim market if this happens and end up 'diluting' the experience and dedication of learning the ins and outs of even a single aircraft.

 

ED picked the perfect duo of (western) aircraft when they developed Lock On for flight sim enthusiasts/casuals. The F15 and the A10; one for air superiority, the other to pound the ground. The addition of the F18 has added the aircraft carrier experience (with respect to the SU-33 module) and one day, with that elusive F15C Advanced Systems Model, the trinity will be complete.

 

(Sorry, I'm waffling, I'm tired, I need to go to bed)

[DarkFire]

Well there are ways around that - you can already download cockpit mods with every decal in the cockpit translated into English :) .

 

True, but the last time I tried to use it the mod in question produced an incorrect mach readout on the airspeed indicator. IAS was shown correctly but mach number was drastically wrong.

[Mars Exulte]

No idea, probably not much though.

[HiJack]

DCS: F-15C Was being looked into by BST when they did the PFM.

Really really hope someone does the DCS: F-15C Full fledge module! Pre Buy guarantee! :)

[DarkFire]

This kind of leads onto another question I had about how ED determines the 'quality' of a partner's project and how they could really 'use' the various pieces. Say Razbam release their Strike Eagle and then ED come along and release the F15C. Would people honestly buy both? The answer is probably yes but I fear we will start to over saturate the sim market if this happens and end up 'diluting' the experience and dedication of learning the ins and outs of even a single aircraft.

 

I don't think the military sim market is all that saturated at the moment. Outside of DCS & BMS, which relies on the historical Falcon 4 engine, the only other serious flight sims are truly ancient games that have been kept alive by the modding community such as the improved version of DID's Total Air War. Such games have tiny communities still playing them and are commercially irrelevant. TAW was an awesome game in it's day, but that was nearly 20 years ago now.

 

With the eventual incorporation of an F-16C Block 50 and at some point a dynamic campaign in to DCS, there will arguably be little reason for the continued existence of Falcon BMS. At that point DCS will likely be the only serious military flight sim.

 

I think it would make perfect commercial sense and would appeal to a broad fan base if DCS had top-quality stand-alone modules for all the US teen series fighters, since they were and are so widely used throughout NATO (with the exception of the Tomcat).

 

My fear is that as more advanced DCS modules are introduced of various NATO & western aircraft, the Russian aircraft will be left further & further behind in terms of everything except flight models. That would be unfortunate for a number of reasons, not least of which is that the Su-27 is where it all started circa 1995.

 

Edited to add: Should have made it clear that I'm referring to jet sims. The prop / WW2 sim community are somewhat better serviced with titles such as IL2 and the modded versions of Cliffs of Dover.

Edited June 8, 2018 by DarkFire

[Alfa]

True, but the last time I tried to use it the mod in question produced an incorrect mach readout on the airspeed indicator. IAS was shown correctly but mach number was drastically wrong.

 

Oh didn't know about that - I just saw the mod on the DCS download page and haven't tried it myself(prefer the original Russian).

 

AFAIK its just a texture mod, so do you mean that the inner(Mach) scale on the gauge is painted incorrectly?

[Ventus_Clu]

I think the bigger issue with the F15C being made into a DCS module will be cost vs profit, as was said, A-10C and F-16C came from previous military contracts saving a lot of time and also money. F-18 was obviously seen as the first major modern "fighter" and so will also scoop a lot of money.

 

However you then spend "full money" on developing an F-15C with all it's modern complexities, I highly doubt it'd turn much of a profit. Not everyone buys every module, and those who have F-18 and its multi-role capabilities and spamraam ability, how many would actually purchase an eagle?

 

Maybe it will come in time, but only after sales of hornet have tanked imo.

[Ropay]

Sorry, perhaps 'market saturation' was the wrong term. 'Module saturation' rather as in having a fully simulated F15C (ED) and then also an F15E (Razbam).

 

The Flaming Cliffs A-10A and the DCS: A-10C worked fine because the latter could be regarded as a full simulation upgrade to the Flaming Cliffs module (ignoring the physical/technical differences between the two variants).

Had the F15E a single seat cockpit, it would be an awesome upgrade to the C but also at the expense of the C variant's uniqueness in its Air to Air dedicated role. Hence I maintain that the F15C should be its own fully simulated module, and, to be quite frank and possibly controversial, the release of the Strike Eagle should be shelved.

 

Ventus_Clu, I think my problem when I started this topic was I underestimated the intricacies of going from the Standard Systems Model to the Advanced Systems model. I was under the impression that the F15C was 'almost there' with its Professional Flight model and when I heard the mention of the F-16 in last week's newsletter after the launch of the F/A 18C instead of the attention now turning to the F-15C, I had a bit of a mope.

Having worked in IT, I understand all too well that development has to be financially viable. I dunno, maybe I just assumed that everyone would want to buy a "DCS: F-15C Eagle" (gosh I love writing that..."DCS: F-15C Eagle...there it is again)

 

As an aside, should BMS one day work together, with ED, I think their Falcon could so easily be absorbed into the DCS engine and viola, we'd have an F-16 in DCS. So much work has been done already and it would be shame to see it part of some competition between the two platforms. edit...sorry, you mentioned the F-16C "from previous military contracts". What F-16C is that, the one currently being developed by Belsimtek?

(Usually I'm all for competition but in this case, I dunno, the sim community seems to get along really well.)

 

In terms of the Flaming Cliffs Russian aircraft, there are 6 to choose from but from a FULL SIMULATION perspective, I believe they need to be partnered correctly with the likes of the A-10C, F-15C (once it's fully simulated) and the new F/A-18C.

My proposal is the Su-25T, the MiG-29S and the Su-33.

"WHHAAT, no Su-27??!!" I hear you cry.

Well, the Su-33 would surely serve this purpose and we HAVE to have a DCS: MiG29.

But, I digress!!!

Edited June 8, 2018 by Ropay
Reply to Ventus_Clu

[Mars Exulte]

You've made a bit of another mistake, Ropay, in assuming BMS=DCS.

 

I know it's a complex level simulation, as DCS is, but that's like saying a Ferrarri and Lambo have fully interchangeable parts because 'Look! They both have four wheels and an engine! They're even both Italian!'

 

Firstly, it's doubtful BMS contains as much data as DCS, simply because of its age and lack of update in however many ages. Even if it has an equivalent level of information:

 

It is 100% incompatible with the DCS engine. You can't just port that kind of data over. It has to be in the same format, same syntax, etc. Flight and systems modeling is not a spreadsheet of arbitrary numbers in a txt file somewhere (in fact that is what a Simple Model IS) it is actual coding. That's why it can interact back and forth. Even if it WAS a spreadsheet, syntax/format etc still apply.

 

Razbam had an AV-8B Harrier II developed for a different simulator. Want to know how much of it they ported?

 

0

[Ropay]

Regretfully, I should not have mentioned anything about BMS. I wanted to allude more to the level of fidelity in the actual F16 aircraft that BMS have developed over the years. Despite coming across as so, I am not naive enough to assume that it's just a case of unplugging it from the prehistoric Falcon engine and then plugging it into DCS World 2.5.

By "so easily" I meant that a lot of the ground work has been done by the BMS guys and it would be great to see some kind of collaboration between the two in terms of translating it over to DCS.

 

Anyway, I know there are forums out there on this 'project partnership' between the two but I don't really want to get into that. I also don't know enough about BMS and the F16 development there so I am going to look at that now.

 

Returning to the F-15, if Razbam are in the process of developing the Strike Eagle then here's to hoping that the Advanced Systems Model from that can be incorporated into the F-15C (obviously taking into account the differences between each variant).

[captain_dalan]

 

Just to return to details, is it just the "Flight model" and "Systems model" that constitutes the flight simulator? i.e is there anything outside of these two models that needs to be taken into account or, in the case of the F15C, is it JUST the Systems model that needs upgrading (since we already have the Professional Flight model)?

Well, systems management can be somewhat misleading as term. It involves much more then clicking buttons and flipping switches. Just one obvious example, engine management. Right now, you can take an F-15 into the lower stratosphere, bring it back, and not give the slightest of damns about your engines. Your engines will never blow, stall, flame out.....no matter what you do to them. Even if you fly them in vacuum. If we want a full blown module, that's just one of the things that needs sorting out...... and the rather obvious one. Let's not even go into more specific nuances.....