My DCS dream : F-15E...just like with this 3D cockpit in F4RV --> movie

[HungaroJET]

Another GREAT stuff for Falcon4 + Red Viper...

 

....just 4 motivation / example 2 B followed ;)

 

http://www.cockpits.net/website/movieF15E_v3.0.html

[Malleus]

Neat! Makes me want to fire up Jane's F-15 :P

[leafer]

Sorry, but for some reason, F-15, F-16, F-18 don't do diddly-squat for me. Sure, they are eye-friendly aircraft, and many Americans go patriotically gah-gah over them, but they have been done. Done. Why not be original and create something exotic: Like the Harrier.

 

Hell, man, I hate the Ka-50 but I gotta give credit to Eagle D for originality and not conform to the mass. Massive army of Americans, with ego the size of their SUVs, who want nothing but me me me jets that is.

 

C'mon people, be original! Put on some techno music and give us Euro fighter or something. Shitaze, if I knew how to code, I'd have finished a Harrier and a Rafeal by now. :D

[Malleus]

... but they have been done. Done.

 

I can agree with that, that was the subtle point of my previous post. I can also agree with your points about the exotic stuff, and that's part of the reason why I'm looking forward to black shark (and the su-25t, cause I'm yet to get FC), and not really interested in the apache.

 

But ED have to consider the interest of the people, and quite a lot of them are from the US or want to fly US planes. Sales matters - I guess that was one of the reasons US planes made it into LO in the first place...

[GGTharos]

Sorry, but for some reason, F-15, F-16, F-18 don't do diddly-squat for me. Sure, they are eye-friendly aircraft, and many Americans go patriotically gah-gah over them, but they have been done. Done. Why not be original and create something exotic: Like the Harrier.

 

Because it just plain blows in the A2A arena, and if you want something modern in the A2A arena, you need an F-15, an F-16, or an F-18, and the associated red counterparts.

So bring on the A2A fighters. ;)

 

Hell, man, I hate the Ka-50 but I gotta give credit to Eagle D for originality and not conform to the mass. Massive army of Americans, with ego the size of their SUVs, who want nothing but me me me jets that is.

 

Pot, kettle ... ;)

 

C'mon people, be original! Put on some techno music and give us Euro fighter or something. Shitaze, if I knew how to code, I'd have finished a Harrier and a Rafeal by now. :D

 

 

I wonder how well you'd model a Rafale knowing nothing of it ... ;)

[Shepherd]

A2A fighters we waitith for you,

 

Strike Fighters with A/G radars we also waitith for you. :)

[RedTiger]

Sorry, but for some reason, F-15, F-16, F-18 don't do diddly-squat for me. Sure, they are eye-friendly aircraft, and many Americans go patriotically gah-gah over them, but they have been done. Done. Why not be original and create something exotic: Like the Harrier.

 

Hell, man, I hate the Ka-50 but I gotta give credit to Eagle D for originality and not conform to the mass. Massive army of Americans, with ego the size of their SUVs, who want nothing but me me me jets that is.

 

C'mon people, be original! Put on some techno music and give us Euro fighter or something. Shitaze, if I knew how to code, I'd have finished a Harrier and a Rafeal by now. :D

 

They've been done eh? Lets take just the F-15, in general. Would you really consider the F-15 "done" after Jane's (a title thats almost 10 years old and takes tweaking to run on a modern PC) and Lockon's treatment (no comment here...:music_whistling:)? Sure there have been others, but most have been long forgotten, relegated to sit on mobygames.com and the like for all eternity.

 

Same goes for the Viper. Done to death? Is everyone really sure about that? Other than the Falcon series and all of 4.0's bastard offspring, what else has there been? A bunch of old titles no one plays anymore.

 

This also applies to the MiG-29 and the Su-27. Plenty of room to improve on these too.

 

I just find it odd that people will look back at these old dinosaur sims and think that a plane is "done" because you could fly it on your 386 in 1989. :lol:

[Eagle Driver]

We also have to look foreward in counting things "done". Because while the Eagle family and the Viper would not be technically done at this point, we do know that they are in the process of making it into a modern sim. By the time ED finished with what it's got planned already, FighterOps would likely be on the scene, making those jets essentially "done". However, this still leaves room for many others, notably Tomcat and Hornet, which have been left high and dry for well over a decade (I don't count JF-18 because Superbug is technically a whole different jet from legacy). As hard as it is to say it (because I'm an Eagle fan and am suffering from Asthma) I think ED should definately pursue the Su-27 and MiG-29, as the FO team is damn well not going to do it anytime soon, and they're not even close to being overdone (really, LO was pretty shameful compared to what DCS aims for). Tomcats, Flankers, Foxhounds, Harriers, Mirages, Hornets. That should be a good enough list of A2A fighters for DCS until we get a new ED sim with another funky acronym.

[RedTiger]

We also have to look foreward in counting things "done". Because while the Eagle family and the Viper would not be technically done at this point, we do know that they are in the process of making it into a modern sim. By the time ED finished with what it's got planned already, FighterOps would likely be on the scene, making those jets essentially "done". However, this still leaves room for many others, notably Tomcat and Hornet, which have been left high and dry for well over a decade (I don't count JF-18 because Superbug is technically a whole different jet from legacy). As hard as it is to say it (because I'm an Eagle fan and am suffering from Asthma) I think ED should definately pursue the Su-27 and MiG-29, as the FO team is damn well not going to do it anytime soon, and they're not even close to being overdone (really, LO was pretty shameful compared to what DCS aims for). Tomcats, Flankers, Foxhounds, Harriers, Mirages, Hornets. That should be a good enough list of A2A fighters for DCS until we get a new ED sim with another funky acronym.

 

I didn't think about it like that, thats a good point. However I have very little faith in FO at this point. It just seems like such a pie in the sky idea being tackled by a very small-time operation. I can't help but feel like they're wasting designing something that will just turn out to be ludicrous for most simmers.

 

T-6 and T-38C with a training syllabus before I can even set foot in a Eagle of Viper? Need we remind them that real people do this type of thing except they're generally making a career of it? It just all seems kinda like they're over doing it. "Next FighterOps module: Go see your USAF recruiter!"

[Eagle Driver]

I, for one, am looking greatly forward to the training process as it will make me much more an Eagle pilot than I ever could by just watching some 15 minute track file with the bare bones basics. I really want to go through the training, even though I would not like to risk my life doing the real thing, nor would I like to exercise alot to get there (exercise is my nemesis) and I'm also only 16 and would like to be an engineer. Get the DVD of the reality show American Fighter Pilot and see if you think differently. ;)

[Kula66]

Because it just plain blows in the A2A arena, and if you want something modern in the A2A arena, you need an F-15, an F-16, or an F-18, and the associated red counterparts.

 

Unless you're flying a Mirage III/V or a Sky Hawk ...;)

 

So bring on the A2A fighters. ;)

 

Sooner rather than later ... please.

 

Question for all you people that still play Falcon (not something I've done for a few years) ... what is the AAM missile modelling like these days?

[mvsgas]

I, for one, am looking greatly forward to the training process as it will make me much more an Eagle pilot than I ever could by just watching some 15 minute track file with the bare bones basics. I really want to go through the training, even though I would not like to risk my life doing the real thing, nor would I like to exercise alot to get there (exercise is my nemesis) and I'm also only 16 and would like to be an engineer. Get the DVD of the reality show American Fighter Pilot and see if you think differently. ;)

 

Eagle Driver, I'm not sure if my information is accurate or correct but, I believe FO has been in development for about five years and we still have not seen one in game video or even screen shoots. So I would not have high hope for that game. I know a lot of guys that where member of their website for 1 or 2 years, paying to be a member just to get one or two updates a year, I guess they sent picture of a aircraft model but no back ground so could not tell if it was in game or not. They told me it was not worth it, so they stop going there. This is all second hand info so take it with a grain of salt ( I think that is how the saying goes).

[RedTiger]

Eagle Driver, I'm not sure if my information is accurate or correct but, I believe FO has been in development for about five years and we still have not seen one in game video or even screen shoots. So I would not have high hope for that game. I know a lot of guys that where member of their website for 1 or 2 years, paying to be a member just to get one or two updates a year, I guess they sent picture of a aircraft model but no back ground so could not tell if it was in game or not. They told me it was not worth it, so they stop going there. This is all second hand info so take it with a grain of salt ( I think that is how the saying goes).

 

There have been screen shots of various buildings on airbases as well as pictures of terrain and simple fighter models flying over that terrain. Even so, I agree with what you say.

 

@Eagle Driver

 

For me at least, I think its important to draw the line somewhere between "hardcore realism" and "silly". If you don't, you sound like those jokers at Frugal's who blather on and on about OpenFalcon and "pilot workload". I already have a career. I've never relished the idea of coming home after work and playing a game thats a second job. This is why it took me so long to get into F4AF.

[GGTharos]

I'm fairly certain that the XSI guys have through this through - I think the 'career' is just one part of the game. I have no doubt you'll be able to hop into any flyable you like in public servers or non-career type missions.

 

Though I don't know why I'm speaking on their behalf when some individuals who -should- know better have been taking pot shots at ED ... well anyway!

 

If they pull it off, we'll have plenty of simmage to go around.

And yes, I agree: Mower's 'pilot workload' mantra is amusing. ;)

Once you set up your switches, the 'pilot workload' is over and done with, and you're fighting. I see nothing wrong with being able to skip the preparation step if what you're interested in is combat, though the argument that this is all 'part of the deal' is certainly valid, but again ... like you said RT, some people do -not- have the time to bother with it (and they are then unfairly branded ... as this or that ;) )

[MBot]

Because it just plain blows in the A2A arena, and if you want something modern in the A2A arena, you need an F-15, an F-16, or an F-18, and the associated red counterparts.

So bring on the A2A fighters. ;)

 

For those that are obsessed with A2A, there is still the fairly modern AV-8B+ (with AMRAAMS). Additionaly it not only flies with the USMC but also off the carriers of the Spanish and Italian navy.

And for us normal people the standart AV-8B will still do :D

[leafer]

Because it just plain blows in the A2A arena, and if you want something modern in the A2A arena, you need an F-15, an F-16, or an F-18, and the associated red counterparts.

So bring on the A2A fighters.

 

The Harrier may blows in the air-to-air arena but you gotta admit, it was pretty funny when a flight of Harrier spanked some American Eagles during air-to-air exercises in England. ;)

 

Pot, kettle ...

 

Hmm...I'm not sure about that as I don't think I ever demanded that ED model this and that. In fact, I hardly ever participated in those "which aircraft next" poll thread. Plus, it's ok for a brown person to call Pot black. Because Pot can turn around and call me a brownie and we'll be even. :D

 

I wonder how well you'd model a Rafale knowing nothing of it ... ;)

 

Heh. You got me there. I know very little when it comes to military hardware, tactics, etc. I fly military simulation because I like drilling around in these fire breathing, earth shattering hunk of metal and hydraulic fluid. Heck, when I see a bandit at my six, you'll often hear me say "watch this, I'll eject and he'll fly right by!" :D

[GGTharos]

... which still blows in A2A by comparison. ;)

 

For those that are obsessed with A2A, there is still the fairly modern AV-8B+ (with AMRAAMS). Additionaly it not only flies with the USMC but also off the carriers of the Spanish and Italian navy.

And for us normal people the standart AV-8B will still do :D

[GGTharos]

There's nothing to admit. Those harriers would have been dead meat in a BVR engagement, and after the initial surprise of the whole thrust-vectoring thing wore off they'd be dead meat in a WVR engagement too (it doesn't pay to turn yourself into a sitting duck)

 

The Harrier may blows in the air-to-air arena but you gotta admit, it was pretty funny when a flight of Harrier spanked some American Eagles during air-to-air exercises in England.

 

 

You asked that the -not- model something ... you suggested something else ... so. Pot, kettle, black - whether you like it or not.

 

 

Hmm...I'm not sure about that as I don't think I ever demanded that ED model this and that. In fact, I hardly ever participated in those "which aircraft next" poll thread. Plus, it's ok for a brown person to call Pot black. Because Pot can turn around and call me a brownie and we'll be even.

Well you know ... Ace Combat and stuff?

I mean seriously, if you're going to be that casual about it, there's nothing wrong with that! Otherwise though? Fidelity, and as much as possible!

 

Heh. You got me there. I know very little when it comes to military hardware, tactics, etc. I fly military simulation because I like drilling around in these fire breathing, earth shattering hunk of metal and hydraulic fluid. Heck, when I see a bandit at my six, you'll often hear me say "watch this, I'll eject and he'll fly right by!"

[MBot]

The Harrier may blows in the air-to-air arena but you gotta admit, it was pretty funny when a flight of Harrier spanked some American Eagles during air-to-air exercises in England. ;)

 

Jep, I heard that too. I think it was Sharkey Ward in his book that bragged how they repeatetly beat the european F-15C units in their thrusty FRS.1 Sea Harriers in the 80s.

[GGTharos]

I do believe there was an effective rebuttal of such posted somewhere by someone who did indeed participate, but I don't remember where to find it now ... the basic idea was that F-15C's would easily just BnZ the Harriers and that was that.

[MBot]

The way Ward discribes how they beat the F-15s is that they defeated the Sparrows by beaming, then closed in for a straight Sidewinder kill (not much or no dogfighting involved). The big advantage the SHAR had is that it was small and hard to see, while Eagles were visible miles away. At least that is how I remeber it without rereading.

[leafer]

They've been done eh? Lets take just the F-15, in general. Would you really consider the F-15 "done" after Jane's (a title thats almost 10 years old and takes tweaking to run on a modern PC) and Lockon's treatment (no comment here...:music_whistling:)? Sure there have been others, but most have been long forgotten, relegated to sit on mobygames.com and the like for all eternity.

 

Same goes for the Viper. Done to death? Is everyone really sure about that? Other than the Falcon series and all of 4.0's bastard offspring, what else has there been? A bunch of old titles no one plays anymore.

 

This also applies to the MiG-29 and the Su-27. Plenty of room to improve on these too.

 

I just find it odd that people will look back at these old dinosaur sims and think that a plane is "done" because you could fly it on your 386 in 1989. :lol:

 

Uh-uh. I did not say it's been done to death. I said it's been done. I'm pretty sure, in most cases, once is enough. I wouldn't buy an RX-7 from Ford if they decided to completely copy the 3rd gen Mazda RX-7, and there is room for improvements with the original RX-7 as well. Crappy door handle, turbo intercooler, etc. Same goes for the Su-27, Mig-29... Sure, it'd be nice if ED amped up the avionics and flight models in those two but I'd much rather see completely new, never before seen in military sim kind of aircraft. That would really get me pumped up.

 

But hey, if an F-16 floats your dinghy then keep at it. Me, I would rather see something more exotic. I don't care if the new flyable is relevant to the theater of operation, I just want to fly something different.

[GGTharos]

From what I've been told, that's a rather bad deal for the harriers anyway - so I have to wonder what was going on there (it has been my understanding that the F-15's still maintain superior SA, and superior SA wins the fight - so my guess here is that this was a training exercise meant to show how a harrier -should- fight if it must, and the F-15C's might have been say, simulating threats whose radar won't be quite as good - and that, as an exercise, is far more valuable than fighting a full-up F-15C ... which you wouldn't fight in a war! -- just a wild guess though)

 

The way Ward discribes how they beat the F-15s is that they defeated the Sparrows by beaming, then closed in for a straight Sidewinder kill (not much or no dogfighting involved). The big advantage the SARH had is that it was small and hard to see, while Eagles were visible miles away. At least that is how I remeber it without rereading.

[MBot]

As far as I remeber it were all out competitions between squadrons. The SHAR also beat F-4 and other units. Sharkey Ward was pretty proud his squadron could compete with the best fighter units NATO could offer. On the other hand you have to take all what Ward sais with a grain of salt... Still I don't think he made the story up.

When I get home today I will have a look at "Sea Harriers over the Falklands" again and post some more details.

[leafer]

I do believe there was an effective rebuttal of such posted somewhere by someone who did indeed participate, but I don't remember where to find it now ... the basic idea was that F-15C's would easily just BnZ the Harriers and that was that.

 

I remember when the exercises were made public. Several forums were crawling with Eagle fanbois defending their beloved American pride fighter. Man, it was an all out war. Especially this one guy who wrote this book about an F-15. What was his name? Anyway, hilarious at its best. It really doesn't matter what the rebuttal says because when all is said and done, those Eagles had their six handed to them. And in this case, none can say the Eagles were flown by third world peasants.

 

It never seizes to amaze me when an 'inferior' fighter, flown by competent pilot spanked top-of-the-line fighter flown by world class pilot. Take the Red October documentary for example. A squad of Topgun instrctors flew their Hornets to German and were shocked when they didn't annihilate the Mig-29s.