Jump to content

Wish For F/A 35B


Recommended Posts

only 78 - 115 million.

 

 

Only if you include the 160 initial deliveries that will never be combat, mission ready, or even able to be used as trainers. The first 160 are so flawed and far behind in design changes they cannot ever be fully functional.

 

The cost metrics are skewed, including the first 160 as if they are functional, they are basically bricks. If you remove those 160, especially the naval version, cost goes up.

 

Now that they are replacing ALIS with ODIN, development costs of a completely new logistical, inventory, troubleshooting, and mission data platform will increase costs associated with each airframe.

 

Not to mention that an F-35 has dismal readiness rates, and maintenance costs as compared to an F-15 who's combat readiness and mission loads literally exceed the F-35 by hundreds of hours.

 

The F-35 expected cost over it's initial delivery run, and maintenance of those initial deliveries is expected to exceed 1.5 Trillion dollars, literally the most expensive weapon system (per plane) ever produced. But hey, don't take my word for it, just read over the GAO reports about it.

 

Here is how the GAO characterized costs of procurement outside of raw manufacturing costs:

 

To execute its current procurement plan, the F-35 program will need to request and obtain, on average, $12.4 billion annually in acquisition funds for more than two decades.

 

One of many articles, detailing the 160 (or more) that will never be combat ready:

 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a28685/f-35s-unfit-for-combat/

 

 

But the good news is, since the American Taxpayer, and Allies have funded LM's research, development, and initial startup costs - LM is looking sweet on Wall Street.

 

 

Also, current Block models are finally coming into their own as mission capable. The data amalgamation and synthesis capability is literally a game changer and no near peer advisories have anything like it. It will truly be a historic platform.


Edited by SmirkingGerbil

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I'm against. While I would probably say yes there are a couple of points that just turns me away.

 

Firstly, we're having more than enough problems completing a late legacy Hornet and fairly modern (2007) F-16, both of which have probably been in development for at least the best part of half a decade. How long is an F-35B going to take? And how much of developer resources is it going to take. The F-35B is probably the most modern and advanced aircraft I can think of, my guess is that it'll take a LOT of work - a heck of a lot, I'd be surprised if it took less than the time for the F-16 and F/A-18 combined, and again, even they aren't finished yet.

 

I don't doubt that they'll eventually be finished (and fingers crossed by the end of the year, but wouldn't be surprised if they took longer) it's just when it happens - ED seems to have their plate almost perpetually full. 2.5.6 has only made that problem worse, let alone new damage modelling, new weapon FDM and whatever else there is (RADARs?).

 

The 2nd reason relates to what I consider to be the current scope of DCS as well as how we accomplish 'balance' in an ideal DCS. Yes I said the dreaded 'b-word' but hear me out.

 

How we accomplish balance in DCS (or at least an ideal one) is by putting aircraft of roughly the same generation against each other - hopefully meaning we get aircraft that are well matched (or at least best fit), with capabilities as similar as possible.

 

Now at the moment BLUFOR have the clear advantage - I don't think you can do much arguing here; they have access to a late model legacy Hornet and a fairly modern F-16, not to mention a fairly modernised Mirage 2000C and the AV-8B NA. They all have at least parity or just straight up eclipse REDFOR aircraft in air-to-air (apart from maybe the AV-8B NA) and they definitely eclipse REDFOR in air-to-ground (apart from the Mirage).

 

For REDFOR? Well, we have the JF-17 which is kind of a ball-park equivalent(-ish) to the F-16. It's an aircraft primarily used by Pakistan, hardly an adversary to BLUFOR (sure 'what-if' scenarios and all that, but it's not exactly the first thing that comes to mind at least when I think REDFOR aircraft). In terms of full fidelity aircraft, the most modern 'true' REDFOR one we have at the moment, is the MiG-21Bis from 1972 - hardly much of a contemporary, being 30-40 years older than most BLUFOR aircraft, and nearly half a century older than the F-35B. Sure a late MiG-23 is in the works by RAZBAM but it's a minor improvement at best (it's better at A2A but largely the same in A2G).

 

So what's left? Well we have literally the first production variant of the Su-27; an Su-33 which, excluding carrier capability, is essentially identical; the first production variant of the MiG-29 and it's first major upgrade variant - all of which are Soviet era aircraft and all at least 30-40 years old. I'm not necessarily saying they'll cease to be competitive, but they're certainly become less and less relevant the more modern aircraft get added.

 

I think we can see the problem here - the divide only broadens with the F-35B, I'm not saying it'll be total domination or the mentioned aircraft will cease to be competitive, but there's a clear gap in capability, both in A2A and A2G.

 

And what about other assets? We currently only have Soviet era air defences, and IADS out of the box is still WIP, as is the SA-5. If an F-35B was to be developed will we see upgraded Tors? What about the S-350 and S-400? What about Pantsir-S1 etc? Let alone modern vehicles.

 

But that's not all, the F-35B is supposedly going to be kitted out with weapons that are IRL in development themselves; things like LRASM, JAGM, SPEAR 3 and Meteor to name a few. Also what about the AIM-120D? The AIM-9X Block II and III, the SDB (plus it's variants), the GBU-54, the JASSM and the AGM-88G? All of these weapons will have to be developed, now sure probably not completely from scratch and I imagine some copying and pasting can be done, but it only increases the workload. We don't have ATFLIR yet for the Hornet and JHMCS is WIP also, let alone the HMD system of the F-35B, combined with EOTS, which is Sniper XR ATP equivalent IIRC - even more advanced than ATFLIR (Sniper XR ATP was planned for the F-16, but has since been removed from it's planned features and is currently in limbo). What about literally the latest, most modern, airborne AESA RADAR? Nothing in DCS has that, and I'm not even sure about the current implementation of RADARs (only a select few simulate 'real beam' AFAIK).

 

The odds are really against it here. Before we get into how much is this radically different aircraft going to cost as a module - the F/A-18 and F-16 already top out at 80 USD...

 

Personally, I think DCS modules should primarily focus on aircraft from say, the early-to-mid 50s to the early 90s. As well as a secondary focus on WWII. I think aircraft like the AJS-37 and F-14B are near-perfect fits for the current era and scope of DCS, and gives the aforementioned aircraft more relevancy, especially given the obstacles barring full-fidelity, modern Russian aircraft (AFAIK). Though personally I'm more than up for a full fidelity early Flanker or Fulcrum, even if it is the first production variants.


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very long time ago there was a novalogic game F-22 raptor. Of course it wasn’t a high end study sim like many of the modules in DCS, but I think they made money with that title. The capabilities were probably guesses and assumptions, but people had fun.

 

If I were in charge of DCS, and had resources to make a second stand alone spin-off, I would consider adding “assumption” based flight sims as long as I didn’t get sued by the companies that make the real mckoy.

 

Dear OP. Don’t get discouraged by the salty responses and welcome to the forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if you include the 160 initial deliveries that will never be combat, mission ready, or even able to be used as trainers. The first 160 are so flawed and far behind in design changes they cannot ever be fully functional.

 

The cost metrics are skewed, including the first 160 as if they are functional, they are basically bricks. If you remove those 160, especially the naval version, cost goes up.

 

Now that they are replacing ALIS with ODIN, development costs of a completely new logistical, inventory, troubleshooting, and mission data platform will increase costs associated with each airframe.

 

Not to mention that an F-35 has dismal readiness rates, and maintenance costs as compared to an F-15 who's combat readiness and mission loads literally exceed the F-35 by hundreds of hours.

 

The F-35 expected cost over it's initial delivery run, and maintenance of those initial deliveries is expected to exceed 1.5 Trillion dollars, literally the most expensive weapon system (per plane) ever produced. But hey, don't take my word for it, just read over the GAO reports about it.

 

Here is how the GAO characterized costs of procurement outside of raw manufacturing costs:

 

To execute its current procurement plan, the F-35 program will need to request and obtain, on average, $12.4 billion annually in acquisition funds for more than two decades.

 

One of many articles, detailing the 160 (or more) that will never be combat ready:

 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a28685/f-35s-unfit-for-combat/

 

 

But the good news is, since the American Taxpayer, and Allies have funded LM's research, development, and initial startup costs - LM is looking sweet on Wall Street.

 

 

Also, current Block models are finally coming into their own as mission capable. The data amalgamation and synthesis capability is literally a game changer and no near peer advisories have anything like it. It will truly be a historic platform.

 

There is no skewing anything. You just used dated price listings. People make the same mistaking citing 18 mil pricetag on the f16c.

 

This was the same old bs arguments and criticisms brought up any time a new mission platform comes online. " But but x aircraft that just came about is more expensive and has had developmental issues, and does not have same xombat readiness than ( now dated) y aircraft that is 30+ years mission proven."

 

Like with the f15. People seem to forget the f15 today is not the same old daddy's f15a. that went off the production line in 76 with pre PSP apg 63 radar. Just as the hornet program going into the 80s.

 

So the story with f35 is just history repeating itself but in the information age.

 

The fm had the same stance and lost any shred credibility long ago.

 

F35 is currently combat ready platform. And an excellent one at that. It's still arguably the most successful gen 5 multi-role fighter, especially if you try to find any other foreign aircraft program remotely in the same class as the f35.

 

But hey old memes never die, and some will only ever obsess and keep rambling on about the negatives at every chance they get.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh sweet summer child, The US Government has exceeded our expectations. Who better then Lockheed to contract to replace ALIS, welcome ODIN!!! https://www.janes.com/article/93861/pentagon-announces-replacement-for-f-35-s-alis

 

The Drive calls it a rebranding https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31861/replacement-for-f-35s-troubled-alis-cloud-based-brain-rebranded-odin-and-is-still-years-away

 

It’s suppossed to be cheaper in the long run, but not like it was ever reasonably priced.

 

 

 

People seem to forget how long link 16 development and implentation took.

 

Jtids was expected to go operational by the late 80s immediately after f15c's msip 2 upgrades.

 

Rebranded under link 16/mids which essentially took until the 21st century before any fighter were using it operationally., never minding standardizing it upon NATO and making further refinements.

 

Already link 16 is deemed dated, not just from a gen 5 perspective, but even from its generatio it is realized that even last gen fighters need more a modern follow up to link 16.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no skewing anything. You just used dated price listings. People make the same mistaking citing 18 mil pricetag on the f16c.

 

This was the same old bs arguments and criticisms brought up any time a new mission platform comes online. " But but x aircraft that just came about is more expensive and has had developmental issues, and does not have same xombat readiness than ( now dated) y aircraft that is 30+ years mission proven."

 

Like with the f15. People seem to forget the f15 today is not the same old daddy's f15a. that went off the production line in 76 with pre PSP apg 63 radar. Just as the hornet program going into the 80s.

 

So the story with f35 is just history repeating itself but in the information age.

 

The fm had the same stance and lost any shred credibility long ago.

 

F35 is currently combat ready platform. And an excellent one at that. It's still arguably the most successful gen 5 multirole fighter, especially if you try to find any other foreign aircraft program remotely in the same class as the f35.

 

But hey old memes never die.

 

I used the old GAO report, as it leads to the newer ones.

 

160 non combat aircraft are still in inventory, that hasn't changed.

 

I can see that this is just going to be "oh you spoke ill of the development and cost overruns . . . surely you are some meme and getting bad information . . . therefore I dismiss you as meme."

 

So, as a meme, I leave you with the URL to no less than 25 of these reports (with the search criteria already baked in!!), up to the most recent, and none of them are "glowing" regarding development costs, procurement timelines, etc.

 

I have read most of these, as a taxpayer, I was very interested.

 

 

 

You will note, that I end my expose that it will be indeed a historical aircraft, and its data amalgamation and synthesis capabilities are unmatched, but the cost is way out of line compared to what was promised by LM initially.

 

For your meme based enjoyment:

 

https://www.gao.gov/search?q=F-35&Submit=Search

 

:)

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The data on the Mig is inaccurate. I could tell you the truth about the platform but then I would have to kill you. Needless to say, two out of the three US military branches are combat operational and already highly successful on their last several deployments. As far as the cost goes, it is no secret now we have the F-35 down to around $80 mil. You can google that one and see it has been posted everywhere. It was big news when it happened. More countries want a piece of the Cheddar now that we are competing with older 4th gen aircraft price wise. Simple mistake, verify the data you post before posting it.

 

"I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, I know nothing. Socrates"


Edited by robert.clark251
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is rambling on and obsessing about about cost overruns of the projects development pertinent to how this aircraft is going to or not going to be in DCS?


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The data on the Mig is inaccurate. I could tell you the truth about the platform but then I would have to kill you. Needless to say, two out of the three US military branches are combat operational and already highly successful on their last several deployments. As far as the cost goes, it is no secret now we have the F-35 down to around $80 mil. You can google that one and see it has been posted everywhere. It was big news when it happened. More countries want a piece of the Cheddar now that we are competing with older 4th gen aircraft price wise. Simple mistake, verify the data you post before posting it.

 

"I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, I know nothing. Socrates"

 

Tell that to Belgium, Israel, Japan and Korea. They are not original partners so it’s over $100 million for them

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell that to Belgium, Israel, Japan and Korea. They are not original partners so it’s over $100 million for them

 

And?

 

In a certain case the higher price tag for a non partner nation, still came lower than projected to another competitors.

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-aerospace-belgium/belgium-picks-lockheeds-f-35-over-eurofighter-on-price-idUSKCN1MZ1S0


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And?

 

In a certain case the higher price tag for a non partner nation, still came lower than projected to another competitors.

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-aerospace-belgium/belgium-picks-lockheeds-f-35-over-eurofighter-on-price-idUSKCN1MZ1S0

 

One of the few fighters more expensive then F-35:megalol: I believe during MMRCA someone in the IAF said it was like choosing between a Honda Civic a BMW and a Maruti. I bet the F-18 was the Civic, and of course EF2000 is the BMW. Funny enough I believe the new F-15EX is much more expensive then F-35 upfront, FWIW.

 

I stand behind the F-35, I’m totally for it, but there’s a lot more to its price then being $80 million a pop if you happened to plan out your largest military acquisition 20 years in advance, just wanted to make sure Robert Clark knew that:)

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 :thumbup:

Pointy end hurt! Fire burn!!
JTF-191 25th Draggins - Hawg Main. Black Shark 2, A10C, A10CII, F-16, F/A-18, F-86, Mig-15, Mig-19, Mig-21, P-51, F-15, Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29, FW-190 Dora, Anton, BF 109, Mossie, Normandy, Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, Channel, Syria, Marianas, WWII Assets, CA. (WWII backer picked aircraft ME-262, P-47D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that would be a problem - F-35 features already several AAA games and Hollywood hits

 

 

The difference is that DCS is a study sim, where others take artistic license in designing the F-35 for say P3D. When ED develops a module they represent that aircraft faithfully in as many aspects as is possible. Where others are willing to make an F-35 that guesses at most systems and capabilities, ED is not! This is why we love DCS!

Motherboard ASUSTek TUF Z390-PLUS GAMING (WI-FI)

Processor Intel i5 9400

Memory VENGENCE PRO RGB 32GB

Video Card # 1 GIGABYTE NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX1660 6GB GDDR6

Power Supply Thermaltake GOLD 850 RGB

Sound Card NVIDIA HIGH DEFINITION AUDIO

Monitor 1. Vizio 32" 2. Samsung 32" 3. Samsung 32"

Operating System Windows 10 64 Bit build 19035.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about as likely as adding Spike's red spaceship from Cowboy Bebop

 

Off to start a new wishlist thread! :megalol:

 

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the few fighters more expensive then F-35:megalol: I believe during MMRCA someone in the IAF said it was like choosing between a Honda Civic a BMW and a Maruti. I bet the F-18 was the Civic, and of course EF2000 is the BMW. Funny enough I believe the new F-15EX is much more expensive then F-35 upfront, FWIW.

 

I stand behind the F-35, I’m totally for it, but there’s a lot more to its price then being $80 million a pop if you happened to plan out your largest military acquisition 20 years in advance, just wanted to make sure Robert Clark knew that:)

 

AeriaGloria, considering you were citing information spoken about during the MMRCA (Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft) competition held in India to choose a medium role aircraft for the Indian Air Force, you are referring to India planning their next major acquisition. The conversation being discussed prior to you making sure I knew what I was talking about was simple, the cost of what one F-35 was rolling off the line at Lockheed. If I wanted to flaunt my knowledge over India's decision to invest in their own indigenous programs to save money and bash the worlds best 5th Gen fighter, I would have gladly done that. But this is a professional forum where I do not tend to throw stones. And I am very aware of the F-21. It is an excellent plane and will serve India well.


Edited by robert.clark251
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously is this even a thread - no offence made to the OP.

 

Why do people keep asking for new modules ......Need to sort out the ones ED have first and more importantly than that sort out the many multiplayer issues, memory leaks and crashes. It is currently near enought unplayable, actually is if you want carrier ops.

 

Its fair to say 2.5.6 is buggy as hell - should not even be thinking of introducing a supercarrier into the current mess to add to the existing problems.

 

Any spare dev time for new modules should be on sorting out the core - and delivering the F18 and F16.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously is this even a thread - no offence made to the OP.

 

Why do people keep asking for new modules ......Need to sort out the ones ED have first and more importantly than that sort out the many multiplayer issues, memory leaks and crashes. It is currently near enought unplayable, actually is if you want carrier ops.

 

Its fair to say 2.5.6 is buggy as hell - should not even be thinking of introducing a supercarrier into the current mess to add to the existing problems.

 

Any spare dev time for new modules should be on sorting out the core - and delivering the F18 and F16.

 

While I totally agree with your statement, just to play devils advocate...The F-35 would in fact be a very simple module for ED to simulate and would take little away from their upgrading of the core program. Build a 3d model and cockpit (so mostly texturing work) and then have the plane have no user interaction at all much like the actual plane itself. In fact, this business model of simulating newer 5th gen aircraft could be a huge financial boon to ED as they slowly ween user interaction out in favor of autopilot and AI routines taking charge for the 'meat in the seat'! Never again will you have to experience SAM evasion or the barbarity of a dogfight as you stealthily infiltrate every known air defense network and the pre programmed mission profile delivers your ordnance for you as deftly scroll through your Taylor Swift albums on the high def MFD's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I totally agree with your statement, just to play devils advocate...The F-35 would in fact be a very simple module for ED to simulate and would take little away from their upgrading of the core program. Build a 3d model and cockpit (so mostly texturing work) and then have the plane have no user interaction at all much like the actual plane itself. In fact, this business model of simulating newer 5th gen aircraft could be a huge financial boon to ED as they slowly ween user interaction out in favor of autopilot and AI routines taking charge for the 'meat in the seat'! Never again will you have to experience SAM evasion or the barbarity of a dogfight as you stealthily infiltrate every known air defense network and the pre programmed mission profile delivers your ordnance for you as deftly scroll through your Taylor Swift albums on the high def MFD's.

 

Yea doesn't sound like fun - no challenge no skill.

 

Who wants to fly something that has such an advantage - oh i forgot people that like to fire out Aim54's.....

 

No model is simple, its a non starter we shouldn't be even thinking about new modules need to sort out the mess that is the core code

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it seems like F/A-18 pilots finally got tired of winning by pressing the Big Green Victory Button. Totally understandable. Pressing is so exhausting, an easier way to win is required

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe hornet pilots fly the hornet because they like it, not because they want the most capable jet. .

 

Not all viper drivers have the hornet, and not all horent drivers have the viper.

 

Some have both and other aircraft because they literally like collecting and flying al forms of aircraft.

 

And with the Jeff the red force do have a study sim module within the same ballpark of the hornet and viper.

 

It's not like anyone "needs" any aircraft. They just want to fly it. The f35 certainly is a fascinating aircraft. However considering this isnt a online arcade avaiation mmo,, exact forced balance is not a prerequisite for a study sim.

 

EVEN aircraft that are within a comparable ballpark in avionics and mission roles, are not the same. Many aircraft are dissimilar. As similar as viper and horent are on the mission types, they are pretty dissimilar in they way they are flown against one another.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...