A8 to F8

[peachmonkey]

6 hours ago, noelgallagher said:

i was expecting every possible varient to simulate a8

maybe i was expecting too much?

in my opinion it would have been better option for me to pay 120$ and get G/F 8 varient + all the other possible features(being able to remove the outer wing guns ETC)

yup, it's an interesting debate about what the word "simulation" actually means. When I joined DCS I had the same expectations as you, if each system can be simulated then why don't give us the ability to remove certain elements, experiment with others, actually let us "simulate" the what if scenarios. Unfortunately, time and time again ED showed us that it's not in their interests, and I can understand that. For example, with the delayed fusing, when it was released, they have simulated the actual real-life fuses according to their spec. I thought they'd just give us some amorphous non-realistic timer delay, but instead the simulation is close to reality with the proper delayed timers/arm timers as the fuses allow. And it took them .. well, about ~8-10 months to release since its announcement, i.e. there was a substantial amount of work that went into it. Such approach to simulation allows them to extend the damage model to these elements sometime later, i.e. the fuse got dinged by the shell/explosion fragment, and it no longer works (instead of pretending to simulate some 'hit box' in the vicinity of the fuse). 

So with gun removal 'feature simulation', they would actually have to develop the impacts to the wing, its weight, stress forces surrounding the area of the removed guns, etc. etc, which is serious dev effort,  compared to some basic high level 'hit box' based dev in other more arcade sims.

thinking that way helps (me at least) to see the reasons behind current 'limitations'.

5 hours ago, Blackbird12 said:

If they can make a guesswork on missile performance I can't see why making guesswork on removing/adding weapons of a known mass and drag would be that complicated (the performances can already change depending on the loadout, fuel, bombs, rocket...) 

ww2 stuff is a lot more upclose and personal. The 'guesswork' may impact the ac behavior in a way that it will focus the critics on the 'guessworked' items, which will reduce the trust in the overall system modeling, hence breaking the immersion of the reality, etc.. I doubt ED wants to open that pandora box.

Plus, I definitely do not want any guesswork in the way the A8 operates. There's enough of sims out there that can fill in that niche.

[Blackbird12]

34 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

yup, it's an interesting debate about what the word "simulation" actually means. When I joined DCS I had the same expectations as you, if each system can be simulated then why don't give us the ability to remove certain elements, experiment with others, actually let us "simulate" the what if scenarios. Unfortunately, time and time again ED showed us that it's not in their interests, and I can understand that. For example, with the delayed fusing, when it was released, they have simulated the actual real-life fuses according to their spec. I thought they'd just give us some amorphous non-realistic timer delay, but instead the simulation is close to reality with the proper delayed timers/arm timers as the fuses allow. And it took them .. well, about ~8-10 months to release since its announcement, i.e. there was a substantial amount of work that went into it. Such approach to simulation allows them to extend the damage model to these elements sometime later, i.e. the fuse got dinged by the shell/explosion fragment, and it no longer works (instead of pretending to simulate some 'hit box' in the vicinity of the fuse). 

So with gun removal 'feature simulation', they would actually have to develop the impacts to the wing, its weight, stress forces surrounding the area of the removed guns, etc. etc, which is serious dev effort,  compared to some basic high level 'hit box' based dev in other more arcade sims.

thinking that way helps (me at least) to see the reasons behind current 'limitations'.

ww2 stuff is a lot more upclose and personal. The 'guesswork' may impact the ac behavior in a way that it will focus the critics on the 'guessworked' items, which will reduce the trust in the overall system modeling, hence breaking the immersion of the reality, etc.. I doubt ED wants to open that pandora box.

Plus, I definitely do not want any guesswork in the way the A8 operates. There's enough of sims out there that can fill in that niche.

They are totaly capable of doing it, the fact is the A8 doesn't bring money anymore so there's no interest to develop it further and for the impact on the wings, the wings are the same as the D9 and it will not change the FM that much, it's not another wing or another engine, its the same aircraft with 176,5 kg less and a little bit less drag and maybe a slightly modified roll, all these factors are already modelled when you take less fuel, or bombs or even the ETC rack, if you take 50% ammo (it's what a I do since we don't have the option to remove the wing guns) I save something like 150kg and I can already see the difference in the climb rate, if you use the fuel in aft fuel tank first instead of both you will see a difference, even with the same fuel quantity, it's just because the gravity center moved forward and you can feel it.

I already said this but the A8 was one of the two workhorse of the luftwaffe for the last year of the war and had many subvariant/modifications, some of them were used in quite significant numbers, it's like making a Bf-109 G6 without gun pods or MW50.

[peachmonkey]

25 minutes ago, Blackbird12 said:

They are totaly capable of doing it, the fact is the A8 doesn't bring money anymore so there's no interest to develop it further and for the impact on the wings, the wings are the same as the D9 and it will not change the FM that much, it's not another wing or another engine, its the same aircraft with 176,5 kg less and a little bit less drag and maybe a slightly modified roll, all these factors are already modelled when you take less fuel, or bombs or even the ETC rack, if you take 50% ammo (it's what a I do since we don't have the option to remove the wing guns) I save something like 150kg and I can already see the difference in the climb rate, if you use the fuel in aft fuel tank first instead of both you will see a difference, even with the same fuel quantity, it's just because the gravity center moved forward and you can feel it.

I already said this but the A8 was one of the two workhorse of the luftwaffe for the last year of the war and had many subvariant/modifications, some of them were used in quite significant numbers, it's like making a Bf-109 G6 without gun pods or MW50.

you're new to DCS, so you're full of ambitions and expectations, and I applaud it.

From the dev perspective the D9 is a very old module, released in 2014-2015 (?). Anton was released in 2019, so it was developed using new tech and code. The reason why DCS suffers from a lack of speedy and contemporary progress of graphics and processing tech is that it's a mishmash of different blocks of code that require a lot of rework in to a single coherent platform. The whole WW2 part of DCS is a thorn in their side, where they can't come up with a coherent roadmap that would unify the theaters and ultimately help with a dynamic campaign efforts. I usually shy away from commenting on their business model like I'm some sort of a professional business developer, because it's just super silly from a context of a basic "know it all" consumer, but you still need to keep those points in mind since ED isn't a "game developer", they are simulator developer, i.e. their applications are extensively used in the military markets.  They can't just "wing it" or fake it, their reputation is at stake.

Edited May 7, 2023 by peachmonkey

[MAD-MM]

Hmm come on dont exaggerate something is not there. Thats why is our 190D9 flying with Wfr. Gr21 around, where have exact data how much more drag that cause and influnce the rollrate or shift CG and the behaviour of the Plane special for a D9 Variant? There is only one problem, never saw a D9 with Wfr. Gr21!

They never 100% simulated, there still a part that is more reasoning calculating and guess work.

More likley limitations of the DCS Engine does not allow change like internal guns in the Modul itself, probably this same reason we have clipped and no clipped spit in two seperate Moduls? Was it worth in the End?

Maybe this huch undergoing task thats not earn them any Money, thats why probalby they dont do it.

Edited May 7, 2023 by MAD-MM

[Blackbird12]

56 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

you're new to DCS, so you're full of ambitions and expectations, and I applaud it.

From the dev perspective the D9 is a very old module, released in 2014-2015 (?). Anton was released in 2019, so it was developed using new tech and code. The reason why DCS suffers from a lack of speedy and contemporary progress of graphics and processing tech is that it's a mishmash of different blocks of code that require a lot of rework in to a single coherent platform. The whole WW2 part of DCS is a thorn in their side, where they can't come up with a coherent roadmap that would unify the theaters and ultimately help with a dynamic campaign efforts. I usually shy away from commenting on their business model like I'm some sort of a professional business developer, because it's just super silly from a context of a basic "know it all" consumer, but you still need to keep those points in mind since ED isn't a "game developer", they are simulator developer, i.e. their applications are extensively used in the military markets.  They can't just "wing it" or fake it, their reputation is at stake.

 

I'm not new to DCS at all, I came to DCS when the Spitfire came out and started to follow the developement seriously when the A8 came out. Since day one I prefered DCS to its competitor and I'm big fan of luftwaffe aircrafts and WW2 overall, and I'm bit frustrated that one of my favourite aircraft lacks some contents, same for the rest of WW2. WW2 in DCS has a lot of potential but I understand it doesn't bring as much money as more modern module, however I would have prefered if ED told us that the modifcations we asked for will not be made into the sim because of this, it would have been clear to everybody since day 1.

[peachmonkey]

5 minutes ago, Blackbird12 said:

I'm not new to DCS at all, I came to DCS when the Spitfire came out and started to follow the developement seriously when the A8 came out. Since day one I prefered DCS to its competitor and I'm big fan of luftwaffe aircrafts and WW2 overall, and I'm bit frustrated that one of my favourite aircraft lacks some contents, same for the rest of WW2. WW2 in DCS has a lot of potential but I understand it doesn't bring as much money as more modern module, however I would have prefered if ED told us that the modifcations we asked for will not be made into the sim because of this, it would have been clear to everybody since day 1.

there's a lack of content and problems everywhere you look. The ground AI aim bot functionality for light and heavy flack makes me hate the default maps and I don't appreciate server admin's who use default settings for those units.

anyway, this is a pointless discussion, ED's gotta ED. With DCS I turn to the philosophy of a realist: "not expectations, no disappointments" 

cheers.

[NineLine]

2 hours ago, Blackbird12 said:

They are totaly capable of doing it, the fact is the A8 doesn't bring money anymore so there's no interest to develop it

This thread is so full of so many untrue statements I am just going to have to stop it here. As I have said elsewhere the F8 variant is still planned, simple fact is these are not cookies cutter variants, they all take time and effort. 

 

Anyways, please do not make false and misleading statements like above, it's not helpful. Thanks.

[Pilpoil65]

On 5/5/2023 at 7:36 AM, BIGNEWY said:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on a two year old thread, the feedback is always welcome. I dont agree with you about the price, we do feel it is fair for the work we have put into it, but we also have many sales, currently 50% off for WWII fighters.

The anton was released in 2019 so is using older modelling techniques, as with older modules they certainly can show their age as new modules are realised with more detail like the P-47 which is a fantastic warbird. 

We do like to revisit our older modules, but only when time allows, so fingers crossed for the future. 

thanks

bignewy

 

But you do have to admit that this quote: "Combined with the Fw 190 A-8’s speed, rates of climb and dive and all-round agility, this fearsome amount of firepower gave Allied pilots a real challenge. Even the P-51D Mustang and the Mk.IX Spitfire struggled to match it in a dogfight. When they did land rounds on it, the Anton’s side and rear cockpit armour and armoured engine cowling made it harder to down", which is from your stores page, could be considered misleading. The Anton, as is in DCS, is not a competitive aircraft no matter how you look at it. Plus, it is considered not finished by most, for example, I can abuse the engine at max power for the entire duration of the flight without any repercussion, no oil temp overheat, no damage to the engine. I'm sorry, but the quality of this module is not up to the standard of other products offered on the store. For this reason I would also discourage people from buying it at full price.