For those who missed this on DCS (because its a helicopter forum)

[Pilotasso]

I could barely believe my eyes, specialy if this has been arround for a few days and I missed it (as did others Im sure) because it was announced on a forum that deals mainly with the black shark and other helicopters.

 

May 16 DCS Update

 

Since the last update, not much has scientifically changed from a new task point of view. This is primarily because we are in feature freeze and are focused on content iteration and debugging. Most of the work on DCS: Black Shark (now on build 46) has been focusing on the following areas:

 

1- Campaign generation

2- Training mission generation

3- Bug testing with a focus on multiplayer (lots of work to still do)

4- Editing and tweaking of Ka-50 the flight manual (currently 533 pages)

5- Writing of the DCS GUI manual (will be around 200 pages when complete)

6- FPS and RAM usage testing

7- General bug fixing (yes, there are still quite a few)

 

While we realize that many would just wish for us to release it now (particularly after some of the recent videos), we simply cannot do that given all the items listed above. It's too easy to release a buggy and incomplete product when being pressured by consumers and publishers to "just release it". Please be patient. Given that this will be our first self-published product, we want to do it right.

 

With the creation of larger missions in a near-complete mission environment, we are also now tuning and adjusting the simulation for increased frame rates and minimize RAM usage. Mostly given the 6 DOF cockpit, the higher population density or ground objects (buildings, trees, etc.) and the higher elevation mesh detail, DCS will require more system resources to run smoothly. However, we are taking steps to minimize this as much as possible. When complete, we should have a good idea of minimum and recommended system specs that will be realistic and not low-balled.

 

The GUI is just about done with the integration of the Options screen that allows you to set up separate Input options configurations for multiple types of aircraft. So, as we start to add more aircraft to DCS, each aircraft can have its own unique of input command profiles (keys, axis, etc.). Personally, I do all input controller programming now within the DCS Options GUI and I no longer use external profile programs (although that is still an option).

 

Select members of the Sim-Mod team are still working on some terrain enhancements and we hope to have final versions of the Spring and Fall textures soon. Additionally we hope to be updating additional airbase before release. Once complete we can integrate into the DCS code base.

 

The Mission Editor is just about final and just being debugged now. Two nice additions added near the end was the ability to set rules and actions for not just groups but each individual unit within a group and the ability to assign a mobile area trigger that is attached to a moving unit/group. Also, when creating multiplayer missions, each side will now have their own unique text and image briefings. Also, each side can be assigned unique goals. While this will not be a significant feature for Black Shark, which will likely focus on cooperative missions, this will be a welcome feature as we add additional aircraft to the DCS mix.

 

As for what happens after Black Shark, the team has several aircraft modules currently in development (this could include development of 6 DOF cockpits, avionics or flight dynamics). While the A-10A Suite 2 module will still likely follow the Black Shark, the following aircraft are also now planned for DCS in development at one stage or another:

 

1- A-10A Suite 2 (latest version of A-10A in active use)

2- A-10C Suite 3 (we now have permission from the USAF to develop an entertainment version of the simulation we developed for them. We are very happy and excited about this).

3- AH-64A Blk. 49A

4- Su-27

5- F-15C

6- Mi-24V

7- F-16C

8- MiG-29A

 

Naturally, release of aircraft like the Su-27 and F-15C would coincide with integration of advanced flight model for missiles, advanced seeker logic and advanced air-to-air radar logic and modeling.

 

Attached at the beginning of this thread are a few very early images of the 6 DOF cockpits for the Flanker and Eagle. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=422862&postcount=1

 

The actual order of release is still up in the air. For all of these aircraft, we now have all the needed data to model them properly to DCS standards (very important a big factor of what does and does not go into DCS as a flyable). It is important to remember that all of these aircraft will be modeled to the same level of detail as the Black Shark in DCS. As I hope many of you realize after reading and seeing more about Black Shark, this will be a daunting task but will provide the most comprehensive and realistic simulation of flying these aircraft within a combat environment on the PC.

 

Thanks,

Matt

 

This has got my interest for black shark going again. :)

Got a couple of years of wayting though (at the very least). I can barely wait...

[Geier]

 

 

 

This has got my interest for black shark going again. :)

Got a couple of years of wayting though. I can barely wait...

 

Remember that every flyable plane will take ~9 month , so if we want take part in the Su27 - F15 confrontation we'll have to wait for n+45 month. (where "n" is BS's out)

[Pilotasso]

Im more looking forward for F-16 VS flanker match. Brute force SARH VS smart ninble AMRAAM platform. Very interesting and tacticaly rich possibilities. :)

[Woodstock]

Sounds awsome!

Us customers, we will have to globally coordinate our buying behaviour to control sales numbers:

They must be allowed to make a good profit, to invest in personnel and hardware and to continue this series forever.

However, we cannot allow them to make a fortune, because once they can all afford their personal MiG and Fiji island, they might just stop making sims...:smartass:

[*Rage*]

Im more looking forward for F-16 VS flanker match. Brute force SARH VS smart ninble AMRAAM platform. Very interesting and tacticaly rich possibilities. :)

 

See you on HL end of march 2010 ~1830GMT:)

 

Now what to do till then...

[nscode]

No. They need to make a fortune, so that they can fly migs and adjust the simulation :)

[159th_Viper]

Remember that every flyable plane will take ~9 month............

 

Oh I so hope you are right...............however.................my Creaky Bones tell me otherwize.......then again that might just be age.........:D

[monotwix]

That's nice to see the plan for the listed aircraft especially F-16 which has been a very good ground attack plane as well as an interceptor,the Turnado and Su-24 for suppression of enemy defences would look good on the list also, that chioce would colse the gap between the slow ground attack planes and the air superiority fighters meaning that it would play a significant role on the battle field and plenty of room for the mission building.

 

Did some one consider that the fortune plays as bigger part in the sim development as enthusiasm?

[RvETito]

Even if you are fast mover fan I'll suggest anyone to try BS- you'll feel what DCS is all about. For the first time I see a design philosophy based sim. Even try learning the Ka-50- it will open a whole new horizon in front of you. Or at least you can estimate what to expect from the jet modules because they will bring at least the same philosophy, perhaps even more advanced.

[monotwix]

Even if you are fast mover fan I'll suggest anyone to try BS- you'll feel what DCS is all about. For the first time I see a design philosophy based sim. Even try learning the Ka-50- it will open a whole new horizon in front of you. Or at least you can estimate what to expect from the jet modules because they will bring at least the same philosophy, perhaps even more advanced.

 

It's nice of you to say that I will try Ka-50 without a doubt, I'm a little diapointed that there is no plans for naval operations in the near future.

But I'd have to agree with one thing at a time theory.:) since it would require diferent variants of the sea due to the weather.

[A.S]

F-16 !!!

 

loook in my face ..can u see that smile:love:

[TucksonSonny]

Im more looking forward for F-16 VS flanker match. Brute force SARH VS smart ninble AMRAAM platform. Very interesting and tacticaly rich possibilities. :)

 

 

The only thing the Flanker pilot has to do is to fly a couple of big circles and wait until the viper goes bingo and then he can simply finish the job! :D(Outrunning the amraams would be a piece of a cake)

 

The F-16 has to go full burner all the time to keep up with a cruising flanker :D

[GGTharos]

The same piece of cake that'll run his fuel out before the F-16 runs out? :D

 

'Cause you know, if that F-16 makes the Su-27 run for 5-10 minutes, that Su-27 will come back to find the asset it was defending blown up :)

 

The only thing the Flanker pilot has to do is to fly a couple of big circles and wait until the viper goes bingo and then he can simply finish the job! :D(Outrunning the amraams would be a piece of a cake)

[monotwix]

The only thing the Flanker pilot has to do is to fly a couple of big circles and wait until the viper goes bingo and then he can simply finish the job! :D(Outrunning the amraams would be a piece of a cake)

 

The F-16 has to go full burner all the time to keep up with a cruising flanker :D

 

We would have to wait and see it with the new missile models and see if it's a piece of cake or piece of tart.

[RvETito]

F-16 !!!

 

loook in my face ..can u see that smile:love:

 

Naaah... comrade ;) You don't mean that :) What about Mr. Flanky? :D

[TucksonSonny]

We would have to wait and see it with the new missile models and see if it's a piece of cake or piece of tart.

 

An amraam can not chase a flanker for 5-10 minutes…

 

F-16 pilots have even NATO instructions to deal with flanker targets:

If a flanker is popping up on the edge of his radar then the instruction pronounce: “Full burner to home base and come back with the F-15 or the raptor :D”

[GGTharos]

An AMRAAM can't, but each time a flanker wants to out-run one, he has to spend a minute maneuvering, at the least.

 

And I was never aware of suck instructions, especially given the current quality of F-16 radars. ;) It's not the same as an F-15 fighting a Flanker (the Flanker should have some BVR advantage over an F-16, IMHO) but the F-16 can still give it some run for its money.

[monotwix]

An amraam can not chase a flanker for 5-10 minutes…

 

F-16 pilots have even NATO instructions to deal with flanker targets:

If a flanker is popping up on the edge of his radar then the instruction pronounce: “Full burner to home base and come back with the F-15 or the raptor :D”

At least full burner and RTB but can you imagine doing that with A-10?

I fly flankers 90% of times and I wouldn't underestimate F-16 when it's out.

[GGTharos]

I believe your missiles in the flanker will work a little more reliably in DCS ... also you should (ideally) have a radar range advantage over the F-16's, allowing you an earlier BVR set up.

 

All this is something that's not really practiced a lot in LO today, I believe.

[Vekkinho]

Very, very good move from ED!!!

 

Thank U guys!

[Vekkinho]

P.S.

 

I'd like to beta test MiG-29A or participate in it's creating for DCS so if ED takes any reservations...

 

I already participated in MiG-21bis add-on modeling for FS2004 that was built by SOKO Z.I. and published by Lago. Check it here:

1) http://www.soko.hr/source/pre_index.html

2) http://www.soko.hr/source/Addon/Add_on.htm

 

I was focused on flight dynamics of the modeled aircraft!

 

Check this too:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=480422&postcount=6

[S77th-GOYA]

There was talk of modelling an F-16 months ago. This is nothing new and I'm still not impressed. I might be when I see the jet products but not now.

[badaboom]

Does the A-10C have ground radar?

[GGTharos]

No, it does not. It does have a FLIR pod.

[Pilotasso]

There was talk of modelling an F-16 months ago. This is nothing new and I'm still not impressed. I might be when I see the jet products but not now.

 

yes but whats different is that now its a formalized plan for DCS, before it was just a hypothesis for some future SIM project. Theres a difference between Tank killers and the F-16 SIM and the DCS module of F-16 since it reduces the ammount of time because you dont have to wait for one SIm project to be abandoned in order to start the next.