Jump to content

Can we expect any new features in the future?


Digitalvole

Recommended Posts

Could someone please point me in the direction of a rundown of where the Hornet is at and what’s still left to be done? There’s a roadmap from a few years ago but I get the feeling things may have changed. Eg I read something on Reddit the other day that said we are no longer going to get MSI, is that true?

Is it nearly complete, barring bug fixes, or is there still a fair bit of stuff that needs to be added?

Thanks 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great thanks, I was looking in the roadmap thread. Doh!

I have further questions 😀

Whats Gen-X? (other than someone who likes listening to Nirvana)

Tunning, what do we think that means with things such as radar? Also it mentions MSI so I guess the thing on Reddit was wrong

Thanks again 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Digitalvole said:

Great thanks, I was looking in the roadmap thread. Doh!

I have further questions 😀

Whats Gen-X? (other than someone who likes listening to Nirvana)

Tunning, what do we think that means with things such as radar? Also it mentions MSI so I guess the thing on Reddit was wrong

Thanks again 🙂

Gen-X has a RF expendable decoy.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m back with another question and it is as follows…

Just reading the news letter about the F16s ability to share target info (ground targets by the sound of it) over datalink and was wondering if the Hornet can do the same thing? I’m hoping the answer is yes 😄

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real world yes.

There's a LOT the real Hornet can do that is yet to be implemented into the DCS Hornet.

  • Like 1

 1A100.png?format=1500w  

Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

I’m back with another question and it is as follows…

Just reading the news letter about the F16s ability to share target info (ground targets by the sound of it) over datalink and was wondering if the Hornet can do the same thing? I’m hoping the answer is yes 😄

Quote

MSI tuning and some functions

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the answers.
So, the real one can, ours can’t yet. But it’s likely to be implemented in the future. Is that about right? 
No one can answer that question but ED themselves. It is still very unclear how the final version of the DCS Hornet will compare to the real thing.

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Harker said:

No one can answer that question but ED themselves. It is still very unclear how the final version of the DCS Hornet will compare to the real thing.

The plot thickens! 😉

Lets hope the Hornet gets some love before too long. Fingers crossed 🤞

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Harker said:
17 hours ago, Digitalvole said:
Thanks for the answers.
So, the real one can, ours can’t yet. But it’s likely to be implemented in the future. Is that about right? 

No one can answer that question but ED themselves. It is still very unclear how the final version of the DCS Hornet will compare to the real thing.

I know the answer of ED « when we have new, we will share it » or « EA take time, be patient » or « if you are not happy with EA, don’t buy it and wait »

No more 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

Lets hope the Hornet gets some love before too long. Fingers crossed 🤞

Considering how the last time this was brought up, even radar related bugfixed where swept around the 'too classified' rug. We simply don't know what they plan to do, but the safe thing to assume is that ACLS will come and everything else will remain as is for the forseeable future. Since they clearly lack the resources to properly finish the Hornet, there should be some kind of community driven wishlist as to what bugs are most important to fix and what missing features should be prioritized. I'd say that MSI and the whole overhaul of the air to air suite is obviously out of the picture; it'd require an almost total overhaul of many mechanics and completely new features to be implemented. 

 

I'd say that if we forget the realism aspect, the current datalink correlation system is going to be close enough ish for the capabilities of other 4th gen platforms. It does not realistically demonstrate the capabilities of a real Hornet from the timeframe they are modelling but it's kind of 'useable' enough and it still has an advantage against realistic opponents from its own timeframe (Su-27, Mig-29), which sort of realistically represents the technological advantage that NATO aircraft had over Russian ones in the mid 2000s.

 

The real big issue with the Hornet is the very degraded radar workflow you're forced to follow. What we really need is an actually implemented TWS AUTO (which is not easy to do at all, it took HB like a year to fully implement) and some of the quality of life aspects of the radar. Having the ability to set the scan centering in RWS, making sure that undesignate doesn't nuke trackfiles and having the ability to que TWS auto from STT with undes would be a massive improvement and I dare to say that having a realistic radar is better than having realistic sensor fusion. The other QOL features we'd need are the following: better slew rate on the radar page, the ability to designate L&S from the SA page, and showing datalink tracks on all the MSI displays. 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering how the last time this was brought up, even radar related bugfixed where swept around the 'too classified' rug. We simply don't know what they plan to do, but the safe thing to assume is that ACLS will come and everything else will remain as is for the forseeable future. Since they clearly lack the resources to properly finish the Hornet, there should be some kind of community driven wishlist as to what bugs are most important to fix and what missing features should be prioritized. I'd say that MSI and the whole overhaul of the air to air suite is obviously out of the picture; it'd require an almost total overhaul of many mechanics and completely new features to be implemented. 
 
I'd say that if we forget the realism aspect, the current datalink correlation system is going to be close enough ish for the capabilities of other 4th gen platforms. It does not realistically demonstrate the capabilities of a real Hornet from the timeframe they are modelling but it's kind of 'useable' enough and it still has an advantage against realistic opponents from its own timeframe (Su-27, Mig-29), which sort of realistically represents the technological advantage that NATO aircraft had over Russian ones in the mid 2000s.
 
The real big issue with the Hornet is the very degraded radar workflow you're forced to follow. What we really need is an actually implemented TWS AUTO (which is not easy to do at all, it took HB like a year to fully implement) and some of the quality of life aspects of the radar. Having the ability to set the scan centering in RWS, making sure that undesignate doesn't nuke trackfiles and having the ability to que TWS auto from STT with undes would be a massive improvement and I dare to say that having a realistic radar is better than having realistic sensor fusion. The other QOL features we'd need are the following: better slew rate on the radar page, the ability to designate L&S from the SA page, and showing datalink tracks on all the MSI displays. 
Yeah, the current radar workflow is rather difficult, owing to the current trackfile behavior and the absence of MSI. It's a complaint I get often from new players in our group and all I can say to them is it's still WIP.

IMO, at the very least, MSI needs to be partially implemented, with the radar and datalink as two sensors. Having the FLIR contribute to MSI would be almost as important, but I'd rank it below those two.

Trackfiles are in dire need of a rework and so is trackfile memory. MSI trackfiles exist regardless of what the radar is doing and that's a necessary thing to get right. The radar is just one contributing sensor to them. That would solve issues with smooth transitions between STT and TWS, for example. It would also allow off-board trackfiles to be designated, ranked, included in TWS AUTO and have the FLIR slave to them.

Most importantly, It would actually allow us to easily step through all trackfiles, whether our own radar sees them or not, so that TWS AUTO becomes useful and we don't have to constantly need to switch back to TWS MAN or RWS to make azimuth and elevation adjustments, as we do now. We'd be able to designate any trackfile and TWS AUTO would focus on that.

TWS AUTO done right would also be important, because now it's just the same as in the Viper. I would rank a correct TWS AUTO as very important, but again, below the above items.

And then you of course have your low hanging fruit, such as consistent ranks between RDR, AZ/EL and SA, ranking not changing when designating L&S and/or DT2, off-board tracks on AZ/EL, correct trackfile extrapolation so they don't jump on the display, trackfile memory not affected by the brick timeout setting and correct TDC speed. I would (hopefully) expect these to be fixed in the relatively near future, considering they're already mostly implemented and just in need of adjustment.
  • Like 15
  • Thanks 1

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, gregfp66 said:

I fear the hornet will never reach the level of completion expected of dcs standard

Will wait untils its finally complete before buying anything from ED

Same for me, ED will not have any interest to finish quickly the hornet because no more players will buy it. 
Due to this, i will not buy any module from ED too. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there been any word from ED on any of this stuff? I know things always take longer than expected, and also that they need to release new modules to keep the cash coming in. But reading some of this is making me very wary of getting anything in early access again, just out of interest what modules have left early access/are feature complete? 

Staff being moved from one project to another temporarily, though disappointing, is understandable but..

2 hours ago, ПТНПНХ said:

The Hornet was ED's first full fidelity multirole jet and a learning experience for them. There is a ton of legacy code that would have to be re-written in order to fix a lot of stuff. 

The above is worrying.

Also talk about certain things not happening due to an hitherto unknown classified status is alarming.

Its not the cost of the module but the time and effort one has to put into learning it that would make an incomplete Hornet so heartbreaking imho.

Not to mention it kinda flys in the face of “we are modelling a 2007 USN Hornet” because I’d say a 2007 Hornet without said features is about as realistic as a 2007 Hornet with GBU 54s for example. (Is it 2007 or 2005, I can’t remember.) Just saying.

Come on ED put your customer service hat on and give us the lowdown, that way this all gets cleared up and no need for us to speculate. 👍😀

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wish development of the Hornet would be faster but as others already have said, ED have their reasons why they moved the engineers to other modules. One thing we shouldn‘t forget: The Hornet benefits from development of the modules. Patience is the key word

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Weasel said:

 Patience is the key word emoji6.png

Sorry but 4 years after initial release, with end of EA planned in 2021, with no roadmap for hornet, with only very small team on dev, with no update or video from wags since many month, it is impossible to be more patient. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, hanab said:

Sorry but 4 years after initial release, with end of EA planned in 2021, with no roadmap for hornet, with only very small team on dev, with no update or video from wags since many month, it is impossible to be more patient. 

Agreed...IMHO ED is just about ready to abandon the Hornet.

  • Like 2

"You see, IronHand is my thing"

My specs:  W10 Pro, I5/11600K o/c to 4800 @1.32v, 64 GB 3200 XML RAM, ASUS RTX3060ti/8GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. I only expect one or two more small updates to fix critical bugs, or add simplistic versions of a couple of the big missing items. After that it’ll be out of EA and put on the shelf to collect dust.

(Yes I know it may receive small incremental updates once released, but with everything else on EDs plate, they will be few and far between.)

It would seem what we have now is basically all we’re going to get.


Edited by norman99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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