Jump to content

Roadmap for release out of Early Access?


J20Stronk

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if you guys have a roadmap of changes and/or features you're planning for the JF-17 to consider it a "finished" product.

 

The module's been out for about 2 years now, and I can't imagine there's much left to add in terms of "major features" like new modes, weapons or sensors.

 

There are a couple things I have noticed could use tweaking or finishing (TGP functionality and operation, cockpit textures, MFD graphics and visuals, etc.),  but I would like to know what items the team are focusing to get this module out of early access.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

will review and see what's left

i think several things need to be finished: manual laser btn (wait for SME), radar weather mode, migration akg to scheme, and manual.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1小时前,uboats说:

will review and see what's left

i think several things need to be finished: manual laser btn (wait for SME), radar weather mode, migration akg to scheme, and manual.

AND INS for SD-10😭

  • Like 3

Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed.

Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, uboats said:

will review and see what's left

i think several things need to be finished: manual laser btn (wait for SME), radar weather mode, migration akg to scheme, and manual.

Yes, those too.

Good to hear about implementing a scheme for the AKG, it really needs a proper FM and terminal attack maneuver.

 

Also nice to see the Manual Laser being looked at. I knew there was something off about its operation - seemed odd that it's actuated with some nebulous keybind that isn't physically located on the plane.

 

I imagine you *could* forego stuff like the WA Radar Mode since ED hasn't updated the weather system for it to be of any use, at least for now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everyone.


I'm here to ask a few questions, which probably not many people have much interest in. However, I, like some others, may also be interested in the preparatory phases of a mission, and not just the comabte itself. So I leave here some questions.  


- Details such as the logic of the MFDs, that sometimes when you click on an OSB you go back to the previous menu, sometimes not.
-Check list function operationality (partially implemented but long time in WIP)
- Fuel flow information (I posted in another topic an image, probably from the simulator, where this information appears on the engine parameters screen)


Well, there must be other small details that I don't remember, but in general, they are aspects like these. Details of the aircraft's software system.
I know we are talking about a combat simulator and not the Xplane, but these details, at least for me, are as relevant to the simulation as the armament operating system.


Thanks!
Salute!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, uboats said:

yup

So when are you going to release some info about your next module??? 🙂


Edited by PLAAF
  • Like 1

qLjvyQ3.png

My Adorable Communist Errand Girls  🙂

Led by me, the Communist Errand Panda 🥰

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to see proper flight models and guidance for all missiles in DCS (yes yes.... I know about the "it's classified" arguments) but we can surely do better than we already have.

I'd also like to see the removal of the totally unrealistic behavior of missiles losing lock on slow targets and inability to track helicopters at all.

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Was more refering to this one. The much slicker and thinner 120C is a lot more draggy in DCS with the motor burned out and in the end-game. The SD10/PL12 just coasts along down low and maintains its energy much better right now.

What do you mean "maintains its energy better"? Pulling +13 g or +1 g?

Looking at those graphs, the missile is still short of range when it runs out of energy.

You realize without a proper flight model (we don't exactly know how the missiles are modelled and appear to be some form of SFM-level simplicity) all this talk is nonsense?

Until each missile gets full AFM-level flight modelling specific to the missile with realistic guidance, anything we do in DCS is going to be wrong at some level.

The original reason the SD-10 was modelled the way it was, was because it wouldn't reach the range and terminal velocity required. Unfortunately it meant an OP missile at shorter ranges, but it was a sad reflection of what is otherwise possible within the confines of DCS at the present time.

You realize the AIM-120 is also wrong?


Edited by Tiger-II

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

It is aerodynamically consistent with ED's CFD research which backs it up. Guidence and motor specs set aside as those aren't public. Why doesn't Deka publish their CFD research paper on the SD-10 like ED did with the AMRAAM and Heatblur with the Phoenix?

US vs. Chinese missiles. You know the dev team are Chinese and have special access that they can't make public?

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

If they can't make it public they might as well make it up or implement it how they want to for obvious propagnda reasons. And again, CFD isn't anything that is classified, it is a known shape/object sent through a virtual wind tunnel - that's like the essence of modern dcs missile models. Isn't DCS supposed to be built on publically available data as per their own claims?

Aircraft flight models are, but AFAIK that is not true for the missiles. The missiles are modelled by ED and 3rd parties don't have access. All they can do is use an existing asset and tune it, but otherwise they don't write the flight model for the missile. They can't even create guidance routines.

RADAR missiles are by far the weakest part of DCS.


Edited by Tiger-II

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

we don't exactly know how the missiles are modelled and appear to be some form of SFM-level simplicity

 We actually do know, read the development report below

2 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

You realize the AIM-120 is also wrong?

Currently its the best simulated missile in DCS

 

  • Thanks 3

My skins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh... I remember reading that.

Is this true for the SD-10 yet? From what I recall the -120 flight model discussed is only for the -120 and not all missiles.

Which model is being used by ED since they took over the SD-10 after the first round of ... "controversy"?

Note that I'm not defending the SD-10 here - I want to see ALL missiles accurately modelled, including their guidance. I'm critical of all missiles, including the Phoenix (it's still wrong).

SAMs drive me crazy.


Edited by Tiger-II

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tiger-II said:

Is this true for the SD-10 yet?

Sorta, ED took over the SD-10, did some CFD's, got different numbers and decided to nerf it based on their results and to take over all missile development from 3rd party to bring them down to the same standard. They are currently reworking the missile API's and everything and they plan to rework all air to air missiles but its a long process. As far I know, only the Aim-120 and R-27 has been reworked yet (R-27 report https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/medialibrary/bda/xnncgbqcdftgat1awbmcegln17yf2c8m/R-27_Missile_Family.pdf) and the R-77 should be the next one. The SD10 hasnt been reworked yet but changes were made.


Edited by Mike_Romeo
  • Like 2

My skins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back on topic guys, we don't need another SD-10 OP/UP/correct/incorrect thread.

 

I'd like to see an update from DIS about any outstanding additions or changes remain for the JF-17, and maybe a clue about what their next project is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J20Stronk said:

Back on topic guys, we don't need another SD-10 OP/UP/correct/incorrect thread.

 

I'd like to see an update from DIS about any outstanding additions or changes remain for the JF-17, and maybe a clue about what their next project is.

I agree, but the fact we're back on that topic says a lot about the Jeff already. We can "nit-pick" details like this seeing as the rest of the aircraft is pretty much done.

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, only thing SD-10 is missing compared to AMRAAM flight model wise is it’s new INS modeling, that currently only AMRAAM has. And Deka has stated that they like all 3rd parties need to wait for ED to finalize and release and mature the API before integrating it. So while the flight model itself is on standard with AMRAAM, the INS guidance is the only thing that isn’t, and will be resolved in time as there is no other missile with this new INS model

  • Like 1

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

I remembered there's CFD report from player posted on reddit showing some comparison between in game perf and some cfd tool

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Poenix is only "wrong" in terms of guidence API and fitlers.

I'm talking overall. I know it had its aerodynamics updated. It doesn't mean much though when the guidance is still wrong (especially for such a long-range missile).

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

It works just fine when employed correctly.

What? The flight profile isn't as it should be.

Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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