Jump to content

F-20 Tigershark Please


TEOMOOSE

Recommended Posts

Personally I'd rather see additional modules that actually went into service.

That said, even more so I'd like to see our currently available modules to get completed, before any new projects are started.

 

But again, that's just my 2 cents and opinion in reply to this new wish 🙂

  • Like 4

System specs:

 

i7-8700K @stock speed - GTX 1080TI @ stock speed - AsRock Extreme4 Z370 - 32GB DDR4 @3GHz- 500GB SSD - 2TB nvme - 650W PSU

HP Reverb G1 v2 - Saitek Pro pedals - TM Warthog HOTAS - TM F/A-18 Grip - TM Cougar HOTAS (NN-Dan mod) & (throttle standalone mod) - VIRPIL VPC Rotor TCS Plus with ALPHA-L grip - Pointctrl & aux banks <-- must have for VR users!! - Andre's SimShaker Jetpad - Fully adjustable DIY playseat - VA+VAICOM

 

~ That nuke might not have been the best of ideas, Sir... the enemy is furious ~ GUMMBAH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we all have our dream aircraft but you also have to be realistic about it. It takes a lot of actual technical data and input from former pilots that operated a particular aircraft to develop a full fidelity simulation. With that said prototype aircraft have the least data available as only the manufacture would have it. And they are not too keen on giving out that data and license to prototypes. 

You should be grateful that the F-5 is available which is closely related to the F-20. At least that can be used as a great base to build an F-20 mod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Evoman said:

I know we all have our dream aircraft but you also have to be realistic about it. It takes a lot of actual technical data and input from former pilots that operated a particular aircraft to develop a full fidelity simulation. With that said prototype aircraft have the least data available as only the manufacture would have it. And they are not too keen on giving out that data and license to prototypes. 

You should be grateful that the F-5 is available which is closely related to the F-20. At least that can be used as a great base to build an F-20 mod.

The F-20 was basically a fully designed plane as far as I know. It just didn't get any sales. It's not much different from the Su-25T or Ka-50 in DCS, which barely existed.

  • Like 3

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Exorcet said:

The F-20 was basically a fully designed plane as far as I know. It just didn't get any sales. It's not much different from the Su-25T or Ka-50 in DCS, which barely existed.

I don't know what documentation exists but I do know I'd love to see at least a F-20 mod and if possible a module 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2022 at 12:10 PM, Exorcet said:

The F-20 was basically a fully designed plane as far as I know. It just didn't get any sales. It's not much different from the Su-25T or Ka-50 in DCS, which barely existed.

This is very much true, but i see that from another perspective as i think we could have some more widespread and relevant aircrafts than prototypes like Ka-50 or Su-25T. Let alone F-20. With very limited data, not real air war history to have some point of reference, practically impossible to find subject matter experts, it would be simply unrealistic module.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2022 at 6:10 AM, Exorcet said:

The F-20 was basically a fully designed plane as far as I know. It just didn't get any sales. It's not much different from the Su-25T or Ka-50 in DCS, which barely existed.



3 Prototypes were built, it never got beyond that, so there's likely no printed manuals for it anywhere.

Ka-50 had over 30, and the Su-25T was a upgrade program which converted Su-25UBs to the T, they only converted a Dozen (including the prototypes.), but it was a active Aircraft and was fielded by Russian, as was the Ka-50,

Comparing those two to a Prototype that only had 3 built, and never was deployed. Ummm,.

7 hours ago, Evoman said:

If its any consolation there is a new F-5 upgrade coming that I just heard off in the below interview. It is mentioned around 24:00min.

 

 

 

There is not a New F-5E Module coming.

  • Like 6

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2022 at 8:49 AM, bies said:

This is very much true, but i see that from another perspective as i think we could have some more widespread and relevant aircrafts than prototypes like Ka-50 or Su-25T. Let alone F-20. With very limited data, not real air war history to have some point of reference, practically impossible to find subject matter experts, it would be simply unrealistic module.

I know many people share your opinion but I don't think we always have to prioritize the more historically influential aircraft, and those kind of get priority by default (ie no surprise we have most of the teen series, Hind/Apache, the upcoming F-4, etc).

Also I think people need to stop looking at realism as a binary true/false thing. Every aircraft in DCS is built to a different level of fidelity, though most are probably around the same amount of "realism". The F-20 having not been in service may miss some details compared to other modules, but that doesn't make totally it unrealistic. At the very least I think a developer would have to try to get in touch with Northrop to access the validity of the module.

On 7/3/2022 at 10:02 PM, SkateZilla said:



3 Prototypes were built, it never got beyond that, so there's likely no printed manuals for it anywhere.

Ka-50 had over 30, and the Su-25T was a upgrade program which converted Su-25UBs to the T, they only converted a Dozen (including the prototypes.), but it was a active Aircraft and was fielded by Russian, as was the Ka-50,

Comparing those two to a Prototype that only had 3 built, and never was deployed. Ummm,.

 

There is not a New F-5E Module coming.

Apparently there is a manual:

 

https://www.avialogs.com/aircraft-n/northrop/item/4941-ntm-1f-20a-1-northtrop-f-20a-utility-flight-manual

 

It even includes how to use the FCR, which I've seen other documents for. The F-20 was a prototype but it was in a pretty advanced state by the time it was killed off. Northrop really wanted to make the sale and they knew they had some competition from the F-16 and lack of support from the US.

  • Like 2

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In conclusion the F-20 could have a slight possibility over the average prototype because it was a in an advanced state ready for sale to what ever country was interested. However because it was never sold and saw no service very little data and know how is known about it with the exception of Northrop and a few test pilots. Therefore it would pretty much be up to Northrop granting the license that would be accompanied with access to all the data they may still have to the party interested in it. Which makes the case for the F-20 uncertain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Yes, the jets that saw service are priority. But the F-20 is not like any project that was unsuccessful, the main reason why it was not sold is bureaucracy. The F-20 was ready for mass production, and it was considered by many as the best fighter never built. I think it would be a great addition to DCS. It is the only non production aircraft that I would love to see simulated in DCS.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, darklanov said:

I think it would be a great addition to DCS

 

I fail to see how an aircraft with no service story can be great for DCS .. all its missions would have to be fictional, same with its liveries, the lack of SME to validate its flight model would mean its Flight Model would also likely be partially fictional ... all this while there are lots of other aircrafts that could be done, like the Sepecat Jaguar or the british Sea Harrier, aircrafts that actually saw combat.


Edited by Rudel_chw
  • Like 2

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

I fail to see how an aircraft with no service story can be great for DCS .. all its missions would have to be fictional, same with its liveries, the lack of SME to validate its flight model would mean its Flight Model would also likely be partially fictional ... all this while there are lots of other aircrafts that could be done, like the Sepecat Jaguar or the british Sea Harrier, aircrafts that actually saw combat.

 

I know a tigershark SME you could ask.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

I fail to see how an aircraft with no service story can be great for DCS

What is wrong? DCS is a simulator. The F-20 is perfect. Simulate test/sales flights, simulate weapon certification, simulate the hypothetical simulation where the F-20 was sold and went to war.

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

.. all its missions would have to be fictional

This is completely typical of DCS, and in my opinion preferable in some ways to historical conflict. Re-enacting history is fun, but you know how things will end, there is less to be surprised about.

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

, same with its liveries, the lack of SME to validate its flight model would mean its Flight Model would also likely be partially fictional

CFD should provide a fairly reasonable flight model, we also have manuals for the plane. Then there is the fact that it's heavily F-5 based, which gives a reference airframe to help fill in some gaps. Not to mention that Northrop is still around and may be able to help.

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

... all this while there are lots of other aircrafts that could be done, like the Sepecat Jaguar or the british Sea Harrier, aircrafts that actually saw combat.

 

Honestly, whether a plane has seen combat or not isn't a make or break deal for me. It's just not that important, and I don't see why people care so much about that (but I accept their opinions). As far as DCS goes, we lack details/features to recreate historical conflicts exactly, so while you can have Jaguars and Sea Harriers, that doesn't mean they will end up in recreations of their historical battles. Secondly, DCS has many developers involved. One plane doesn't have to cost us another.

  • Like 3

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

What is wrong? DCS is a simulator. The F-20 is perfect. Simulate test/sales flights, simulate weapon certification, simulate the hypothetical simulation where the F-20 was sold and went to war.

This is completely typical of DCS, and in my opinion preferable in some ways to historical conflict. Re-enacting history is fun, but you know how things will end, there is less to be surprised about.

CFD should provide a fairly reasonable flight model, we also have manuals for the plane. Then there is the fact that it's heavily F-5 based, which gives a reference airframe to help fill in some gaps. Not to mention that Northrop is still around and may be able to help.

Honestly, whether a plane has seen combat or not isn't a make or break deal for me. It's just not that important, and I don't see why people care so much about that (but I accept their opinions). As far as DCS goes, we lack details/features to recreate historical conflicts exactly, so while you can have Jaguars and Sea Harriers, that doesn't mean they will end up in recreations of their historical battles. Secondly, DCS has many developers involved. One plane doesn't have to cost us another.

I’ve heard good things about Northrop’s willingness to cooperate and provide info on this sorta thing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

What is wrong? DCS is a simulator. The F-20 is perfect. Simulate test/sales flights, simulate weapon certification, simulate the hypothetical simulation where the F-20 was sold and went to war.

This is completely typical of DCS, and in my opinion preferable in some ways to historical conflict. Re-enacting history is fun, but you know how things will end, there is less to be surprised about.

CFD should provide a fairly reasonable flight model, we also have manuals for the plane. Then there is the fact that it's heavily F-5 based, which gives a reference airframe to help fill in some gaps. Not to mention that Northrop is still around and may be able to help.

Honestly, whether a plane has seen combat or not isn't a make or break deal for me. It's just not that important, and I don't see why people care so much about that (but I accept their opinions). As far as DCS goes, we lack details/features to recreate historical conflicts exactly, so while you can have Jaguars and Sea Harriers, that doesn't mean they will end up in recreations of their historical battles. Secondly, DCS has many developers involved. One plane doesn't have to cost us another.

What is the next, a XB-70, a RAH-66, YF-12, XP-67, TSR.2, Avro Arrow, XF-23, Martin-Baker MB5, Commonwealth CA-15 ‘Kangaroo’, Dassault Mirage 4000, IAI Lavi, Focke-Wulf Fw 187 or a Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III? Please, no. Has a great quantity of real enter of service aircrafts with can build on DCS, no a "What if" fandom sceneries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Exorcet said:

Honestly, whether a plane has seen combat or not isn't a make or break deal for me. It's just not that important, and I don't see why people care so much about that (but I accept their opinions).

 

OK, I also accept yours and this is your wish after all 👍   who knows?, ED may even agree to it.

  • Like 1

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

What is the next, a XB-70, a RAH-66, YF-12, XP-67, TSR.2, Avro Arrow, XF-23, Martin-Baker MB5, Commonwealth CA-15 ‘Kangaroo’, Dassault Mirage 4000, IAI Lavi, Focke-Wulf Fw 187 or a Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III? Please, no. Has a great quantity of real enter of service aircrafts with can build on DCS, no a "What if" fandom sceneries.

The F-20 was essentially production ready, which differentiates it from planes like the XB-70, which still had much more engineering work to be done.

That said, I would not mind having the X-plane series in DCS. Taking on the role of a test pilot would be as fun as flying a combat campaign in my opinion.

  • Like 5

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

I fail to see how an aircraft with no service story can be great for DCS .. all its missions would have to be fictional, same with its liveries, the lack of SME to validate its flight model would mean its Flight Model would also likely be partially fictional ... all this while there are lots of other aircrafts that could be done, like the Sepecat Jaguar or the british Sea Harrier, aircrafts that actually saw combat.

 

DCS world is a combat flight sim, but it's also a military sandbox. We're fighting in scenarios and battles that never happened; the cold war turning hot, WW3 etc. In DCS we're flying in an alternate reality where things went south and all hell broke loose. Well I'm telling ya, in this alternate reality , the F-20 made it into production. Where <profanity> hit the fan and war started grinding economies, countries like South Korea , Bahrain, Taiwan, etc... started looking for more affordable solutions to send to the front lines: this is where the F-20 shines. In DCS, the F-5-e is competitive in BFM, but it is rather underpowered and its A2A loadout is very limited. With the new engine and all the new avionics and radar, and with the capability to fire Sparrows, or even AMRAAMs,  the F-20 would slap 😄

As eager as I am to get the Tigershark in DCS, I do agree that aircraft that saw service are a priority, personally I'm looking forward to getting the F-15e and the rumored full fidelity  mig-29. Cheers


Edited by darklanov
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS World has a combar sim, but the F-20 was a failed program with not get sales by a 80s competence vs others on production aircrafts. Intent revive a extinct program with 3 prototipes olny to a "what if" has similar to a RAH-66, canceled programs of a doom prototipes, nothing more.

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

DCS World has a combar sim... "what if"
 

But these two things go hand in hand. Simulation =/= historical recreations only. We'd lose the entire user files section if that was the case. Historical mode would have to be enforced in the ME if that was the case. Etc.

  • Like 2

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Exorcet said:

But these two things go hand in hand. Simulation =/= historical recreations only. We'd lose the entire user files section if that was the case. Historical mode would have to be enforced in the ME if that was the case. Etc.

We talk about aircrafts, no hypotetics wars, missions, etc, with the comunity and ED and 3rd parties build. What next? Build a Narnia or Lord of Rings map?. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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