DCS Newsletter discussion August 19th 2022 - Introducing the Super Sabre | Mi-24P Sight Update | B-52 Textures Progress

[Dragon1-1]

HB is good about making variants, so maybe we'll get the non-TRAM A-6E as a bonus. We need a Vietnam era A-6E because of Flight of the Intruder.

[exhausted]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

The F-4E were're getting technically flewa couple ofsorties during the tail-end ofthe Vietnam war. The F-8J is a full-up late Vietnam module. TheA-7E flew sorties during Linebackers I and II and if you leave the FLIR pod at home (and don'tmind the FLIR-imaging HUD), it's also quite alright. If you INOP the TRAM on the A-6E, you can get away pretendng to be an early A-6E. Not all hope is lost in terms of the "Vietnamisation" of DCS

Why they didn't decide to do the F-8E, which flew the lion's share of missions in US use between 1962 and 1973, I will never understand. Why does everything they put out have to be a little bit wrong?

[jojyrocks]

4 hours ago, exhausted said:

Why they didn't decide to do the F-8E, which flew the lion's share of missions in US use between 1962 and 1973, I will never understand. Why does everything they put out have to be a little bit wrong?

 

 

Not a big deal nor wrong either since F-8J also flew in Vietnam war missions. It is also happens to be an upgraded F-8E, so all the better.

 

 

A VF-24 F-8J on USS Hancock deployments to Vietnam between 1970 and 1973, In the Gulf of Tonkin.

[jojyrocks]

11 hours ago, Cathnan said:

Century series is finally unlocked . Maybe F104 one day. A man can dream, right? Also that Vietnam space is getting crowded. And that without Vietnam

F-104 is day one buy for me. Hope this gets realized one day.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

7 hours ago, Eldur said:

Great to see Grinnelli becoming a 3rd party dev!

Well, I am still waiting for the F-22A go vector-thrusting teased some time ago.

[Gunfreak]

9 hours ago, Fromthedeep said:

Those are going to be 70s or 80s modules, the A-6 and the A-7 are not going to be a Vietnam era appropriate variants.

The Viggen is a 90s updated version,  yet it's always added to fly on cold war servers with the early MiGs, F86,Mig21 and,F-5. So a slightly too new letter doesn't matter that much. As long as you got the weapons restrictions.

[Bremspropeller]

3 hours ago, jojyrocks said:

Not a big deal nor wrong either since F-8J also flew in Vietnam war missions. It is also happens to be an upgraded F-8E, so all the better.

True, but the F-8E had more kills, flew a duckton more missions (including with the Marines from Da Nang) and has the quirkier handling around the boat. The BLC and additional drag by that 40° flap setting helped curing the Crusader's speed-instability in the pattern. It also took the fun out of landing on an Essex class boat with a speed-unstable airplane at 140kts at night...

What they didn't fix with the J was the throttle-lag of the J57 engine, which is going to get a lot of people the first time they'll try to trap. And the consecutive 50 times...

[Fromthedeep]

9 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

TheA-7E flew sorties during Linebackers I and II and if you leave the FLIR pod at home (and don'tmind the FLIR-imaging HUD), it's also quite alright. If you INOP the TRAM on the A-6E, you can get away pretendng to be an early A-6E. Not all hope is lost in terms of the "Vietnamisation" of DCS

Well, the A-7E we're getting also has some other differences like the HARM control panel. An A-6E TRAM also has a different radar than the early A-6Es and we don't know if we get a TRAM in the first place. We could end up with a SWIP, which has other differences like the missile control panel, different bombing modes and such.

[Fromthedeep]

1 hour ago, Gunfreak said:

The Viggen is a 90s updated version,  yet it's always added to fly on cold war servers with the early MiGs, F86,Mig21 and,F-5. So a slightly too new letter doesn't matter that much. As long as you got the weapons restrictions.

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't fly 90s era AJS-37 on a historically accurate Cold War server but most public DCS servers care about gameplay instead of historical accuracy. So I don't doubt that the upcoming Vietnam server will be perfectly fine with Mig-21Bis/Mig-19P vs post DSGC slatted F-4E and F-5E. Out of those, the only one that actually fits is the F-4E.

 

With that being said, that's a very specific case, because the AJ-37 and the AJS-37 mainly differs in things that you can control. It doesn't have a different radar, engine, flight characteristics, bombing modes, etc. Aside from weapon restriction, you shouldn't use the TERNAV and the DTC and you shouldn't use the ELINT capabilities and now you have some minor cockpit differences. 

 

Out of the previous list, the A-7E is kinda in this regard, but the A-6E (depending on the variant, we may end up with a SWIP) can be somewhat different or drastically different. It also doesn't help that the Migs aren't Vietnam era variant either. For a proper Vietnam era USAF vs VPAF lineup, we'd need at the very least a Mig-21PFM, a Mig-17F, a Mig-19S and F-105, A-1 for the US. The USN is a lot more complicated case, but you can still kinda cobble something together with the F-4J and the A-4, and if you aren't too strict about historical accuracy, the A-7E. 

 

As far as HB, Cobra already talked about how providing multiple variants isn't a choice that can be sustainable long term, because it takes a ton of resources to provide them. I wouldn't be surprised if the F-4 was the last product where they provide multiple variants.

[bies]

Wow, Super Sabre in DCS! Century serie has great potential.

[dawgie79]

I wish for some creativity in module choice from 3rd party devs. Like a C-130 Hercules tanker, a V-22 Osprey, or an E-2D Hawkeye or something.

Or a civilian asset pack to make DCS seem more alive. 

Edited August 20, 2022 by dawgie79

[BIGNEWY]

20 hours ago, westr said:

I never complain about ED and I do really appreciate the work that is involved in these ai models it’s amazing but I remember listening to an interview with Nick Grey and he acknowledged in the interview that one of the requests that comes up a lot is in cockpit pilot bodies and it was something that ED will start looking into. That was a long time ago now, it was mentioned that it would be coming soon to the hind and the apache but it’s gone quiet again on the subject. A10c KA-50 F-16 AH-64 Hind still no sign of it being implemented, ED have you now shifted your focus onto other items? 

 

As we've said many times now, we are currently working on the helo pilots, once those are done, the team will work on fixed wing jet pilots

17 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

On the other hand, still no MB-339...

It is a coming. There are a number of items for the 3rd party to resolve, and once done and fully tested, we look forward to releasing.

21 hours ago, kotor633 said:

Except for the announcement regarding Petrovich AI voice-overs and the adjustment of the 9K113 system (again) no earth-shattering news...

 Not every newsletter will be earth shattering news, but announcing a new aircraft is quite big. 

20 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

So we're just gonna get more and more Vietnam era planes and no Vietnam map.

Cheer up, you never know what the future holds.

[Mogster]

9 hours ago, Fromthedeep said:

As far as HB, Cobra already talked about how providing multiple variants isn't a choice that can be sustainable long term, because it takes a ton of resources to provide them. I wouldn't be surprised if the F-4 was the last product where they provide multiple variants.

Razbam have been saying the same thing. Less variants in future.

Edited August 20, 2022 by Mogster

[kotor633]

vor einer Stunde schrieb BIGNEWY:

 Not every newsletter will be earth shattering news, but announcing a new aircraft is quite big. 

Yes, you can see it that way...or not.

[WinterH]

1 hour ago, kotor633 said:

Yes, you can see it that way...or not.

Well honestly, to each their own but, voiceovers for Petrovich being exciting and F-100D being not just doesn't compute for me personally. And I'm a huge fan of Hind.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

5 hours ago, dawgie79 said:

I wish for some creativity in module choice from 3rd party devs. Like a C-130 Hercules tanker, a V-22 Osprey, or an E-2D Hawkeye or something.

Or a civilian asset pack to make DCS seem more alive. 

 

A usable tanker would be nice. I've said this numerous times in the A-6 thread in HB's section that the KA-6 is an essential part of the A-6 experience since everyone flew the KA-6 at some point. And a V-22 would be real interesting.

Don't hold your breath for an AWACS, though, that's entering the kind of classifications that make for impracticality.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

21 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

On the other hand, still no MB-339...

It is a coming. There are a number of items for the 3rd party to resolve, and once done and fully tested, we look forward to releasing.

*Sigh* But good to know.

[exhausted]

20 hours ago, jojyrocks said:

 

 

Not a big deal nor wrong either since F-8J also flew in Vietnam war missions. It is also happens to be an upgraded F-8E, so all the better.

 

 

A VF-24 F-8J on USS Hancock deployments to Vietnam between 1970 and 1973, In the Gulf of Tonkin.

Only the Navy flew the F-8J. The Marines would be immediately excluded by this unhinged choice. The -E was always the way to go.

[dawgie79]

20 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

A usable tanker would be nice. I've said this numerous times in the A-6 thread in HB's section that the KA-6 is an essential part of the A-6 experience since everyone flew the KA-6 at some point. And a V-22 would be real interesting.

Don't hold your breath for an AWACS, though, that's entering the kind of classifications that make for impracticality.

If I hold my breath I die so I won't.

Anyway. I wouldn't mind a KA-6, since we know HB is already working on an A-6. But that's not what I meant. I really meant creativity. A C-130 Hercules is something we don't already have in some form or another, in DCS. I has multiple uses (not unique in usecases but this plane in DCS would be unique: 4 engines, big & slow, not a fighter, bomber or another kind of attack machine), and as I said, it's really different, and most importantly, still in use today in the real world, so it's not bound to some specific timeperiod (i.e. "cold war" hype which I don't have interest in, none whatsoever, hence I'd like something more general). 

AWACS, I know, but still would be very unique within DCS. Also, it's carrier capable, which adds another challenge with these types of planes.
Osprey would be my first wish for a 3rd party dev who's getting creative. It stands out due to its looks, its versatility, and the way one can fly  it.

Lastly. These were just on the top of my head. I just meant I'd wish for a 3rd party dev to be creative in module choice, surprise us!

That is why I also mentioned a civilian asset pack. I would love that anyway. I know there are a few mods for that but some of us want to keep DCS mod-free and clean. Furthermore, some civilian assets like boats (yachts, coast guard, utility ships), airliners (a small one like a A320/B737 and a bigger one like A350/B747. Maybe also a smaller one like a Learjet. Citation or Gulfstream, next to the Yak-40 already in DCS).

Again, I know I know, there are mods already. But I and others don't like mods.

 

Edited August 21, 2022 by dawgie79

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

On 8/20/2022 at 9:02 PM, exhausted said:

The -E was always the way to go.

Yet, we're getting the Juliet. Also, it's an airframe that was involved with other air arms around the world, too, not just American ones. 

By that logic, I could say it's "wrong" since it isn't the F-8E(FN) or F-8P. What if I *really* wanted the SHERLOC RWR? This is just the reality of DCS development; the best documentation about the nitty gritty may make the Juliet the most accessible one for development. 

When HB comes around to working on the Intruder, I'd want a SWIP A-6 with all of the neatest kit, but we take what we get.

Edited August 23, 2022 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Eldur]

On 8/20/2022 at 10:28 AM, Bremspropeller said:

What they didn't fix with the J was the throttle-lag of the J57 engine, which is going to get a lot of people the first time they'll try to trap. And the consecutive 50 times...

To be fair, the DCS community has plenty of practice with that based on how the Hornet's 404s had been for quite a long time...