FC 2024 and future FC candidates

[cailean_556]

I have already said part of this in the newsletter, but I wanted to add and expand on it here.

The announcement of the FC2024 upgrade was both welcome and also something I felt was a little underwhelming.

Of course I understand people like myself (those who have been involved with DCS and Full Fidelity modules since 2015 or earlier) are not the target audience of these new 'additions' to the FC family, I felt that adding FC-level modules of aircraft that are already FF modules was a bit backwards in going forward.

I provided what I thought was a good compromise - very similar variants to the FF modules, but different enough in their own ways to still provide owners of the FC modules to 'progress' to the FF module, if they so chose. These same variants would also be just different enough that those who already have FC3, or the FF modules, incentive to purchase these FC modules also - making the investment much more profitable.

I understand it's not as simple as tweaking a couple values in a spreadsheet and viola! new plane, but by providing players with somewhat less capable versions of aircraft that are already Full Fidelity modules it does not diminish either the already-FF modules, nor does it ignore or exclude the FC modules. By being similar (both aerodynamically, externally and internally) they could share flight models (though in some cases with less efficiency due to differing engines/control surfaces etc) - reducing the level of work required, while maximising the appeal, and these can be gradually refined as time permits to be more reflective of the real aircraft - as every other FC aircraft has done at some point.

F-86F - F-86A Sabre The major offensive difference being that, unlike the F-86F, the F-86A can't carry missiles - which is perfect considering the MiG-15 is a 'guns only' fighter also. Having a 'less capable' variant of essentially the same place provides ease of learning (the intent of FC) with the logical progression to the 'more advanced' FF F-86F module that adds the complexity of early IR missiles.

MiG-15bis - MiG-15PB While eventually the 'PB' was dropped when the modifications (plumbing for drop tanks on the wings) became standard, the MiG-15PB was powered by the slightly less performant RD-45, providing incentive to 'upgrade' to the FF MiG-15bis module for better performance characteristics. 

F-5E - F-5A Freedom Fighter - no radar or RWR (similar to the F-86 and MiG-15 in that respect), the addition of 'tip tanks', optional IFR probe. A good mix of 'something the others don't have' but also lacking some things the F-5E has, and with no ability to really operate in night-time conditions - so there's incentive to upgrade. Plus, if someone just wants to do aerobatics or practice formations and/or mimic Patrolle Suisse without the 'clicky pit hassle' - this could be that outlet. Additionally, with the optional IFR probe, one can practice probe-and-drogue IFR on a Western-style aircraft with simplified systems instead of the Su-33 (which also serves as the FC carrier operations option.

I can see future FC-level aircraft as being a way to 'get around' the loss of, or inability to obtain, documentation for older aircraft that would be welcome in DCS but either do not yet have models representative in DCS, or have models in DCS but are not flyable. As well, by focusing on 'older' aircraft, this 'simplifies' the cockpit in that it does not require MFD pushbutton submenus thus requiring less buttons.

For example,

F-16A - Visually similar, though faster and more nimble on account of being lighter - restricted (depending on Block) to IR-only AAMs. The F-16A would be a highly attractive FC-level module to encourage customers (new and old) to purchase. The F-16A was in use with many countries in DCS, and in the regions depicted in the DCS terrains current and future. The F-16A would provide high capability ease-of-learning and would naturally push those who chose this as their first 'FC' module to progress to the more complex, more capable F-16C FF module. It could also, depending on whether or not documentation could be sourced, provide a solid foundation for an eventual FF-level F-16A module.

Mirage III - Similar to the Mirage 2000C, and the Mirage F1, the Mirage III would also be a great addition to DCS as an FC-level module. Its standout quality, compared to the F-16A above, is that it would be able to utilise the radar-guided Matra R530. It would be limited in terms of ordnance carried but would otherwise be useful in various conflicts that are able to be simulated in DCS as well as being used by a number of countries included in DCS.

F-7MG - A Chinese license-built variation of the MiG-21, the majority of the J-7/F-7 family were daytime interceptors that utilised only IR-guided AAMs. They differed externally from MiG-21s by having a 'double delta' wing. The F-7MG (export production J-7E) differs from the E in that it had a doppler radar (so it could work at night/in all-weather, at least on paper - still IR AAMs only), HUD and HOTAS. This variant can also carry a wide variation of IR AAMs - including Chinese PL-5/PL-8 missiles, French Magic IIs and US AIM-9s. It did, however, only have a single gun and that gun only had 60 or so rounds. Standard loadout was 2x IR AAMs and 2x drop tanks (outboard) as well as, optionally, a centre-line drop tank. In DCS the F-7MG is 'primitive' enough to not require multiple complex MFDs (making it an ideal candidate for an FC-level module) and different enough from the MiG-21bis to stand on its own. Users could progress from the F-7MG to the MiG-21bis FF module, or to aircraft such as the JF-17. A FF-level module could also be developed from this if desired.

Thanks for reading, and I hope to see other aircraft come to future DCS FC upgrades - just preferably ones that everyone might want to buy, not just 'simplified' versions of modules we already have aimed at newcomers. If it can be helped.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Similar variants or models still requires modeling work and even FM work. That's always going to be a lot.

For example, the F-7MG has a drastically different fuselage, canopy, and (most importantly) wing shape. It has a compound wing, so that's going to require FM changes, probably quite a few. F-16C to F-16A maybe a little less, but there still promises to be work. Mirage 3s and Mirage 2000s are pretttty different, probably the most work there.

If they intend to build more FC offerings? Look to what they offer in the first party. So, Hornet, Viper, and the L-39s. Hinging it on a third party or starting from scratch? That's going to lengthen development and reduce over all value from the perspective of the developer as a result of third parties having less resources than ED and also starting from scratch is just that. We've heard from developers, repeatedly, they're not that much less work than a FF module if done from the ground up. They still require a highly detailed model, a highly detailed cockpit, sounds effects, etc.

So, I'd honestly wager that any further FC additions will be from existing aircraft, tbh.

[cailean_556]

8 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Similar variants or models still requires modeling work and even FM work. That's always going to be a lot.

For example, the F-7MG has a drastically different fuselage, canopy, and (most importantly) wing shape. It has a compound wing, so that's going to require FM changes, probably quite a few. F-16C to F-16A maybe a little less, but there still promises to be work. Mirage 3s and Mirage 2000s are pretttty different, probably the most work there.

If they intend to build more FC offerings? Look to what they offer in the first party. So, Hornet, Viper, and the L-39s. Hinging it on a third party or starting from scratch? That's going to lengthen development and reduce over all value from the perspective of the developer as a result of third parties having less resources than ED and also starting from scratch is just that. We've heard from developers, repeatedly, they're not that much less work than a FF module if done from the ground up. They still require a highly detailed model, a highly detailed cockpit, sounds effects, etc.

So, I'd honestly wager that any further FC additions will be from existing aircraft, tbh.

I didn't say 'FC models require no work', nor do I believe that to be the case at all. I don't even think I said they require less work. Though I believe the words I used were to 'reducing' the level of work. The part about being aerodynamically and visually similar was more the first three, not the second three - the second three were off-the-top-of-my-head proposals for a follow on FC suite of aircraft. A suite of aircraft that would require 'ground up' development on a much more drastic scale than the first ones. Considering the span of time between FC3 and FC24, FCX (X being the next instalment, not its actual title) could be some time away. Time enough to develop three new FC-level modules?...not my department.

ED did say, in the past, that their intent was to distance itself from FC-level aircraft (in part because of the level of effort required between FC and FF aircraft modules, as you mentioned). That stance has obviously now been softened- but with the intent of FC being to soften the learning curve, developing FC modules of already established FF modules is, like I said, a bit backwards in going forwards.

Where I see ED being able to capitalise on FC modules in future is for aircraft that either don't have sufficient documentation to make a FF module or aircraft whose technical documentation is no longer available (so a level of approximation is necessary) but the aircraft is still a highly demanded addition to DCS. In short, FC modules could be 'placeholders' for FF modules down the track or stop-gap/learning modules for aircraft that, for one reason or another, can't come to DCS as a full fidelity module. In short, these modules could be a little less specific and a lot more general in their simulation (so the F-5 could simulate a broad range of F-5 variants, not just specifically an F-5E-3 - if that makes sense).

The part I do comment on is that the bottom three aircraft have no/less MFDs - so the cockpits are primarily analogue gauges with 'simple' screens (HUDs or sights, radar). From a 'FC' development approach, that's less buttons (physical, as the aircraft won't have an interactive cockpit) to bind as the user does not have to navigate MFD submenus in order to operate the aircraft or its systems. These ones would also, though I might not have made it obvious, require models as they either have low-fi representative models, or no model, in DCS currently.

The F-16A could probably capitalise on the F-16C development. Yes, they are different aircraft, with the A being lighter, faster, less complex overall (by comparison), but it does give a starting point from which to commence. And development on the A (say Block 5 for argument's sake) could lead to development of a Block 15, or a Sparrow-armed ADV, FF module in due time.

The Mirage III and F-7MG are not directly related. In fact the Mirage III has more in common with the Mirage F1 than the Mirage 2000. A Mirage III would lend itself well to users progressing from an FC Mirage III to the Mirage F1 or Mirage 2000 - given they're all from the same manufacturer and have a level of commonality in design (mainly cockpit layout/logic and systems). It was not intended to mean 'just slap the Mirage 2000 flight model on it, all delta-wings are the same - she'll be right'. That may have not been clear. And, given the high demand for a Mirage III due to its use particularly in the South Atlantic and Syria/Sinai (namely by Israel) - a full-fidelity Mirage III module can capitalise on the FC module development in due course.

The F-7MG was a pick specifically because of its double-delta wing (and its simplicity, being a primarily day-interceptor). Despite its lineage being traced back to MiG-21, it is not a MiG-21. Not in the same way you can compare a MiG-19 and a J-6. However, from a FM to FF progression approach, a user might feel more comfortable transitioning from an F-7MG to the MiG-21 or, potentially, the JF-17. I purposely didn't mention the Flankers and the MiG-29 on that one.

I hope that makes more sense now...

[AvgeekJoe]

I like the idea of F-16A being FC 2024 candidate.  It should be the most basic F-16 without smart weapons capability or even AIM-120, though.

I would add that having a F-111 and Su-24 as FC 2024 candidates would be worth $24 to upgrade, not $9.99.  Make it $34 for the Su-34.

But finally, saving the best for last, having a FRS.1 Sea Harrier with the most basic of radar and AIM-9 + dumb bomb + rocket capability would also be worth at least $24 to upgrade, not $9.99.

[Dragon1-1]

This is unlikely to happen. F-16A would require a new FM, as the engine is different and the aerodynamics are, too, unless we're talking Block 15 with a big tail. Plus, it's much lighter. The new additions are the lowest hanging fruit there is. I could, perhaps, see the L-39, as its cockpit could use an art pass (that said, it's already so simple that an FC version would not have much appeal).

I would also not expect aircraft that have been made by a 3rd party to have an FC version made, not by ED, at least. 

[AdrianL]

I highly doubt a multi-craft aircraft would be added to FC 2024, unless it was planned to become a FF module at some point.

You would need to model both cockpits, AI interface to manage the other crews duties, etc. So would not be a cheap or quick module to implement.

So I do not see F-111 or Su-24 soon.

[Dudikoff]

The F-16A is a very cool idea and would fit well with the other FC3 aircraft and the FC concept in general. Mirage III series, as well.

I guess those late 70s single-pilot aircraft with their basic avionics are ideal for FC3, like e.g. Jaguar and such.

[Gunfreak]

Honestly if I get an F16A I want it as full fidelity. 

I have no idea whe ED has planned for their new FC project. But I hope they add aircraft that we don't have that might be hard to do as FF because various legal and acces reasons.

Su22, Su34/35. Various British aircraft (since the British won't share aircraft info) MiG25. Mabye other early cold war aircraft like F9, etc.

[supersylph]

Don't have unrealistic expectations.It is obvious that ED hopes to add some "new" content to FC by using existing resources to do the minimum amount of work, and then increase the price of FC to the latest DCS module standard.This is obviously business behavior.When they model an aircraft and add the necessary systems and simple functions, they can pre-sell it for a few dozen dollars.How much effort do you think they will be willing to invest in FC?

[MIghtymoo]

The new FC 2024 was apparently developed for MAC (Modern Air Combat). They aren’t doing MAC anymore so they are moving these planes into Flaming Cliffs 2024.

I hope to see many more FC planes, but seriously doubt it as there is very little money to be charged for "low-fidelity"-planes compared to the "premium" high-fidelity" ones. 

Personally I love the FC3 planes, as my brain does not have time for more than 2-3 full fidelity planes/helicopters at a time. The FC3 planes gets you up in the air quickly for some variation.

The SU-25 is one of my absolute favorites...

[upyr1]

I've had mixed feelings about the death of MAC, just as I did about it being developed in the first place. On oneside it would have been nice to DCS to be strictly FF and MAC as a separate but related product. However, I've also stated that if we are going to have FC-level modules then I think ED should make it a point to add aircraft that would otherwise not be available in DCS due to lack of data.  My biggest fear with the FC versions of the MiG-15 and F-86 is that they will continue to exist in an asset desert since right now all we have in the way of Korean War era assets are those two, BlueFor's WWII leftovers, and we have the AD in the works and while they weren't used in the Korean war the La-7 is planned as well. No matter what we get in the way of Korean-era assets, I'll be a bit miffed, though I'd be less miffed if we get said assets. 

If we get the Korean war-era assets then why didn't ED ad them to the WWII asset pack or DCS core depending on what was appropriate and if we don't get them then why did ED even bother with FC versions of the MiG-15 and F-86.