F-35A Announcement discussion mega thread.

[Hiob]

2 minutes ago, metzger said:

Yes, ED strictly.

A-10C was released in very much completed state, with gameplay mechanics only available(to this day) for the a-10 wingman and AI jtac. And is to this date probably the most complete and depth module DCS has.

No 7 years EA BS.
+ nttr map bit later developed for the a-10.

Similar with ka-50 black shark2.

Both came with specific mechanics for the AI + content - deployment campaign was really good for the time.

Later modules started to appear more rough, without any specific additions for their specific use cases. They stopped making free campaigns with the modules too.
But still in ok state.

I think around Viper release, things started to smell. It was in a bare bones at release barely usable, or accurate. They slowly dropped the accuracy, e.g. BS3 now F35... no way they can make f35 with A10C depth and accuracy.

Sent from my SM-G985F using Tapatalk
 

I don't know anything about the history of the ka-50, but if I remember correctly, for the Warthog they actually made that for a professional customer and had official help from the DoD? Or something along those lines, no?
The Viper had a bad start, I'll give you that. But apart from that I have the feeling, that is more due to the increasing expectations and growing complexity (systems wise) of more modern Aircraft that lead to this impression.

 

I agree on the lack of content though. I miss something like that, too!

[Canada_Moose]

If ED think it’s doable to DCS standards then it’s good enough for me.

Some of the pontificating on this thread is outrageous and way out of order.

DCS has come so far and I could only have dreamed about such fidelity and graphics when I started on C64 and Amiga sims.

How about we just give these guys a chance to deliver? If you don’t like the final product when it comes out, don’t buy it but please stop being absolute killjoys to the entire project. 
 

 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

5 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I agree on the lack of content though. I miss something like that, too!

It's also about basic functionality, such as the ability to give direct commands to Wingman 4, which is present in FC3 but not in full-fidelity modules.

[speed-of-heat]

4 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

It's also about basic functionality, such as the ability to give direct commands to Wingman 4, which is present in FC3 but not in full-fidelity modules.

that's a separate issue... by the by I use Voice Attack and VAICOM and give direct orders to dash 4 all the time .. which he even obeys 

[Hiob]

Let's see how the dynamic campaign will work out.....

I hope it does also feature a more dynamic environment.

[wilbur81]

5 hours ago, metzger said:

People don't complain here as some put it...

 

Haha... funny one, Metzger.  

1 minute ago, Hiob said:

Let's see how the dynamic campaign will work out.....

I hope it does also feature a more dynamic environment.

Indeed... DC was the most significant footage in that video, I'd say.

[metzger]

If ED think it’s doable to DCS standards then it’s good enough for me.
Some of the pontificating on this thread is outrageous and way out of order.
DCS has come so far and I could only have dreamed about such fidelity and graphics when I started on C64 and Amiga sims.
How about we just give these guys a chance to deliver? If you don’t like the final product when it comes out, don’t buy it but please stop being absolute killjoys to the entire project. 
 
 

What is 'dcs standards ' in your opinion ?

Do you really believe they can model f-35 with the a-10c level of accuracy ? Or even hornet level of accuracy? I very highly doubt it.

And in dcs playground, how are you employing f-35 in a remotely realistic tactical environment?
May be with the dcs 'realisric' awacs .



Sent from my SM-G985F using Tapatalk

[Furiz]

I see F-35 as improvement of DCS and It gives us insight in most modern and advanced jet in the world. It is very good that they managed to pull this off cause it can open doors to other eagerly awaited modern jets in the future.

ED has its standard of delivering high fidelity aircraft and I'm sure they gonna keep up to that standard cause its very hard to get good reputation and very very easy to lose it.

[Snakedoc]

[Николай Ушаков]

30 минут назад, MiG21bisFishbedL сказал:

If one is going to against the F-35 because of balance, then they're not making a compelling argument since that's not up to the devs, that's up to mission makers and server admins. You're never going to see this on a Cold War server, oddly enough. And, air quake servers will probably nix it all together.

The concern should be fidelity. How can we honestly expect this to uphold ED's stated standards? As we have established, the -35 is insanely classified. CFD is nice and all, but given how immensely abstracted EW is in DCS and how important that is the F-35 ops, there's just a lot of question markets.

It's a game of wait and see, at this point. If it's good, I'll get it. Otherwise, I can just skip.

And, yes, honestly? How do we tell people who have been patiently waiting for more redfor/Warsaw Pact content that this is ok, but their wants are still out of reach?

Both are problems
Content and multiplayer are gonna be in trouble too with this: You must be really delusional if don't see this.

And besides we can say fidelity or any idea of realism goodbye if we will see a module based on guesswork.

[jeventy26]

Its not like ED has to get the stealth coating formula implemented.  The RCS is the size of a golf ball... so make it the size of a golf ball... done (of course its a bit more than that depending on angles).  Also, if they are getting a real F-35 pilot to test this out... and he says its the same level of simulation as the F-16 in DCS and he flew that as well and compared, then that's good enough for me.  SME's are the experts.  I think this is great for the game.  Lets not forget they wouldn't be doing this if they did not have Lockheed's/US permission... right?  Personally I think if ED added that to the FAQ's that they did get permission that would ease a lot of peoples anxiety. 

[ACS_Dev]

A number of more qualified people have discussed the alleged inability of ED to fully realize this module, they make good points.

I want to press a different angle, one that I feel I have a modicum of qualification to comment on. Let's suppose that ED does, in fact have the capability, willingness and stamina to accurately model this F-35. Let's suppose that it is actually realized, a full-fidelity, fully modeled and perfect aircraft dropped into the game.

What the heck is it going to do here? This isn't about balance, I don't care about that. The F-35, in this game, would be a profoundly boring experience for those who want to use it for what it was designed. It is so profoundly powerful, high-tech and potent that I can't imagine I would find it very interesting in the environment of this game, or any game for that matter. Further, there is a massive gulf in what this game has vs what it needs to have for such a jet to even really exist.

 

Let's discuss a theoretical sortie involving a 4 ship of Player F-35s vs a modern red SAM battery as an example. Realistically we are looking at more aircraft for CAP but let's ignore that.

The pilots first plan and brief the mission, then walk out to the jets, inspect them and get in (none of which we can do)

They start up the jet with the assistance of one or more crew chiefs (that we don't have)

They communicate with Ground, C2 and probably tech support because 2010s and 4 F-35s (we don't have these things), also with each other (they actually don't, we still don't have working VOIP)

They taxi and get armed up at EOR (we don't have this)

They take off and check in (with C2 that we don't have)

They get handed off to the main freq (I don't know 100% how it works but it is worth noting that our E-3 version is out of date, the ABM system is incorrect and the main freq doesn't exist)

They probably tank (not possible to realistically do with our systems)

They proceed on mission. The enemy probably can't see them, if they do it's with radars we don't have, maybe they do and send some 4th gens to intercept. Perhaps some modern Su-27, MiG-29 (no), J-20 (lol) or J-10s. We don't have any of these but even if we did they would all die, likely before seeing the F-35s. Said F-35s may use targeting data from the modern E-3 we don't have in order to launch the proper AMRAAMs we don't have via datalink. The enemy aircraft aren't even warned of the launch. This is one of the major points. It's not just about what is in the game but what exists in real life in the first place. The F-35 is just so good it's boring. Nobody is making it to WVR, the nerfed C-3 we have has nothing on a proper D-X.

They reach the SAMs they need to take out. They could jam the radars we don't have using EW methods that aren't modeled but instead they just fly about 15 miles out and drop SDBs that the enemy can't intercept. Perhaps they have some GBU-12s that need to be disposed of so they just cruise in at 15k and drop them on the operator's foreheads.  Second point. The best SAM we have right now is the S-300PS and its modeling is tremendously simplified. A system possibly older than the pilots attacking it. ED has a track record of adding 'new' SAMs at an absolutely glacial pace and nothing we have right now would be a significant threat to a proper F-16C Bl.50, much less a 5th gen. What system could ED possibly add that would be kosher for their employees to model and have a chance against an F-35? Are you suggesting that between now and the F-35 release, ED will not only make leaps and bounds in SAM system modeling but also introduce several new systems that have been requested for years with no shown interest from you? IIRC ED hasn't even developed a single TVM system yet!

They fly back, maybe they are chased but probably not. If they are, it's a repeat of the previous scenario. They contact the Ops we don't have, do the code call that we can't, go through the ATC ladder that we don't have, land at the airfield, de-arm with the non-existant EOR crew and then debark and go to the debriefing room we don't have. Repeat for a couple days and the enemy, any one, is crushed.

 

Does that really sound that interesting? Even if we are to believe that you will be able to safely and correctly model the F-35 (when you can't even seem to add failures, proper AMRAAMs, correct 3D models or finished systems to your representation of the most common fixed-wing military aircraft in existence), make tremendous gains in gamewide systems modeling and do everything else that's needed, where's the fun in it? The aircraft wasn't designed to be a challenge, it wasn't made to have difficult mission scenarios. Are we just supposed to have the enemies in our scenarios send mobs of comparatively obsolete 4th gen aircraft at it? Sure, it would be fun to fly around I suppose, but beyond that, nothing we have in real life and certainly nothing in-game besides other F-35s would be able to make taking one on a combat sortie interesting.

I get the argument that this takes resources from core improvements, I know that you can't just ask developer in specialty x to work in area y. That being said, I believe that the resources being allocated for the F-35 project probably could have been better used with a different aircraft, of which there are many options I would recommend. Given your lowered bar for fidelity, wouldn't it make more sense to develop more modern variants of existing modules, for example an F-16C from 2015? Perhaps a more modern F-15C? Maybe you could even finish the current modules? This venture just doesn't make sense to me.

Edited January 17 by ACS_Dev

[Viking 1-1]

This announcement took me by surprise. Well played, ED!

I Am very curious how this will turn out

[Boosterdog]

11 hours ago, NineLine said:

Maybe, but in a game people want to be so realistic it seems weird to demand balance. Especially when you can add and remove planes from any mission. 

Fair

[Robi Hobby]

F-35A 

[Canada_Moose]

48 minutes ago, metzger said:

What is 'dcs standards ' in your opinion ?

Do you really believe they can model f-35 with the a-10c level of accuracy ? Or even hornet level of accuracy? I very highly doubt it.

And in dcs playground, how are you employing f-35 in a remotely realistic tactical environment?
May be with the dcs 'realisric' awacs .



Sent from my SM-G985F using Tapatalk
 

My opinion doesn't matter. Its what ED releases to the sim. I get what they decide is good enough and then I choose to buy or not buy.

Its the same for you.

The reality is that this module will come in an EA state and will be worked on for years like the Hornet and others. It will also bring many module sales which are needed to keep this sim moving forward. I can guarantee that the number of moaners on here will be far outweighed by the people who are excited for this release. It will also bring in new players (and new $$)

Edited January 17 by Canada_Moose

[Mistermann]

9 hours ago, NineLine said:

Voice chat is very cool, and I am not sure why you are ignoring it, but a lot of work went into that and is still being refined. Same with what we have done with weather, its not done but what we have done the team is very proud of and has worked very hard on.

Maybe because it doesn't work?  I've given up on you guys ever fixing it.  

[Devil 505]

3 hours ago, rozjkeee said:

Can we get clickable su-30 /su-35 / now? Please? Hello?

@NineLine How can you possibly say no to this request now that you are doing the F-35? This is what I am talking about. 0 chance in hell you have more open source documentation to build the F-35 than you would a Su-30 or Su-35.  Your community have been screaming for these for years but the response was not enough information and no authority, it would never happen.  How have you obtained the authority from Lockheed Martin and enough information on a plane more classified than Bidens bank account, but you cant do the same thing for these other aircraft? 

[Chervo]

I am really looking forward to the f35 and I am convinced that ED will deliver a great product that will be challenging and fun to fly. how many of us would even realize that a system is not implemented 100% correctly, because that would require secret knowledge. If you take the time to google weapon systems for the F35, a lot of interesting information pops up which can and may be implemented because it is public. ED certainly has its information sources which provide legal information details, I trust ED to build a great F35. Also, the module will evolve over the years and more complex systems will be added. Unfortunately, many who are looking forward to the plane are probably quiet here and those who want to complain are writing like crazy.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

34 minutes ago, ACS_Dev said:

A number of more qualified people have discussed the alleged inability of ED to fully realize this module, they make good points.

I want to press a different angle, one that I feel I have a modicum of qualification to comment on. Let's suppose that ED does, in fact have the capability, willingness and stamina to accurately model this F-35. Let's suppose that it is actually realized, a full-fidelity, fully modeled and perfect aircraft dropped into the game.

What the heck is it going to do here? This isn't about balance, I don't care about that. The F-35, in this game, would be a profoundly boring experience for those who want to use it for what it was designed. It is so profoundly powerful, high-tech and potent that I can't imagine I would find it very interesting in the environment of this game, or any game for that matter. Further, there is a massive gulf in what this game has vs what it needs to have for such a jet to even really exist.

 

Let's discuss a theoretical sortie involving a 4 ship of Player F-35s vs a modern red SAM battery as an example. Realistically we are looking at more aircraft for CAP but let's ignore that.

The pilots first plan and brief the mission, then walk out to the jets, inspect them and get in (none of which we can do)

They start up the jet with the assistance of one or more crew chiefs (that we don't have)

They communicate with Ground, C2 and probably tech support because 2010s and 4 F-35s (we don't have these things), also with each other (they actually don't, we still don't have working VOIP)

They taxi and get armed up at EOR (we don't have this)

They take off and check in (with C2 that we don't have)

They get handed off to the main freq (I don't know 100% how it works but it is worth noting that our E-3 version is out of date, the ABM system is incorrect and the main freq doesn't exist)

They probably tank (not possible to realistically do with our systems)

They proceed on mission. The enemy probably can't see them, if they do it's with radars we don't have, maybe they do and send some 4th gens to intercept. Perhaps some modern Su-27, MiG-29 (no), J-20 (lol) or J-10s. We don't have any of these but even if we did they would all die, likely before seeing the F-35s. Said F-35s may use targeting data from the modern E-3 we don't have in order to launch the proper AMRAAMs we don't have via datalink. The enemy aircraft aren't even warned of the launch. This is one of the major points. It's not just about what is in the game but what exists in real life in the first place. The F-35 is just so good it's boring. Nobody is making it to WVR, the nerfed C-3 we have has nothing on a proper D-X.

They reach the SAMs they need to take out. They could jam the radars we don't have using EW methods that aren't modeled but instead they just fly about 15 miles out and drop SDBs that the enemy can't intercept. Perhaps they have some GBU-12s that need to be disposed of so they just cruise in at 15k and drop them on the operator's foreheads.  Second point. The best SAM we have right now is the S-300PS and its modeling is tremendously simplified. A system possibly older than the pilots attacking it. ED has a track record of adding 'new' SAMs at an absolutely glacial pace and nothing we have right now would be a significant threat to a proper F-16C Bl.50, much less a 5th gen. What system could ED possibly add that would be kosher for their employees to model and have a chance against an F-35? Are you suggesting that between now and the F-35 release, ED will not only make leaps and bounds in SAM system modeling but also introduce several new systems that have been requested for years with no shown interest from you? IIRC ED hasn't even developed a single TVM system yet!

They fly back, maybe they are chased but probably not. If they are, it's a repeat of the previous scenario. They contact the Ops we don't have, do the code call that we can't, go through the ATC ladder that we don't have, land at the airfield, de-arm with the non-existant EOR crew and then debark and go to the debriefing room we don't have. Repeat for a couple days and the enemy, any one, is crushed.

 

Does that really sound that interesting? Even if we are to believe that you will be able to safely and correctly model the F-35 (when you can't even seem to add failures, proper AMRAAMs, correct 3D models or finished systems to your representation of the most common fixed-wing military aircraft in existence), make tremendous gains in gamewide systems modeling and do everything else that's needed, where's the fun in it? The aircraft wasn't designed to be a challenge, it wasn't made to have difficult mission scenarios. Are we just supposed to have the enemies in our scenarios send mobs of comparatively obsolete 4th gen aircraft at it? Sure, it would be fun to fly around I suppose, but beyond that, nothing we have in real life and certainly nothing in-game besides other F-35s would be able to make taking one on a combat sortie interesting.

I get the argument that this takes resources from core improvements, I know that you can't just ask developer in specialty x to work in area y. That being said, I believe that the resources being allocated for the F-35 project probably could have been better used with a different aircraft, of which there are many options I would recommend. Given your lowered bar for fidelity, wouldn't it make more sense to develop more modern variants of existing modules, for example an F-16C from 2015? Perhaps a more modern F-15C? Maybe you could even finish the current modules? This venture just doesn't make sense to me.

This very much sums up the gist of why this module is so controversial for DCS, and eloquently at that. My first reaction when I saw that render in the trailer was: "why?".

[ejzg]

They're going to make an F-35 and they can't make a Super Hornet?

Edited January 17 by ejzg

[Lurker]

15 hours ago, polosat1y said:

Wow. So, apparently there is not enough information to give FW-190 GM-1 system. All info is there, but one key peice is not documented enough to make simulation.

But this is not the case with entire F-35 somehow.

Eagle Dynamics will do whatever they want to do and use whatever rationale they need to. They don't need a bunch of keyboard warriors\airplane enthusiasts giving them a hard time, and rightfully so, they are the developer we aren't. No one really cares. The people who do represent a minor portion of their customer base. They need to make money, after all. 

The fact of the matter is that DCS World has some serious issues, and a new module that's not really up to snuff with regards to modeling is the least of these. 

Edited January 17 by Lurker

[Temetre]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Chervo:

how many of us would even realize that a system is not implemented 100% correctly, because that would require secret knowledge.

We know it'll be wrong, because ED doesnt know either.

Ive seen that argument a bunch, but I dont really get it. Being so close to the actual plane is literally the selling point of DCS. Thats the reason people pay $70 to deal with an overly convoluted control scheme, spend hundreds of hours reading the manual and learning the jet inside and out, because its so close to the real thing.

 

If its just all fake, then why bother with any of that? Its not fun in itself to read and learn 500 page manual, or spend hundreds of hours learning a jet. The idea of learning how a real jet operates is what made it worth.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

8 minutes ago, ejzg said:

They're going to make an F-35 and they can't make a Super Hornet

Yes they can, and ED said they most likely will but they need to finish the legacy Hornet first.

[Hunter2.1]

11 hours ago, NineLine said:

I need to continue to stress, research on this aircraft has been going for 2+ years. We would not take this step without a reasonable amount of information being available to do this aircraft.

Maybe you have classified documents but you can’t say it on public. 
Okay, we wait, but I write with pencil that you are one step closer to be second war_thunder