F-35A Announcement discussion mega thread.

[upyr1]

10 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Yes, but Belsimtek wasn't really an independent 3d party, as Matt Wagner said on a 2019 intervies "BST was originally set up as a branch of Eagle Dynamics as a 3rd party example as a business practice. With the establishment of other 3rd parties, it no longer made sense to keep that staff under a separate entity. They were then merged back into Eagle Dynamics."

That might be the case but I think the confusion comes from the fact Belsimteck is still listed as it's own thing on the shop page

[dcn]

1小时前，Rudel_chw说：

 

Yes, but Belsimtek wasn't really an independent 3d party, as Matt Wagner said on a 2019 interview "BST was originally set up as a branch of Eagle Dynamics as a 3rd party example as a business practice. With the establishment of other 3rd parties, it no longer made sense to keep that staff under a separate entity. They were then merged back into Eagle Dynamics."

That's interesting.Never knew this.Thank you.

[skywalker22]

5 hours ago, Art-J said:

In the end, I think the greates outcome of all of this F-35 "drama" is -  more customers will just have to learn to start using brains for a change, be patient and do RESEARCH before buying a new module, rather than storming the ED-shop on release day as if it was walmart on Black Friday (sorry, "African American Friday"). Exactly like in Afghanistan vs Iraq case, some modules will offer higher and better documented accuracy, while some will offer less documented one.

Mind you, I'm not talking about folks who are already very excited about the -35 and will buy it no matter what, because if their favourite kite. I understand it, because I myself will do the same with M3's F4U Corsair when/if it ever comes.

For the rest of DCS players, though, It will (and should) be up to each individual customer to judge if the F-35 "simulation value" after release is sufficient for him/her to pay full price for it, or wait for further systems improvements of it, or wait for sale, or not buy it at all.

As both community managers hinted, wait and see how it turns out and what it brings to DCS as a whole, even if it means loosing that usual 20-30% preorder discount.

Majority will buy F-35 out of curiosity, I am sure you included (after a week or two) 

[Pilum]

TL;DR

There are literally dozens of posts now in this forum that go something like this: “Yes, well we understand that some are skeptical about DCS ability to model the F-35, but nothing has been released yet so there is no merit to your objections, because you can’t be critical of something you haven’t even seen”.

Well I beg to differ: I think we can be critical of the decision to model the F-35 already now, and here is a concrete example of why:

On the F-35, there is just one big humongous screen that can hold a myriad of different windows and tables etc. And, yes, we can see what they show us at demos and airshow and that can give us some idea about how the display may look like IRL. However, the only thing we can be absolutely sure of is that this will not be what the pilot will see in an operational aircraft. This is just common sense. You don’t show classified presentation modes for operational aircraft publicly. So already here we are lost. But wait, it gets worse:

Because instead of a couple of MFD’s with knowns sub-menus and display properties, supplemented by the ubiquitous round RWR we see in most 3^rd and 4^th generation fighters (you know, the type of displays & systems DCS modeled up till now), you will in the F-35 have just one big screen where you have absolutely no idea how the disposition of different display windows will be. Why? Well because the big thing with 5^th generation aircraft is the sensor fusion and how this will be displayed is top secret.

For example, when you’re dozing off in nav mode, and you suddenly get lit up by a SAM or fighter radar, how will that enormous display react? Will it be overlaid something already there or will a threat window pop up which takes up 10, 20, 30 or 50% of the big screen? Where will it be located? How will threat zones be displayed? If, dynamic, how will this be displayed? Missile position and if you are inside or outside projected range? Birds eye view, or obliquely? What other windows will be active? Stores, radar, IRST etc? And if so where? Bottom right? Top left? etc etc.

And this is where the 6^th gen secret lies: How do you fuse not only your own, but your wingman’s, ship and AWAC data? And how do you in the best way filter and present all this data? And the only thing we can be sure of here is that what we see in manufacturers booths at airshow will be fluffy concept modes, and exactly NOT how it will be displayed IRL. Because this is what separates the wheat from the chaff. And not only for reasons of security, but also not to divulge trade secrets to your competitors, will you be showing how you have solved all this. The winner will present not all data, but the right data at the right time in the right way (SAAB is good at this!). But there is no way SAAB or Lockheed Martin are going to share this with us either in air show booths or in open documentation. So whatever DCS comes up with will be guesswork.

And yes, some may scoff at the figure of 85% guesswork that was thrown around here earlier on, but how are you even going to get THAT close when you are working with one huge display that could be used in a myriad of ways, all of which are classified? However, if the aircraft you are modeling has two MFD’s, a round little RWR, and a bunch of manuals which tells you exactly how those MFD’s function and look in all sub modes (3^rd and 4^th generation fighters), well then 85% ACCURACY and not GUESSWORK seems within reach.

And this is why it's currently possible to do high fidelity 3^rd or 4^th gen sim aircraft, but only 6^th gen game aircraft, and while IMHO DCS should stick to the two former.

 

Edited January 20 by Pilum

[Ornithopter]

I really doubt they would be doing an F-35 if they weren't aware of the challenges awaiting them.  It isn't their first airplane.

[Cool Breeze]

On 1/18/2025 at 9:15 AM, Convoy said:

The point is, is the module has to be of a certain level of realism and quality to be "worthy" of DCS. the bar shouldn't be lowered to allow a module. Because then all we're going to get is "that'll do" modules. 

DCS is nothing but 'that'll do...' modules! To this day modules like the Hornet and Viper a missing MFD pages, systems that are ITAR restricted and are still receiving tweaks to the flight models. Do you think our weapons like the AAMRAM, Phoenix, R-77,.... are anything more than ED's own in house coding, best public white paper research, SME advice, and the best CFD that ED and the third parties can manage? The vast majority of this 'sandbox sim' is best guess, CFD, and hard coding... There are literally a couple dozen modules for people to fly without loosing their heads over one module!

[Eviscerador]

I will only say that I chuckle a bit everytime anyone brings the "warthunder" meme to this module.

I had the pleasure of talking with one pilot who tested the lightning simulator when they were offering it to our air forces and all he could say was: "it's like playing a video game, ace combat, warthunder, you name it. Everything is on the helmet display and you click on anything and you have all information available at the ready"

So yeah, a realistic F35 is closer to ace combat UI than to our current 4th gen birds interface.

You don't need to know how the aesa radar works, just what it can do and how it shows on the display, which is open source.

[dcn]

1小时前，Cool Breeze说：

There are literally a couple dozen modules for people to fly without loosing their heads over one module!

I don't know why so many people say this.So we shouldn't complain when ED releases X-wing module in DCS? I think there is no difference between releasing F-35 module in DCS and releasing X-wing module in DCS.

Edited January 20 by dcn

[MAXsenna]

4 hours ago, Pilum said:

TL;DR

What happened to the summery?  

Just kidding!

I appreciate your opinion, voice and expertise, both in this discussion and elsewhere. You could be correct, while I don't understand why you bother. The majority doesn't care because the majority wants this.  

Cheers! 

 

[Tonker]

Just spent an...interesting...couple of hours reading through the various F35 threads, and wondered if I could borrow you for a quick sanity check? Thanks

My impression from the announcement - there's an F-35A in development, no more, no less. My impression from the FAQ and ED - it'll be as good an F-35 as they can make, info and core engine allowing.

Okay, so far so good.

My impression of the response:

The greybeards, who got into DCS as a study-level sim, aren't too fussed and probably won't buy, but feel it's a bit of a slap in the face to aspects of DCS they care about, which has been watered down over the years anyway.

The midlifers, in DCS for the systems fidelity and resulting PvP multiplayer contest, are fussed because of the fear it'll break their game and devalue their skills and/or toys, and don't want DCS turning into an Air-Quakey WarThunderFest. Say they won't buy, but...

The kids, in DCS cos they get to fly cool planes they've grown up with, are stoked because they'll get to fly the coolest newest plane. Day one Early Access buy.

So far so fair?

My biggest takeaway:

"Anyways, if you don't want the F-35 it's ok, I think even those who do not buy it will see benefits from this aircraft for years to come." @NineLine

Ah. ED need a revenue stream to fund core development to stay competitive*; this comes from Early Access releases of new modules. The F-35 will out-sell anything else; the F-35 is getting made.

*Looking at you War Thunder, Combat Pilot and Il2: Korea

Looks brutal like that, but is that correct?

A bit sad to see ED go the 'algorithm capture' route for customer growth, for all it makes sense, but that's by-the-by.

Anything I missed?

Edited January 21 by Tonker
Sp!

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

28 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

The majority doesn't care because the majority wants this.

And ED doesn’t care because they know it’ll sell like hot cakes no matter how many of the “greybeards”/purists complain.

[MAXsenna]

And ED doesn’t care because they know it’ll sell like hot cakes no matter how many of the “greybeards”/purists complain.

Exactly! I must admit my initial thought was "How? Really?".
I do hope it brings in tremendous mounts of cash, that can be spent on the base game.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

I'm a midlife grey kid.  

[freehand]

I like new shiny toys, I don't really care which route ED take if I like it I will buy it because that's the way I roll  

[Tonker]

Agreed, it's the solution!

Grey...but I struggle for time to learn the complex aircraft I love in such depth; Midder...but find few servers as immersive as they are challenging; kid...but I didn't grow up in '90s America sooo...!

There's no right or wrong, clearly, I'm just trying to parse what's been going on around the F-35A reveal.

Edited January 21 by Tonker

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Tonker said:

Just spent an...interesting...couple of hours reading through the various F35 threads, and wondered if I could borrow you for a quick sanity check? Thanks

My impression from the announcement - there's an F-35A in development, no more, no less. My impression from the FAQ and ED - it'll be as good an F-35 as they can make, info and core engine allowing.

Okay, so far so good.

My impression of the response:

The greybeards, who got into DCS as a study-level sim, aren't too fussed and probably won't buy, but feel it's a bit of a slap in the face to aspects of DCS they care about, which has been watered down over the years anyway.

The midlifers, in DCS for the systems fidelity and resulting PvP multiplayer contest, are fussed because of the fear it'll break their game and devalue their skills and/or toys, and don't want DCS turning into an Air-Quakey WarThunderFest. Say they won't buy, but...

The kids, in DCS cos they get to fly cool planes they've grown up with, are stoked because they'll get to fly the coolest newest plane. Day one Early Access buy.

So far so fair?

My biggest takeaway:

"Anyways, if you don't want the F-35 it's ok, I think even those who do not buy it will see benefits from this aircraft for years to come." @NineLine

Ah. ED need a revenue stream to fund core development to stay competitive*; this comes from Early Access releases of new modules. The F-35 will out-sell anything else; the F-35 is getting made.

*Looking at you War Thunder, Combat Pilot and Il2: Korea

Looks brutal like that, but is that correct?

A bit sad to see ED go the 'algorithm capture' route for customer growth, for all it makes sense, but that's by-the-by.

Anything I missed?

 

4 hours ago, Tonker said:

Just spent an...interesting...couple of hours reading through the various F35 threads, and wondered if I could borrow you for a quick sanity check? Thanks

My impression from the announcement - there's an F-35A in development, no more, no less. My impression from the FAQ and ED - it'll be as good an F-35 as they can make, info and core engine allowing.

Okay, so far so good.

My impression of the response:

The greybeards, who got into DCS as a study-level sim, aren't too fussed and probably won't buy, but feel it's a bit of a slap in the face to aspects of DCS they care about, which has been watered down over the years anyway.

This literal grey beard who got the Original Flanker back in the 1990s, is stoked about the F-35. I don't know how long it will take to get the F-35 but I do think it will add to DCS. 

4 hours ago, Tonker said:

The midlifers, in DCS for the systems fidelity and resulting PvP multiplayer contest, are fussed because of the fear it'll break their game and devalue their skills and/or toys, and don't want DCS turning into an Air-Quakey WarThunderFest. Say they won't buy, but...

This is why I hope to see more mods and official modern assets- then again I just want more assets in general. 

4 hours ago, Tonker said:

The kids, in DCS cos they get to fly cool planes they've grown up with, are stoked because they'll get to fly the coolest newest plane. Day one Early Access buy.

So far so fair?

I'm feeling like a kid

4 hours ago, Tonker said:

My biggest takeaway:

"Anyways, if you don't want the F-35 it's ok, I think even those who do not buy it will see benefits from this aircraft for years to come." @NineLine

Ah. ED need a revenue stream to fund core development to stay competitive*; this comes from Early Access releases of new modules. The F-35 will out-sell anything else; the F-35 is getting made.

*Looking at you War Thunder, Combat Pilot and Il2: Korea

Looks brutal like that, but is that correct?

A bit sad to see ED go the 'algorithm capture' route for customer growth, for all it makes sense, but that's by-the-by.

Anything I missed?

What determines what we get are a mixture of what ED thinks will sell, what they think they can get enough open source data to do it legally. I expect the DCS F-35 to be the most realistic F-35 the public can get their hands on. The real question is when will early orders get started. 

2 hours ago, freehand said:

I like new shiny toys, I don't really care which route ED take if I like it I will buy it because that's the way I roll  

Dittos I hope the F-35 gets some more DCS pilots. 

 

[upyr1]

11 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

Majority will buy F-35 out of curiosity, I am sure you included (after a week or two) 

I won't be waiting that long unless you mean the standard "2 weeks" 

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, Ornithopter said:

I really doubt they would be doing an F-35 if they weren't aware of the challenges awaiting them.  It isn't their first airplane.

They have been doing this since the 1990s so I trust Wag's and the other folks at ED to have an idea of what can and can't be done. 

4 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Exactly! I must admit my initial thought was "How? Really?".
I do hope it brings in tremendous mounts of cash, that can be spent on the base game.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Same. 

4 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

And ED doesn’t care because they know it’ll sell like hot cakes no matter how many of the “greybeards”/purists complain.

Then some of us old timers will be buying it because 

[rwbishUP]

What would really be nice. Is to have a dynamic environment to play with all of these air frames in.

[Pilum]

11 hours ago, Ornithopter said:

I really doubt they would be doing an F-35 if they weren't aware of the challenges awaiting them.  It isn't their first airplane.

You and those who liked this post didn’t read what I wrote above did you? Because that post clearly explains why those challenges cannot be overcome for an in-service 6th gen aircraft like the F-35.

 

Edited January 21 by Pilum

[ThePops]

6 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

no matter how many of the “greybeards”/purists complain.

It would be somewhat interesting to see what part of the community who complain over this. I don't think it's the greybeard/purist, at least not in large parts. The greybeard/purist have been "playing the game" since long before DCS existed, and may very well be pleased or unpleased, but for the most of it see it for what it is. It's ED doing the right moves to shape the company into the future. When all is set and done, that's the thing that matters, and complaining over this is certainly just a waste of time in any case.

I think two groups are the big complainers.

1. The "gamers". The ones who see this purely as a game. They want game balance. Red and Blue should be roughly equal and have roughly the same tech. The F-35 + HF F-15 + HF Typhoon is a move (a huge leap in fact) in the opposite direction.
2. A more hard to describe group that see DCS in their head as something else and much more than what it really is. The F-35 somehow shatters their illusions. I don't know why exactly, but the word "Karen" comes to mind.

As for myself I am too old to have any nice and cozy "childhood memories" about the F-35. It's in large part a big unknown and therefore uninteresting compared with something like the F-104 for instance, or F-5, MiG-21 and so on. But I know there's a huge amount of data available. Now, when ED compiles all that data into a flyable module the same way they have done with all the other stuff. The F-35 suddenly becomes hugely interesting. I see F-35s passing by my window almost every day (literally). Getting the chance to know it more intimately, is a big thing really, and something to look forward to.

[Pilum]

7 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

What happened to the summery?  

Just kidding!

I appreciate your opinion, voice and expertise, both in this discussion and elsewhere. You could be correct, while I don't understand why you bother. The majority doesn't care because the majority wants this.  

Cheers! 

 

Why do I bother? Well forum posting helps me procrastinate and stay away from doing the honest work that needs to be done, that’s why. 

But more seriously: I agree with the take that the DCS F-35 module will probably sell like hotcakes. But that does not mean it’s the right approach: There is a famous company doing commercial aircraft that was once run by engineers, but when the accountants took over, quality took a dive and they are now struggling to regain their good name. And just because you can make money on something in the short term, doesn’t mean it will benefit you in the long term.

I’ve always respected DCS in the past when they have said that they could not do something because they did not have enough data. That speaks to the engineer in me.

[MAXsenna]

5 minutes ago, ThePops said:

I don't know why exactly, but the word "Karen" comes to mind. 

Well, Karen actually means pure. So there's that.  

[MAXsenna]

6 minutes ago, Pilum said:

And just because you can make money on something in the short term, doesn’t mean it will benefit you in the long term.

Well, then you need to define short term and long term. Pretty sure ED is in for the lather.

I don't think your analogy quite fit here. 

7 minutes ago, Pilum said:

I’ve always respected DCS in the past when they have said that they could not do something because they did not have enough data.

I've come the conclusion that they might not have been totally honest about that. Easier way to say no. We can't really expect them to willingly lose money. If the MiG-29 sells well too. I'm sure that will be an incentive to make more Redfor modules.

[Pilum]

17 minutes ago, ThePops said:

It would be somewhat interesting to see what part of the community who complain over this. I don't think it's the greybeard/purist, at least not in large parts. The greybeard/purist have been "playing the game" since long before DCS existed, and may very well be pleased or unpleased, but for the most of it see it for what it is. It's ED doing the right moves to shape the company into the future. When all is set and done, that's the thing that matters, and complaining over this is certainly just a waste of time in any case.

I think two groups are the big complainers.

1. The "gamers". The ones who see this purely as a game. They want game balance. Red and Blue should be roughly equal and have roughly the same tech. The F-35 + HF F-15 + HF Typhoon is a move (a huge leap in fact) in the opposite direction.
2. A more hard to describe group that see DCS in their head as something else and much more than what it really is. The F-35 somehow shatters their illusions. I don't know why exactly, but the word "Karen" comes to mind.

As for myself I am too old to have any nice and cozy "childhood memories" about the F-35. It's in large part a big unknown and therefore uninteresting compared with something like the F-104 for instance, or F-5, MiG-21 and so on. But I know there's a huge amount of data available. Now, when ED compiles all that data into a flyable module the same way they have done with all the other stuff. The F-35 suddenly becomes hugely interesting. I see F-35s passing by my window almost every day (literally). Getting the chance to know it more intimately, is a big thing really, and something to look forward to.

Well Pops, thanks for sharing. However, since I don’t belong to the first category, I think you are implying I belong to the second?

But maybe you should consider that there is a third category? Professionals who actually know a thing or two? I’m an aeronautical engineer by profession with a master’s in aerodynamics and structural engineering. I worked for more than 10 years at Ericsson and SAAB with the JAS 39 Gripen, mostly in EW, but close to the guys who did the display systems.

So maybe you should consider that there are people here who actually know a thing or two before categorizing them into gamers and Karen’s?