Will we get a hybrid of Block2B and Block3F?

[NytHawk]

10 hours ago, TotenDead said:

 

The Block 3F was the first F35 with full operational capability. Everything before it was a glorified test aircraft.

Block 2B/3I jets could only carry two AMRAAMs internally with no sidewinders and very limited A2G payload.

[TotenDead]

8 часов назад, NytHawk сказал:

The Block 3F was the first F35 with full operational capability. Everything before it was a glorified test aircraft.

 

Isn't 3f the Block that became operational only like about 6-7 years ago? 

16 часов назад, Northstar98 сказал:

No it isn't.

I want an operation variant, of which Block 3F is the first. If I wanted "the most powerful version" I would've said block 4+

It's give me a MiG-23MLA, not a pre-production MiG-23. Give me a 9.12 MiG-29, not a 9.11 MiG-29A.

Unlike with older planes you don't have much choice here

[NytHawk]

2 hours ago, TotenDead said:

Isn't 3f the Block that became operational only like about 6-7 years ago? 

Block 3F entered OT&E in late 2018

[Northstar98]

3 hours ago, TotenDead said:

Unlike with older planes you don't have much choice here

Yes, this is a problem when developing an aircraft that was only recently declared fully operational. It's part of the reason why I think that the F-35 is a poor choice for DCS.

However, developing a pre-IOC aircraft would really solidify that the F-35 is a poor-choice in DCS for me - on top of everything else (like the lack of relevant peer threats, low fidelity sensor modelling, lacklustre EW etc).

And to be honest, the only thing 3F materially improves when it comes to DCS-relevant aerial warfare is external carriage of 2 AIM-9X. Most of the changes relevant for DCS would concern AG armament.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

On 5/5/2025 at 9:25 AM, Northstar98 said:

 developing a pre-IOC aircraft would really solidify that the F-35 is a poor-choice in DCS for me - on top of everything else (like the lack of relevant peer threats, low fidelity sensor modelling, lacklustre EW etc).

And to be honest, the only thing 3F materially improves when it comes to DCS-relevant aerial warfare is external carriage of 2 AIM-9X. Most of the changes relevant for DCS would concern AG armament.

A Pre-IOC Panther would be disastrous. If we're expecting a production F-35 and we get something like AF-01? That's like asking for a ribeye and then getting eye of round. Yeah, it's identifiable as a steak, but is it the steak you wanted?

[lee1hy]

even old gbu39 doesn't allow it either, so I don't expect f35 payload either

Edited June 18 by lee1hy

[NytHawk]

3 hours ago, lee1hy said:

even old gbu39 doesn't allow it either, so I don't expect f35 payload either

What do you mean with this?

[aaronwhite]

On 2/23/2025 at 9:48 PM, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

We just turned DCS into a survival horror game.

This summarizes my feelings every time I'm flying in a Hornet on the Persian Gulf and thinking "I really hope there aren't an F-14s operating anywhere..."

[ricnunes]

On 5/5/2025 at 3:25 PM, Northstar98 said:

And to be honest, the only thing 3F materially improves when it comes to DCS-relevant aerial warfare is external carriage of 2 AIM-9X. Most of the changes relevant for DCS would concern AG armament.

And the gun, and the external carriage of (any type of) weapons, and expanded flight control rules, and 9G capability, and etc... (not to mention the AG weaponry like you mentioned)

Anyway, there's lots of improvements and functionalities that weren't implemented or functional in pre-Block 3F F-35 variants. Even more than the ones you can read above.

It makes absolutely NO SENSE building a pre-Block 3F F-35, period.

Edited Thursday at 01:44 PM by ricnunes

[NytHawk]

21 hours ago, ricnunes said:

And the gun, and the external carriage of (any type of) weapons, and expanded flight control rules, and 9G capability, and etc... (not to mention the AG weaponry like you mentioned)

Anyway, there's lots of improvements and functionalities that weren't implemented or functional in pre-Block 3F F-35 variants. Even more than the ones you can read above.

It makes absolutely NO SENSE building a pre-Block 3F F-35, period.

I think most people also would appreciate not being limited to only two AMRAAMs in the Block 2B/3I

[ricnunes]

4 hours ago, NytHawk said:

I think most people also would appreciate not being limited to only two AMRAAMs in the Block 2B/3I

Yeap. That too, indeed!

[TotenDead]

В 08.10.2025 в 20:13, ricnunes сказал:

And the gun, and the external carriage of (any type of) weapons, and expanded flight control rules, and 9G capability, and etc... (not to mention the AG weaponry like you mentioned. 

It makes absolutely NO SENSE building a pre-Block 3F F-35, period.

I get it, you don't want the F-35, you want a "press to win" button. 

It makes all the sense as it's what the aircraft was (and some airframes possibly is) in real life with all its IRL limitations and drawbacks. And in such a shape it would've been sent into Combat if a huge war occured.

 

Yes, it would've been slaughtered and so will you on-line, but don't you play DCS for simulation purposes?

[NytHawk]

5 hours ago, TotenDead said:

I get it, you don't want the F-35, you want a "press to win" button. 

We just want an F35 with its full warfighting capabilities.
Its barely any more effort to make a 3F because its just a 2B/3I with less FLCS restrictions and mostly more of the same weapons. Eg. SDBs are operated the same way as JDAMs and we get more AMRAAMs and external stores.

We get it, you just really want ED to make a Block 1# F35. 

Edited 22 hours ago by NytHawk

[TotenDead]

3 часа назад, NytHawk сказал:

We just want an F35 with its full warfighting capabilities.
Its barely any more effort to make a 3F because its just a 2B/3I with less FLCS restrictions and mostly more of the same weapons. Eg. SDBs are operated the same way as JDAMs and we get more AMRAAMs and external stores.

We get it, you just really want ED to make a Block 1# F35. 

Ye, would be interesting

[NytHawk]

26 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Ye, would be interesting

We already have plenty of subsonic trainers in DCS, an F35 Block 1A/B would objectively be the worst.

[TotenDead]

3 часа назад, NytHawk сказал:

We already have plenty of subsonic trainers in DCS, an F35 Block 1A/B would objectively be the worst.

I disagree, but we're not getting a pure trainer anyway

[NytHawk]

34 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

I disagree, but we're not getting a pure trainer anyway

Regardless, the Block 1s you want are subsonic, can only pull 18 degrees of alpha and 5G. They carry no weapons and lack MADL or L16. The Jet you want is an initial training variant of the F35.

[TotenDead]

1 минуту назад, NytHawk сказал:

Regardless, the Block 1s you want are subsonic, can only pull 18 degrees of alpha and 5G. They carry no weapons and lack MADL or L16. The Jet you want is an initial training variant of the F35.

If that's the only variant available for ED documents wise then so be it. But, like I said, we're not getting block 1, we'll have a combat capable jet

[NytHawk]

2 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

If that's the only variant available for ED documents wise then so be it. But, like I said, we're not getting block 1, we'll have a combat capable jet

Hopefully a 3F since its barely any more work than a 2B and has significant upgrades in capabilities

[ricnunes]

16 hours ago, TotenDead said:

I get it, you don't want the F-35, you want a "press to win" button. 

It makes all the sense as it's what the aircraft was (and some airframes possibly is) in real life with all its IRL limitations and drawbacks. And in such a shape it would've been sent into Combat if a huge war occured.

 

Yes, it would've been slaughtered and so will you on-line, but don't you play DCS for simulation purposes?

Just like any other aircraft in DCS, I want a F-35 that represents an in-service aircraft (which is the case of Block 3F) and not just some prototype produced in considerably numbers (due to concurrency) which is the case of Block 2B and Block 3i.

It's not my fault that the F-35 is in itself a "win button" (currently, the best fighter aircraft in world)!
Even a Block 2B or Block 3i would still be a "win button" compared to all other fighter aircraft in DCS (due to stealth, sensor fusion and other factors), so I don't get your point as you still wouldn't get the "online balance" that you seem to cater so much (with a Block 2B or 3i) and the rest of us wouldn't get a representation of an in-service F-35 (at least Block 3F).

About your last question, that doesn't make any sense because:
1- I do play DCS for simulation purposes in BELIEVABLE SCENARIOS and as such, that includes flying in-service aircraft and not "glorified prototypes".
2- If the problem is on-line balancing then it's very simple:
2.1- Don't add F-35s to online mission, namely those that are team-versus-team.
2.2- Or, only add F-35s to co-op online missions.

Simple as that.

[ricnunes]

2 hours ago, TotenDead said:

If that's the only variant available for ED documents wise then so be it. But, like I said, we're not getting block 1, we'll have a combat capable jet

A Block 1 would even be more stupid than a Block 2B or Block 3i.
Only a very few Block 1 prototypes ever existed and these would NEVER see combat in any real scenario!

F-35 Block 1 was nothing like for example the F-16 Block 1 (for former was simply a prototype while the later an actual in service combat aircraft).

Or putting into another perspective, a F-35 Block 1 was like the YF-16. Would you prefer to have in DCS the YF-16 rather than the F-16C Block 50? 

[TotenDead]

2 часа назад, ricnunes сказал:

Just like any other aircraft in DCS, I want a F-35 that represents an in-service aircraft (which is the case of Block 3F) and not just some prototype produced in considerably numbers (due to concurrency) which is the case of Block 2B and Block 3i.

And is there enough documents available to make the 3F?

2 часа назад, ricnunes сказал:

It's not my fault that the F-35 is in itself a "win button" (currently, the best fighter aircraft in world)!

Whatever you say, mate

2 часа назад, ricnunes сказал:

Even a Block 2B or Block 3i would still be a "win button" compared to all other fighter aircraft in DCS (due to stealth, sensor fusion and other factors), so I don't get your point as you still wouldn't get the "online balance" that you seem to cater so much (with a Block 2B or 3i) and the rest of us wouldn't get a representation of an in-service F-35 (at least Block 3F).

I wasn't talking about game balance. I'm saying thay many people don't want the F-35, they want bells and whistles, even imaginary ones

2 часа назад, ricnunes сказал:

 

About your last question, that doesn't make any sense because:
1- I do play DCS for simulation purposes in BELIEVABLE SCENARIOS and as such, that includes flying in-service aircraft and not "glorified prototypes".

Believable? Okay, I don't think we have balloons in the game, but I suppose you could bomb peasants in the 2B

[NytHawk]

3 hours ago, TotenDead said:

And is there enough documents available to make the 3F?

Easily. Most of our references for F35 operations are block 3F utilising the full SDD weapons suite. A 3F from an R&D POV is a minor step up from the 2B/3I.

 

3 hours ago, TotenDead said:

I wasn't talking about game balance. I'm saying thay many people don't want the F-35, they want bells and whistles, even imaginary ones

Vocal minority. The amount of new players the F35 will attract will definitely benefit the DCS ecosystem as a whole.
 

3 hours ago, TotenDead said:

Believable? Okay, I don't think we have balloons in the game, but I suppose you could bomb peasants in the 2B

The F35s have done a lot more than just "bombing peasants" in the real world.