DCS: P-51D Mustang Coming in 2012

[FLANKERATOR]

I will buy this DCS P-51D IF you announce right now what the next DCS Fixed Wing JET Fighter will be and estimate (rough) timeline of release!

 

I and you (ED) have to see this as Investor/Shares scenario where by I the investor will buy this DCS Mustang module in which I am not interested at all, only because I wish to support further development, but to next actually gime something I want... a Jet Fighter of any kind with Afterburners and guided missiles or any kind... that I would pay for but where's the "guarantee" that such thing will happen any time soon? You (ED) migth as well say your next DCS priject will be another DCS Flying Legends aircaft... correct? As after all now everything really is subject to change and there is no guarante ever that no matter how high your (ED) intentions are to give us a DCS Fighter you can always change your plans and intentions... which would leave me with bad "investment"... see my point?

 

ED would like us to support you... and I have so far... but then I feel we need to be suported also. We've been hoping for something in DCS standard with afterburners for years (I've been active here since 2005... that's 7 years now) and if ED continues to go sideways from this this is not a good sign.

 

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kuky again.

 

Am sure this is not everybody's way to look at things, but to be honest, it's way more than driving high fidelity vehicles simulations.

 

We have started with ED since Flanker, we grew up/got old flying JETS, this may sound weird but IMO that's very similar to asking a real F-15 driver to convert himself into a Mustang! Like someone else said before, we got feelings. It's not like we dont want to fly something inferior from a technological standpoint, it's just that, over a long period of time, we became Virtual Fighter Pilots of the modern era.

I wish we could bring the IL-2 community to us, not the opposite.

By the way, with all due respect to the Mustang, is it holding anything Digital? aren't we flying Digital Combat Simulations?

[winz]

I don't understand why everyone is still comparing FSX to DCS, both are great, but completely different.

I agree with you on that one. I personally don't get the whole 'well you can fly that in FSX, there for it got no place in DCS' arguement.

FSX has some great aspects and I enjoy flying the PMDG 737 a lot.

[104th_Cobra]

I think there will be lot of people that wont buy P51, because Element1108, as a cessna and a P51 is a very poor comparison, a P51 in moderm DCS environment is also very poor.

Greetings

 

For You people I don't know, but for me it will be a lot of fun going NOE, dodging those nasty SAMs while nailing some A-10C and Ka-50 and blowing some MBTs with HVAR rockets.

If I want some fun with Ju-88 or He-111, using some bombsight to send Buckingham Palace to Stone Age (the only joy), I'll still have CloD.

Meanwhile, DCS Some Fighter Jet Airplane is being worked on parallel.

[BS_Fighter]

How deep is the simulation of the systems compared to FSX A2A Simulations? In one of the screenshots the prop RPM stuck on the red dot :). Leads to the corresponding effects? If the hydraulic system or "simulating" or only "shown" correctly?

[159th_Viper]

Thread cleaned up.

 

Should members elect to further render opinions not constructive, courteous and respectful, either to the Dev Team or each other, do not post.

[Rikus]

Another thing i don´t understand is, that P51 will have AFM like A10 or BS, but for FC3 is not possible?

 

First FC3 and P51 than fast jet, because is fast jet is before, wont sell FC3

 

Greetings

[159th_Viper]

How deep is the simulation of the systems compared to FSX A2A Simulations?

 

Doing this as illustrated in the following Vid will get you killed in quick-time:

 

Tx0U5LreXag

 

Let's just say that it's a good example of 'Definitely-what-not-to-do'.

 

 

In one of the screenshots the prop RPM stuck on the red dot :).

 

Nothing wrong with that - engine speed set to Military Power as opposed to Normal Rated Power :)

[jp203000]

FC3 will have AFM .

[element1108]

I said a cessna as i could say a BF109.

 

The key is that ED know what customers want, a multirole fighter or air to air at least, at this moment, that we have a helicopter and an air to ground plaen.

 

But ED is now in a monopoly position, and he knows.

 

So before to give customers what they are demanding, is good to remember that customers are who pay at least, they are going to take all eggs of gold from the chicken, they sell FC1, then FC2 and again FC3

 

I think there will be lot of people that wont buy P51, because Element1108, as a cessna and a P51 is a very poor comparison, a P51 in moderm DCS environment is also very poor.

 

To fly for fly, FSX, or other sims very very good like IL2 for say one.

 

And this is bad, because finally, customers must wait more, and more for what they want and are demanding, a multirole fast jet, and if is with carrier, better than better.

 

Greetings

 

The customers wants a jet, they're getting one. They also want a fc3 they're getting that as well, ground commander ,more patches and yes now a warbird. Flying legends is a side project, just because it was announced first doesn't mean it's coming out first. And I still think a Cessna is a poor comparison a 109 would have been more more accurate.

 

No disrespect...this thread is as nerdy as it gets (pedantic arguments based on little facts). I'm guilty of it as well for contributing.

 

I just don't think anyone can predict what happens next with other timelines because this was announced.

[Yo-Yo]

How deep is the simulation of the systems compared to FSX A2A Simulations? In one of the screenshots the prop RPM stuck on the red dot :). Leads to the corresponding effects? If the hydraulic system or "simulating" or only "shown" correctly?

 

Where can we read how deep is the engine modelled by A2A?

Concerning the red dot (if you mean that rpm were more than 3000) - this screenshot was taken in beta and this is a well known bug. If the plane spawns in the midair prop governor will not work until prop rpm axis is not updated.

Surely unproper operation (overboost, overrev) will lead to engine damage.

[BS_Fighter]

Doing this as illustrated in the following Vid will get you killed in quick-time:

 

 

Let's just say that it's a good example of 'Definitely-what-not-to-do'.

 

 

 

 

Nothing wrong with that - engine speed set to Military Power as opposed to Normal Rated Power :)

 

I had forgotten to say that I thought the accu-sim expansions ;).

[element1108]

but its still a WW2 aircraft without MFDs etc...not what I am looking for at all. But did I read correctly that you are doing a modern ac and a historical one parallely?

 

+1 for reading and understanding the entire announcement. They aren't claiming the first born to all dcs customers as some would have you believe. It's a compatible seperate initiative to the modern airframes. The company has a few warbirds laying around and decided to transpose them onto the desktop so all of us can enjoy them (if we so choose).

 

Emotional reactions the likes of some with a clear misunderstanding of the message is how a child acts when he doesn't get what he wants. He doesn't understand it, he just reacts.

 

The only excuse I have for those people is of English isn't their first language... "in parallel" can be easily missed.

[BS_Fighter]

Where can we read how deep is the engine modelled by A2A?

Concerning the red dot (if you mean that rpm were more than 3000) - this screenshot was taken in beta and this is a well known bug. If the plane spawns in the midair prop governor will not work until prop rpm axis is not updated.

Surely unproper operation (overboost, overrev) will lead to engine damage.

 

 

Thanks Yo-Yo.

 

Alook at the accu-sim core fatures of the Spitfire or P-40B Warhawk explains much already.

[159th_Viper]

I had forgotten to say that I thought the accu-sim expansions ;).

 

Oh - I had no idea they even existed. Be happy to take a look if you link me some accu-sim P51 videos :)

[GGTharos]

Digital as in 'on a computer'. Not as in 'Tron' or 'Aircraft with modern fly by wire'.

 

 

By the way, with all due respect to the Mustang, is it holding anything Digital? aren't we flying Digital Combat Simulations?

[GGTharos]

It is because there is a relatively large market for middle-of-the-ground simulation, ie. simpler avionics (and in some cases, FMs).

 

Also, the community asked for it.

 

I dont think DCS jet fighter will come soon, thats why Ed decided to revive FC2 into FC3

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

So wrong...

 

There is no way DCS with this heavy barricaded engine can compete with FSX or X-plane which are all about 3rd party addons. Just look at the PMDG, A2A, VRS, Flightsimlabs... they produced more realistic aircrafts than ED will ever do.

 

I flew to Krasnodar many times in MSFS, working flawless and actually, addon scenery (freeware) has more details than DCS one, and all navaids work.

 

 

MSFS Krasnodar:

 

 

VS

 

 

DCS Krasnodar:

 

Actually, DCS world is fictional, every single airport is wrongly positioned, rwy headings are wrong, ATC and navaid freqs. are all wrong, Novorossiysk does not exist in RL anymore, Gelendzik is more airfield than airport, there is no parallel taxiway in RL...

 

My point is that ED should concentrate resources on combat simulation only like they do right now.

 

Hmm ... Very well said Nikola.

[GGTharos]

No, that is what you want. There are plenty of people who do want a P-51, which you either didn't see because you didn't bother reading their responses, or you ignored them.

 

ED isn't obligated to cater to your specific desires - but they sure try. They come out with a P-51 and at the same time FC3 and DCS: Jet Fighter are being worked on - what on earth do you have to complain about? What?

 

The key is that ED know what customers want, a multirole fighter or air to air at least, at this moment, that we have a helicopter and an air to ground plaen.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I will buy this DCS P-51D IF you announce right now what the next DCS Fixed Wing JET Fighter will be and estimate (rough) timeline of release!

 

I and you (ED) have to see this as Investor/Shares scenario where by I the investor will buy this DCS Mustang module in which I am not interested at all, only because I wish to support further development, but to next actually gime something I want... a Jet Fighter of any kind with Afterburners and guided missiles or any kind... that I would pay for but where's the "guarantee" that such thing will happen any time soon? You (ED) migth as well say your next DCS priject will be another DCS Flying Legends aircaft... correct? As after all now everything really is subject to change and there is no guarante ever that no matter how high your (ED) intentions are to give us a DCS Fighter you can always change your plans and intentions... which would leave me with bad "investment"... see my point?

 

ED would like us to support you... and I have so far... but then I feel we need to be suported also. We've been hoping for something in DCS standard with afterburners for years (I've been active here since 2005... that's 7 years now) and if ED continues to go sideways from this this is not a good sign.

 

I second your opinion! Previously I stated that I will buy Mustang to support ED, as I have done it with A-10C that I never fly. But, I really, really would prefer to see a jet airplane, MiG-21 or F-4 or MiG-23, 29, F-18, even F-16 ...

[Laud]

Now how comes we have a P-51D thread in the A-10C forums? Here's the same stuff going on like in the "Main"-thread for this topic...

[Nate--IRL--]

Oh - I had no idea they even existed. Be happy to take a look if you link me some accu-sim P51 videos :)

 

Still in development but looks detailed enough.

 

ejsc1BwKDn4

 

Nate

[Nate--IRL--]

There is no P-51 forum yet so....

 

Nate

[MTFDarkEagle]

Still in development but looks detailed enough.

 

ejsc1BwKDn4

 

Nate

Oh yeah she'll be detailed enough! Access to 3 Mustang's, and Dudley Hendriques is on the team (as well as other highly qualified pilots). Dudley founded the International Fighter Pilots Fellowship, and flew P-51's. I suppose that's saying something :)

[Smokin Hole]

How about an anouncement like this:

 

"...We at Eagle Dynamics have been very fortunate to have the enduring backing of The Fighter Collection (TFC). It has been and will continue to be a great relationship. But until now, the products that ED offered to aviation fans the world over have had very little to do with the great work of TFC maintaining and flying some of the great classics of WWII. This year that will change. As a small token of our recognition TFC's steadfast support, we are offering something to their fans, and hopefully to a few of ours: DCS P-51. ..."

 

Actually I don't know if the above is completely true. But the backlash that ED is seeing on this thread is mostly due to how this product was intruduced. Showing pictures of the A-10 flying alongside the P-51 is pretty. I enjoy fly-bys like that at airshows. But from the perspective of a DCS "study-sim" fan, its also a little disturbing. ED might say, "relax, we are only showing that the Legend model will be every bit as great as the Modern model by showing the two together." Well, usually people like me are constantly clamouring to have ED products merged together. But this is one I would like to see separated. I will buy it and enjoy the two new desktop icons to sit alondside the eight I have already. I just hope you understand that this isn't just jet fans dissing props. Its DCS fans who have bought into the military study-sim concept sold to us by ED. P-51, as currently described, doesn't fit into that standard.

[Speed]

I haven't seen it mentioned... any idea if we're going to get any of the USAAF weaponry the P-51D carried besides the 6XM2s? Like any of the WWII era rockets or bombs? What about the external tank that supposedly made the thing so hard to fly?