DCS: P-51D Mustang Coming in 2012

[aaron886]

(@EtherealN) Possibly so. You could also make the argument that everything can be server-side. Development of additional aircraft does not preclude the possibility of file-checking, and encrypted aircraft and weapons data (which already exist, to a degree.) The server can decide what is allowed, and all else is excluded.

 

Tailor development tools to the advanced user and make them payware, if necessary, to keep the right people interested. I hate to volunteer myself for additional costs in this hobby, as broke as I am, but that would be one thing I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to spend money on.

[PeterP]

Still hungry?

 

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=83320&highlight=parallel

BTW: didn't you received the e-mail?

[Speed]

Where's the bit about parallel development of a modern aircraft sim for 2012? Was there another announcement, if so where? I know FC3 has been mentioned in an earlier statement, but nothing here. So no need to get sniffy and start patronising people.

 

I think most realistic estimates would place the release of the next modern aircraft DCS aircraft sometime in 2013.

 

DCS: BS- December 2008

DCS: WH- Feb 2011 (bout 26 months, ~2.2 years apart)

If it took just as long to get the next module ready, we'd be looking at a April 2013 release for DCS: fast mover.

 

Now, you can't draw too many conclusions from just two datapoints, but you can get a very general idea about how long it is likely to take them to get the next modern aircraft module ready.

 

Also considering everything else that ED has announced (P-51, Battle Commander, FC3), I'd say a 2012 release for a modern aircraft sim would be highly unlikely.

 

Also, consider what was previously pointed out about how little work the avionics and flight model people at ED are having to do to make the Battle Commander module, FC3, and P-51D ready. Sure, the flight model folks might have to do some work on the P-51D, but I doubt it takes up all their time. It may be that work on the next module is essentially going full-steam-ahead because their rate of progress on it is limited by the rate of progress on the avionics and flight model. Who knows.

[GGTharos]

I only directly spoke with one person who was trying to create terrain, I didn't try to do so mylself - the complaints from him were about finding good textures, not so much about the tools.

 

That said, I'm not saying I don't believe you - there's always room for improvement, and the terrain tool offered by ED was offered 'as is' hoping that it would be helpful ... but it -was- an internal development tool, not something specifically made as an SDK, IIRC.

 

I have to respond to this. The tools provided thus far are the most user-un-friendly development tools I've ever worked with. The process is so confusing, convoluted, poorly documented, and strangely arranged that it's nearly impossible to learn. I'm not trying to insult the person who made the tools, who clearly made them to suit his own devices, but they're just unusable for end-users. That's why so many projects have stalled out, my own included. Just the most incredibly aggravating and arbitrary errors kept bogging me down. I'm well-used to correcting errors and quickly learning a workflow for "modding" ED's simulators, but terrain creation is absolutely ridiculous.

[Gunnergolly]

Please ED, if your going to give us a P-51, why not make a few modifications to your model and give us one of these too ???....

 

Piper PA48 Enforcer.

 

 

http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/piper_pa-48.php

 

Just a suggestion :smilewink:....

 

Regards

 

Gunner....

[Snoopy]

I think most realistic estimates would place the release of the next modern aircraft DCS aircraft sometime in 2013.

 

DCS: BS- December 2008

DCS: WH- Feb 2011 (bout 26 months, ~2.2 years apart)

If it took just as long to get the next module ready, we'd be looking at a April 2013 release for DCS: fast mover.

 

Now, you can't draw too many conclusions from just two datapoints, but you can get a very general idea about how long it is likely to take them to get the next modern aircraft module ready.

 

Also considering everything else that ED has announced (P-51, Battle Commander, FC3), I'd say a 2012 release for a modern aircraft sim would be highly unlikely.

 

No inside knowledge but I agree...people forget that it takes a while to develop a sim as complex and accurate as DCS...IMO P-51, Combined Arms, FC3 are products ED will produce to help "hold folks over" until DCS Fast Mover is released....

[Speed]

Please ED, if your going to give us a P-51, why not make a few modifications to your model and give us one of these too ???....

 

Piper PA48 Enforcer.

 

http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/piper_pa-48.php

 

Just a suggestion :smilewink:....

 

Regards

 

Gunner....

 

Might as well give us the AT-802U :) We get the P-51 because the flight model people had some spare time. Maybe we'll get the AT-802U at some point in the future if the avionics people get some spare time :D

[Smokin Hole]

Well sixty-three pages in three days. If you just count the "definately yes" and the "I-hate-the-idea-but-will-grudgingly-take-another-crack-hit" as buyers, then I think ED will make some money.

 

Smokin' Hole proven wrong once again:badmood:...

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

Good man, now go ahead and buy yourself that Pony you always wanted! :D

[EtherealN]

Might as well give us the AT-802U :)

 

Agreed. :D

[Gunnergolly]

Originally Posted by Speed

Might as well give us the AT-802U

 

I'd be willing to pay for one of those too !!!!....:thumbup:

[nemises]

...gosh, imagine the furor if ED announce the next DCS vehicle isn't even an aircraft :P

 

...oh that's right, combined arms..

 

ED are thinking outside of the box, and you guys should as well when imagining what might be coming from DCS....

It's always been envisioned as a "total battlefield" simulation experience...why get hung up on whether its a fast jet with buttons and screens or a WWII fighter with cable based flight systems and a MAD tendancy to try and kill you.

 

Its a battlefield simulation full stop...next could be anything on the battlefield, sea air or land.

[Zaltys]

...gosh, imagine the furor if ED announce the next DCS vehicle isn't even an aircraft :P

 

...oh that's right, combined arms..

 

ED are thinking outside of the box, and you guys should as well when imagining what might be coming from DCS....

It's always been envisioned as a "total battlefield" simulation experience...why get hung up on whether its a fast jet with buttons and screens or a WWII fighter with cable based flight systems and a MAD tendancy to try and kill you.

 

Its a battlefield simulation full stop...next could be anything on the battlefield, sea air or land.

 

Oh, no... you scared me...

[Frostiken]

It's a simple battle between those who have their own personal ideals of what they want the DCS series to be about.

 

At this point in time, releasing a WW2 combat flight simulator is like releasing an FPS game set in the near future where everything is brown and smudgy and you get blood on the screen when you're shot.

 

some of us like it..we had to take a back seat to those jet burner's

 

 

 

 

Versus

 

 

[aaron886]

I only directly spoke with one person who was trying to create terrain, I didn't try to do so mylself - the complaints from him were about finding good textures, not so much about the tools.

 

That said, I'm not saying I don't believe you - there's always room for improvement, and the terrain tool offered by ED was offered 'as is' hoping that it would be helpful ... but it -was- an internal development tool, not something specifically made as an SDK, IIRC.

 

Duly noted! :) Textures is only hard depending on where you're trying to find textures for. In my case, I have 1m/px resolution textures for the entire area I want to (someday) complete. Hopefully I'll get a chance to finish it someday.

[GGTharos]

I hope you do, it'll be nice to see more terrain. To go with a meme, Moar! :D

[ALDEGA]

Actually, DCS world is fictional, every single airport is wrongly positioned, rwy headings are wrong

That is true of the old (LOMAC-era) airports. The ones that were added in DCS are much closer to the real ones. Please check.

[ALDEGA]

I still would advocate a small GPS receiver to be mounted in the P-51 to simplify navigation.

You want to take away the very thing that makes these aircraft different? ;)

[EvilBivol-1]

PS. Trolling? Give me a break that was my first reply after my initial reaction so if that's trolling... go ahead ban me because then I'm a moron and can't differ one from the other.

So it's clear, I did not intend my messages about repeated posting to be directed at you specifically. In fact, my original post was directly addressed to another user, who had already repeated his opinion multiple times in this thread, which I felt had no purpose other than repetition.

 

I hope we will stop the moderation discussion with this. If you feel inclined to continue it, please do so via PM.

 

As to your other points, we understand you may disagree with ED's business decisions and product development. We strive to ensure that all of our products deliver a high quality and lasting gaming experience that is at least fair (IMHO far, far better than fair) for the price asked.

[effte]

Hmmm... the DCS P-51 appears to have dual altimeters? One where it should be, and another one on the right among the engine instruments? Or is it something else?

 

The position where the right one is has to be cleared again. That's where the tactical radio for A-10 and Ka-50 coordination has to go in! :D

[EvilBivol-1]

Hmmm... the DCS P-51 appears to have dual altimeters? One where it should be, and another one on the right among the engine instruments? Or is it something else?

 

The position where the right one is has to be cleared again. That's where the tactical radio for A-10 and Ka-50 coordination has to go in! :D

The instrument you are seeing on the right is probably the accelerometer.

[galagamo]

Everyone who thinks the DCSFL P-51 sucks, please keep in mind that it doesn't matter what you think XD

I would wager that it will do well in spite of what you all think.

Ohh the novelty, Ill be dogfighting and MP will be a lot less coop more H2H furrballls we'll see who's got the quickest hands to manipulate this bird with deadly accuracy, a fair test of skills.

Some of you are just not seeing the potential, but you will.

[Madog]

A question about this addon

 

Hey,

this is a very active thread, and i have not read all 64 pages of it, so it this has already been answered, please point me to the right post.

 

I wonder about the nature of this add on, is it a FSX like "aircraft only" add on which provides the airframe and documentation only, or is there going to be extra content.. missions, challenges, maybe even a campaign? If so, what is planned for that? If not, since most of using the P51D will probably be flying around, will there be improvements in AI airspace handling and proper ATC and procedures?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Madog

[effte]

The instrument you are seeing on the right is probably the accelerometer.

 

D'oh! The one with labels down to '-4'? I'll go to bed now I think.... Better than a spare altimeter at least, especially a spare one of the infamous three-hand variety.

 

Still, it's gotta go... ;)

 

BTW, I'm going to be the first to begin on the new line of whining: Is it out yet?! We've been waiting for aaaaaages! :D

 

(And yes, I'd like cheese with that.)

[159th_Viper]

D'oh! The one with labels down to '-4'?

 

Aye

 

-4 to 12......That's the one :D

 

Still, it's gotta go... ;)

 

Agreed!

 

Don't need the airspeed indicators either.......Crank the canopy, lick your finger, stick it out and judge the windspeed!

 

:P