Wishlist for 1.2.4 and next fighter (long post)

[Demongornot]

Hi

First, i want to avoid debate about which of F-15 or F/A-18 will be release first.

My wishlist focus more on the F/A-18C than the F-15C but it was possible for both.

 

First, Hornet mean carrier ops, high alpha, and restrictions like 7g, no 0g except for transition and high alpha.

 

For carrier Ops, several things was way needed, first of all, ground crew, use external view for placing aircraft on the catapult or teleport it on the catapult position its way unrealistic and will totally waste the work for create a complex and fully realistic aircraft.

We need ground crew with a guy who will guide our aircraft for depart from park area to the catapult with correct placement, it will be nice to see people do animation like of they attach our aircraft to the catapult but if its not, well ok, just a guy for guide our aircraft to the catapult, its the minimum require, we also need communication with carrier, ground, control center (they have radar and can told us when they spot an aircraft, in fact launch ship after spotting incoming unknown radar contact was one of the most common thing in carrier), and finally carrier also need communication for approach like in real life.

 

Also parking/ground management, for carrier AND airport, i will back to carrier after, now lets talk about airport.

We need a way more better airport management, its an important part of the flight, the ATC was way too much simplified, we have no airport sign, the ground controller just told us : taxi to the parking are...Yes, but which one ?

Look at this image : http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_kqZ_hq4ViPg/S18QLDq6mbI/AAAAAAAAAko/EcN_TVFYNwE/s1600/RW+Sign+Test.bmp

After a brief search of google image, Georgian airport clearly and definitely have airport sign, look at Kutaisi :

http://a.pix.ge:81/w/g9ncc.jpg

Ground crew who will really manage ground navigation, told is where we need to go and a ground crew who appear on on the parking area that we must park on.

Look this, even this "simulator" have ground crew : http://combatpilotseries.com/interactive-ground-crew/

For...Ground, its was needed but for carrier it was obviously impossible to deal without if we want to have realistic experience.

Even the guy who will help us for testing control surfaces need so much, in the A10C we can't see our tail and we can't notice (except by using immersion killer external view) if elevator work.

Look at this video :

with the Eagle or this one

with the Hornet.

 

I'm sure if you implement ground crew you, ED Team will only make the guy for surface control test and the guy who lead us to the taxiway for leaving the parking area to the taxiway for take off or the guy who will lead us from the taxiway to the parking area after land, i totally understand that you don't have the time to make long animation of ground crew check our aircraft and do a lot of things with, but at least plz open doors and lets the possibility to modders to upgrade any potential ground crew with more animations.

And if even radar/engine cover, remove before flight pins and other are not needed but eyecandy, the wheel chocks are really useful.

First : cause sometime our aircraft begin to roll on the ground before we expect to taxi, just cause of wind, i have see a lot of time my SU-25 (simple and T variant) rolling on the ground with minimum throttle after land and leave the parking, but with carrier, who NEED to pitching for carrier OPS, a lot of time our aircraft slide on him cause for the moment i never have see any game/simulator who really simulate friction and avoid object to slide on other, the wheel chocks can be considerate like "attach on ground/attach on carrier" things.

 

Back to the carrier, we need a way better model with aircraft on the deck and several aircraft configuration, launch, recovery, tanning, clear deck etc etc and why not working elevator, and before you start to told me that a carrier with full deck will be impossible cause of performance or any other things, just look at the Nimitz carrier addon for Flight Simulator X (also a CPU based game with same kind of graphic and who also need NASA's computer for operate.

Look this one :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRdcQwpGq1U

And everytime i have use this carrier, even with full carrier combat group, i have NEVER notice FPS drop over 2 FPS loss, so if an amateur modder can do it, ED Team can also do it, empty deck was unrealistic and kill totally immersion...

Carrier combat group are also needed, mainly in a combat sim, FSX was a civilian sim and already handle it.

Carrier group with realistic configuration of this (class, distance, number, position).

And a WAY more important feature : during launch and recovery the carrier need to turn ahead of the wind and back to waypoint cap after all ship was recovered or launch, and that was one of the more important reason why we need to communicate with carrier.

I hope you will agree...

 

And what about Windsock ?

 

 

Hornet or Eagle mean fighter with high speed and turn capability, the hornet are know for the famous vapor on wings (mainly cause it operate over water a lot of time), we really all want the wing vapor effect, both vapor type, first created by vortex :

http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/3/1/1/8/2/4/a4345604-208-F18%20vapor%20Key%20West.jpg

And the second on the wings : http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2011/11/227ef9684b418386ad2d42205d9ebf8c.jpg

If even you don't want to do it yourself for every aircraft (cause every aircraft need different animation, i know) open door for modders.

 

http://hushkit.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/fa-18e_super_hornet.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/FA-18F_vapor_over_wings_1.jpg/750px-FA-18F_vapor_over_wings_1.jpg

 

Same for transonic vapor cone : http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3209/2920839094_77107826ac.jpg

http://static.squarespace.com/static/4f393c5b875415a6736e90fc/4feb3fb9e4b03725783e89af/4feb3fb9e4b03725783e89cb/1338082329093/1000w

 

About transonic and sound, please can you considerate the possibility to make aircraft LESS louder with cockpit are open or in external view, i know it was realistic, but you don't need to simulate headache and noise-induced hearing loss by make us have an headache and become deaf.

Actually with STANDARD volume that i use for all music, game, skype communication and video, they are all almost the same, but i always need to turn down volume for DCS and ONLY cause of the engine sound when cockpit are open or in external view, the sound are so loud that it make my headphone crackling, except, and its not a problem of volume, even in really low volume it do it, and its not a problem from my computer, my old computer also experiment it, my Logitech G930, my Tritton Ax Pro and my new Razer Tiamat 7.1 do it and also my hifi, so 3 headphone, 2 computer and a hifi, the problem don't come from me, even in youtube a notice this way too much loud sound on DCS video.

 

Example : regular P51D video :

Another one :

The problem that i talk about :

and the problem don't come from youtube, and you can show me any other video with a less loud sound but a lot of use probably turn down the volume during video compression/montage.

And also, the Doppler effect are way too much exaggerated, you use a separate CPU core only for the sound, so please exploit it correctly...

I know this video are not loud, the creator of this video probably turn down the volume, but listen the huge difference between internal and external view :

its almost twice the volume, transition at 1:00 and explosion at 1:45, the sound really and clearly need an upgrade.

 

Anyway back to talk about smoke, look at Seven G :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTFIE_cA-LM with he firing the gun, when the aircraft was hit and when pilot eject, the effect look great, sure its not Arma 3 but the smoke effect still look nice, the same level than DCS i think but it was clearly WAY more FPS friendly, and the ejection look WAY more realistic !

This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xywrekEIJIg show a lot of great things but at 2:50 we can clearly see how vapor was really nicely done, cause i"m afraid to see something like this : http://flyawaysimulation.com/images/downloadshots/14013-sukhoi-su-24m-aizip-921-su-24-supersonic.jpg or like this http://flyawaysimulation.com/images/downloadshots/14014-sukhoi-su-24m-fencerzip-914-supersonic.jpg or like this http://www.crimeanairwars.com/Frontpage2/FA18E/Vapor3.jpg, completly different than this : http://wodumedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-ring-of-water-vapour-is-created-around-pilot-Lt.-Justin-Halligan-left-and-Lt.-Michael-Witt-right-as-they-fly-their-FA-18F-Super-Hornet-airplane-while-performing-at-New-York-Air-Show-at-Jones-Beach-in-Wantagh-New-York-May-960x579.jpg you have to admit.

Or some flat and bad vapor like this : http://www.crimeanairwars.com/Frontpage2/FA18E/small/Vapor2.jpg or like this http://www.crimeanairwars.com/Frontpage2/FA18E/Vapor1.jpg rather than this : http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i45/schuit/FlightSim/F-16-vapor.jpg

Please don't do that...

 

In the second Seven G video i have link, you can, around 3 minutes see a missile, did you notice the smoke ? realistic and FPS friendly.

So plz change the unrealistic and FPS killer smoke...

 

In the video of Seven G you can also notice two important things on the Hornet.

First, flexible wings, the IRL Hornet are know for be one of the most flexible wings fighter, that why NASA choose this one for aeroelastic wing study with the X53.

So flexible wing are nice to see, even Falcon BMS who are not reputed for graphic beauty have it.

And also High Alpha, it mean first vapor and mainly, vibration in cockpit, and i don't talk about camera inside cockpit who vibrate, i talk about camera who show the body of the pilot TOTALLY vibrate during high G turn (any minimum radius) or high alpha.

In this video we can clearly see an F-18 with vapor, wing flexibility and pilot body vibrate, even at slow speed and high alpha

 

Also what about payload over G ? and ice on surface/windshield ?

 

 

 

Part two in comment below !

[Demongornot]

Another things, actually the simulator show ground traffic, but in an AIRCRAFT simulator, civil air traffic wasn't more important ?

In a lot of case, in some conflict civil aircraft still flying, even during war, its rare but some aircraft still flying.

Civil traffic was a part of the real life fighter pilot every day, escort (during conflict, for protect them) routine interception for control, interception for IFF ID incorrect or radio malfunction, some pilot have never shoot down any aircraft except during training when they shoot drones or with Master Arms in SIM mode, and they still have intercept civil aircraft, also avoid traffic was a part of the military jet pilot life.

Possibility to set in mission editor the traffic, normal (for simple training or free flight), conflict (less aircraft but still flight) and war (almost no aircraft, but some rare still flying).

 

Now about Flaming Cliff aircraft, some important things : toes brakes AXIS are needed, also, set afterburner was needed, the best joystick (HOTAS) actually available (the Warthog, i have one) when we use the afterburner hold, its totally not correct with DCS aircraft with AB...Set afterburner will be really nice, mainly if the next aircraft with totally realistic and complexes system was a fighter.

What about make the Pugatchev's Cobra back ?

What about realistic start up time (and sound ?) for engine start, actually AI and FC3 aircraft start way too fast.

And things like realistic speed, for SU-33 wings for example who actually are retract or expend too fast.

 

About AI, better landing was needed, actually the aircraft slow down way too fast, an A10C brake less than the KC-135 or any other big birds...

So it was not really nice, and in fact, rather than turn on the first taxiway they find when they have enough slow down, they just wait to roll SLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWLLLLYYYY untill the end of the runway...

We need better ATC/Ground traffic control, possibility to formation take off/landing.

And what about realistic landing for F-18 bot ?

I have check every video of the Hornet i have find, and everytime an Hornet pilot landing on a Runway, he always lets touch the ground without flares maneuver, like they do in a carrier, the FPS was always 5° down, during the approach and during the touch down, some aircraft immediately after the main landing gear touch down lets the nose touch down like the Hornet (anyways they always do controlled crash, in carrier and in runways :D ) like we can see here

And other like F-15 or F-16 lets the nose up and use the aircraft like a giant airbrake.

 

And what about AI who will avoid collision ?

A realistic ATC who handle more function (maybe not like FSX but something close) like a holding pattern will be first, more realistic and two, avoid unrealistic collision when several bot waiting for landing.

 

Also better weather, the actual was nice but we have almost no choices, look at the FSX one.

In DCS we are limited with 3 determined wind altitude, single cloud that was totally flat (no variation) on max density, http://imgs.abduzeedo.com/files/articles/above-clouds-photography/4-7.jpg its not totally flat and i think its the more flat we can get.

Also i have notice that in real life when you are close of a cloud, you see clearly until you are inside, but in DCS if you make a max density cloud, you fly just over you will see something like a fog but you clearly see that you are above, so please delete this strange fog effect near of a cloud and add cloud size/altitude variation, look this : http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs28/f/2008/175/3/9/Above_the_Clouds_1_by_Valentine_FOV_Stock.jpg

Or this : http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AGhVQ3hUL6Q/TN04KOtt-PI/AAAAAAAAAng/zkDdJNn62Hs/s1600/ws_Above_white_clouds_1920x1200.jpg

Or even a video : In real life no strange fog effect transition

And can you please separate contrail from engine, contrail who start inside engine was totally bad and kill immersion...Anyways smoke effect need to be reworked, mainly cause of the bad effect that we see when smoke pods or contrail start, like a giant cone...

 

But i have to congratulate you for the effect inside the clouds, when we look at our wing inside a cloud, it was realistic (even if a strange bug if totally missing cloud area appear).

 

 

I also wish something useful, a lot of time in the mission editor we set speed of AI aircraft, but we don't know cruise speed of every aircraft and we are forced to select a random value, so please can we have the possibility to set (cruise speed/combat cruise speed, supercruise) option ?

A speed that will be automatically set depending of the aircraft and the altitude and the payload...

Cause always see AI jet can't be long time in air cause always use afterburner or at the edge of the stall its bad...

Same for tanker, the cruise speed of a tanker was way different of the speed it will flight for refuel an A10C, so see the tanker automatically adapt his speed to the aircraft he will refuel will be nice.

 

Also pilot body with kneeboard like we have on the Mustang, with customisable page for show, for example, what weapon we have on which station, or AWACS or Tanker radio frequency, the flight plan, the mission itself, or things like ILS or TAKAN frequency, or on our airbase the holding pattern profile, the approach, emergency procedure etc etc...

 

What about ingame options ? ok maybe your actual graphic engine can't handle ingame change (i don't know) but key/controller assignment, sound and other options will be really nice and useful !

 

About the mission editor, possibility to choose the type and the quantity of ammo for ground/sea unit are needed for a lot of reason, mainly for training missing or some scenario.

 

We also need two things with AI : First Training mission, dogfight with us in SIM mod or with training weapons and other things like this.

And also the possibility to be a wingman, always be the leader was NOT what a lot of people like, have to manage our aircraft for a lot of people its already enough without need to manage 3 other aircraft, mainly on mission where we need to be several ships.

 

Also sometimes aircraft was NOT only 4 in a flight, 8 or 12 ship are also possible.

 

 

Anyways i have some other ask :

First, about the 3D 6DOF SU-27 Cockpit, i hope we will also have one for the SU-33, both cockpit are at 99% the same, we have some rare details but that's all.

 

And for the next aircraft, what about single seat and dual seat variant ? most of the work are done with a dual seat and aircraft will be soon able to handle multiple player or player/AI slots !

 

And just something useful : Emergency firefighter crew, a lot of time our aircraft explode on the ground after some minute in fire cause no firefighter are here to save us...

 

Another things to ask : Clickable radio menu ?

before we have the possibility to do it, but now its gone, we need complicated mods for get it to work, for a lot of people who don't use the keyboard during the flight (for example i have my Hotas Warthog and my mouse, nothing less, nothing more and my keyboard was far of me) and i'm sure i was not the only one like this...

 

And a last things, it was more an eye candy than a 100% needed thing, but it can be nice.

For some vertical missing launcher like the SA-15 Tor, in game the missing just launch and turn, but in real it was way more impressive and nice, the missing just "jump" with a short burst of an "extraction" engine, rotate with some other engine, and finally ignite the main engine.

In game :

In real :

That was ok if you can't do it, but please for a lot of things like this to change, can you open door to modders and maybe of someone do a nice work to see his work implemented inside DCS, like Ricardo cockpit

 

It took me several hours to write this, i don't write this for trolling or complain, just for clearly explain why several things are needed.

I respect Eeagle Dynamics work even if it don't look like.

[sylkhan]

Ouchhh, big wich list.

You are a very optimistic guy :)

Don't forget FA18C=multirole figther=air/ground radar

not going to happend soon :)

[Demongornot]

Sorry for the triple post but something important i have forget (i have write all this from my memory without taking notes)

 

The mission report flood us (i know i do the same with my triple post)

First, like someone actually say, we need to know why our engine suddenly explode or goes in fire or stop, birds strike, random failure or error from us, even if show a bird (even with a bad 3D model, anyways we won't see it long time) will be better, just show it in the mission debriefing report will be nice.

 

Also it flood, if we shoot any bot with the gun, we will see in the log a line for every bullets who touch the target...

It was way too much, mainly during big air combat, just show the number of bullet in a single line who touch the target and if needed show the start and the end time of the event like : 18h34m24s/18h34m27s

 

And i also remember that i have another wish :

Can you please make AI a little more human, they actually eject at the microsecond exact that they take a shoot, they need some delay for a lot of things like this, for a lot of things they react too quickly...

 

 

 

 

And another wish i have just think about...

Actually we have an F-15C in Flaming Cliff 3 and one of the next DCS Fighter will be the F-15C, what will happen ? one for FC3 and another in DCS quality or the FC3 replace by the DCS one ?

 

A nice thing to do will be an alpha/beta version of the F-15C, even a prealpha.

I explain :

FC3 are needed, people who paid the DCS F-15C prealpha will have the F15C of FC3 and a copy named F-15C DCS in the mission editor, it begin with everything exactly like the F-15C of FC3 and slowly begin to be transformed into the DCS one by adding progressively the Alpha/Prealpha version of the AFM, clickable cockpit, advanced avionic etc etc...

 

And what about an FC3 F-15E ? it can help for multiseat with AI and in MP, it will add an USA aircraft (7 aircraft for Russian with the KA-50, 8 with the German Mig-29G...And only 3 for USA with the A10C, a single fighter for USA and no multirole, Russian have two variant of the Mig-29 and the SU-33 are nothing more than a naval SU-27, so variant of the same aircraft are possible to do).

 

The flight model of the F-15C don't need to change, just some tweak for engine (i don't know if the F-15E have more powerful engine than the F-15C or if the rapport weight/thrust still the same) and weight, payload change, 3D model are already done, so a 3D cockpit like actual other aircraft than the F-15C (a 3D cockpit after, but a 2D ole will be a really nice begin and don't take too much time) and almost the same avionic, anyways FC3 aircraft are not 100 realistic.

 

 

And wishlist for modders :

Someone can please try to see if its possible to importing the F-16 from Falcon BMS into DCS World, i don't talk about a DCS model but a FC3 one with nice flight model like we see in BMS and basic avionic like actual FC3 aircraft, or maybe a semi realistic somewhere between DCS and FC3 with clickable cockpit but still totally simplified.

It is possible ?

 

 

 

 

@sylkhan

Yes i know

And probably IFF too, it mean the ILS from A10C will be working and it will be long and complex...

Anyways we wait since a lot of time for the next DCS Aircraft and the Nevada map, if ED can focus in a single plane rather than create a lot in the same time, i'm sure the Hornet (or the Eagle) will be already release...

Edited April 9, 2013 by Demongornot

[Rangi]

I agree with most of what you wish for...

Maybe in 10 years we will have most of those upgrades.....

[Scoggs]

Wonderful suggestions, I hope to see all of them in the future!

[jamesr20]

I'd like to add BVR missiles that work to this list!

[Demongornot]

I'd like to add BVR missiles that work to this list!

 

Yes, i have to, all the night i have done some BVR training and the missile are pretty bad and stupid...

BVR missing with the new patch now have less range than short range IR missile of real life...

 

So i have to add some things to my list.

 

First i excuse myself to Eagle Dynamics cause i have told they have delete the pilot body but i have just notice yesterday that it was in fact back and with nice texture.

The rest of my wishlist :

 

 

 

BVR Missing need to be TOTALLY reworked.

Yesterday i doing some interception training with a friend (F-15 vs Mig-29, PvAI), and even with collision course at 12 my AIM-120B can't reach the target at 10Nm and we where somewhere between 10000 and 25000 feet (we do this mission a lot of time and the bandit altitude don't stop to change), same for my AIM-7 Sparrow unable to shot running target at 5Nm (i have a little bit more speed than him and the radar totally confirm that he was at range, he just escape to my missile with a SLOOWWWW and regular turn...

 

IRL : AIM-9 Sidewinder (with AIM-9 AIM-7 and AIM-120 it was the missile with the shortest range i have ever see) have between, 10 to 18 Nm of range depending of the altitude, it mean real life short range missile AIM-9 have two time (at the worst condition possible) the range of the long range missile inside the game at a good altitude condition...

 

Real life AMRAAM have over 20 Nm range and Sparrow somewhere around 30 Nm

 

So please ED tweak the missile and give them REALISTIC performance between range, maneuverability, speed and speed/inertia consummation.

 

Anyways the ridiculously high AOA of the missile proof that the missile are completely wrong, i have never see real life missile in any video with an AOA that high....

 

 

 

And also, the aircraft performance need to be tweak.

 

The F-15 for example

This aircraft is capable of mach 1.2 at sea level and mach 2.5 at high altitude, sorry but i have never reach Mach 2 with any aircraft in DCS/FC, even in a big dive, the Machmeter don't lie, he is not depending of the altitude and was always correct, so its not a problem of speed depending of the altitude cause the machmeter work depending of the altitude and give the speed relative to the sound and not the dynamic airspeed.

 

The ceiling altitude of the Eagle C/D is 65000 feet and 60000 feet for the strike eagle, and except in ballistic flight i have NEVER reach this altitude, its IMPOSSIBLE to be stable at this altitude in FC3, even the F-15 Streak Eagle (designed for climb speed record) reach 100000 feet in 208 seconds.

Speed and max altitude of FC3 aircraft REALLY need to be improved, also the control itself, Russian aircraft can't do the Pugatchev cobra and a problem was encounter in max speed (only possible to reach it in a big dive, and we still far away from the max speed of the real aircraft at level flight) in F-15 (for example) when we reach the max speed the control of ailerons are inverted ! I'm sure its cause they decrease with the speed and rather than stay somewhere close to 0 they just fall over zero and become negative.

 

So Flaming Cliff aircraft have a REAL and a BIG problem who need to be fixed.

 

 

 

I also noticed that the damage was a lot of time exaggerated for light impact, when two aircraft just TOUCH each other, on the ground or in formation, MAINLY if we touch softly, the aircraft will NOT loose a wing or the tail, same for SOFT ground contact, every time for example a KA-50 slowly touch an F-15 or any other aircraft, this aircraft completely loose a part of itself.

Look at this video and notice than Civil aircraft are not stronger as the Military was cause they don't have to resist to missile and bullet impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSUL46Jdudw the A380 aircraft at a certain speed (clearly way more faster than a almost 0 speed gently touch in DCS) the wing and the tail of both aircraft was NOT rip out.

Same here :

both aircraft was damaged but its far to be like DCS aircraft are, at the same speed in DCS rather than loose a wing we probably will explode.

This one not explode or loose a wing :

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/809/1135488141238f16ks1.jpg

 

The aircraft are way stronger than they are in DCS, they don't fall in piece just cause we gently touch something.

 

 

 

And another things important, control surface is correctly responding to the joystick at middle/max course, but like every simulator it was too much responding at low travel.

Its not only DCS, its all simulator, i know we have the curve, but it just mitigate the problem and in the middle course of the joystick we have an area with bad precision.

Do you even play FSX ? if yes you have probably notice how ridiculously sensible are the control even with correct TRIM for any aircraft including airliner.

Now look at this video :

Or this one

 

He is definitely not moving of some millimeters the joystick.

Before they break, look at how the elevator of the Blue Angle's F-18 moving

Its way too much than what we see in simulator, and if they don't always move they elevator like this its just cause a lot of time they reach correct trajectory and don't need to compensate a lot, but it don't change that at low angle elevators in DCS like other simulator are too much effective, and even with a curve on joystick setting we can notice it and its not nice...

 

Also, axis for airbrake of FC3 aircraft or even possibility to use ON/OFF option AND open/close, like it is for the A10C, cause we can control the position of the airbrake in real aircraft, its not just ON/OFF.

 

And a lot of people experience LOW FPS or huge FPS Drop without any crash/smoke/explosion, the sim still really need to be tweaked.

 

 

 

Edit :

 

Sorry i have forget about the Tanker.

Actually its hard to refuel with F-15 and Russian aircraft, why ?

First cause the boomer was an idiot and never correctly put his boom on our...aircraft.

With the F-15 its really hard cause we have no indication, we can't just look at the boom, the boomer was an idiot and connect only when he must not and the boomer don't give us any indication if we are too low too high forward backward left or right, we have indication under the tanker but they are not accurate, they are hard to see and we miss boomer voice.

For Russian aircraft the pipe was totally not realistic, and if the next DCS aircraft was the F/A-18C its really need to be change, and the problem with Russian Aircraft its that we have NO indication of we are too far or too close, if we are too close it will magically disconnect, if we are too far it will disconnect too (logical) but we have no visual information and no boomer who told us if we are too close or too far, and its stupid cause we see his station in re back of the aircraft...

 

 

Now talk about the interface.

First can you please adding possibility to the encyclopedia, possibility to handle video/animated gif of several page for any item, a lot of people including myself are ready to create more complete encyclopedia with more information and characteristic, but the actual encyclopedia are too simple for this.

The best will be to upgrade it with possibility to see 3D model with skin, possibility to see video and/or animated gif and several sub page/sub tabs for the same thing and the possibility for us to add more main tabs/page, like AG weapon in one side and AA weapon in another page/tab, imagine how more useful it will be if we can see for the same kind of rocket launcher the different type of rocket it can carry, the use and things like this.

Page with payload possible for all aircraft, what is good for, strategy in dogfight against him, cruise speed/altitude and other info like this, and the 3D viewer will finally solve the problem of the skin that we never know what it will be and no one want to remember ALL skin of ALL aircraft.

 

We also need the possibility to see a simple image and description of the weapon when we just pass the cursor over, a little like in the main page the info bubble, just show a simple image and some info like Anti tank/anti personnel, training, range, weight, if we need laser and other basic info like this, and a lot of people will appreciate it cause how many time we just try to set a nice payload and finally just put some training weapon and just look stupid in front of the enemy...

 

Also the possibility to see the weight balance for asymmetrical payload will be really useful.

 

What about an ATC who really make us take off FRONT of the wind ?

Like i said before, better ATC, but don't forget option for ask emergency landing and option for ask weather like wind dirrection, turbulance and QFE

Possibility to choose our skin for multiplayer with a list of authorized skim per aircraft/airport

Possibility to set wingman as client/player

 

And what about a mission control center ?

Actually long range ground radar station are useless for fighter, we have no one who give us the permission to engage or refuse it.

We really need control center like moving one like the E4 Doomsday Plane http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-4

Or carrier or any ground base where information from AWACS, boat/ground radar and reconnaissance/spy mission will converging, like real life, we don't send a spy aircraft just for send it but we send it for obtain information that we can evaluate or transmit in unit already in the area, same for long range surveillance radar, we don't put it on the ground just for give to the enemy a target to destroy, we put it on the ground for watch the sky and help fighter.

For example look at this video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKDjwcH3aHg maybe it look more like a movie than a real training but it a Swiss training, its just arranged to look better.

 

But the best example of mission control center was the Red Flag where every aircraft are follow.

We need it, it will make useful the ground radar and sky mission.

 

 

Another Edit :

Possibility to scroll the chat in NP and have a windows identical to the chat for radio and other game message, also scrollable.

 

Again another edit :

Possibility to have advanced action with ground crew like connection hydraulic pressure system and other ground element like we see in A2A P51D.

Possibility to choosing pilot weight, possibility to choosing which tank we want to fill, like the wing one, fuselage one etc.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Demongornot