DCS: F-15C Eagle

[NRG-Vampire]

I think everyone would want a DCS:F15, it's just at what expense that's the problem. If its delays f-18 or a new map, then no for me.

 

of course its delays but this is necessary imho

first they need to develop an a2a radar (f-15)

and after that the more difficult a2g radar (f-18)

this is their learning/developing process i guess

you know: step by step

or how can you eat an elephant ?

you know: bite/chaw by chaw ;)

[upupandaway]

BIGNEWY copied and pasted if from the original to our 9th Shrek FB page :P

 

A wise precaution.

 

of course its delays but this is necessary imho

 

You have a point, but this could also be done with any other aircraft that has A2A capability, no? What scares me is how casually you go over the point of possible delays. ;)

But seriously - while most projects seems to be more or less on time by ED´s current timetable, there is so much left to get the complex environment of DCS in better shape if you look what kind of bugs and glitches are being reported. I personally do not just want as many cool modules as possible, I also want the functional, engageing and immersive environment to come with it. But I guess the ED staff will know best how to approach thiss anyway.

Edited October 31, 2013 by upupandaway

[Steel Jaw]

The issue I have with a DCS F15C is this:

 

There is nothing cooler on this planet than US Carrier Aviation, NOTHING.

 

And Hornets on top of that! This community needs a DCS Hornet with viable CV Ops, ASAP.

 

[MTFDarkEagle]

A wise precaution.

 

Aye. We can always count on him doing it lol :smartass:

He's not our Diplomatical Officer for nothing you know :music_whistling:

[upupandaway]

The issue I have with a DCS F15C is this:

 

There is nothing cooler on this planet than US Carrier Aviation, NOTHING.

 

Indeed +1

I loved Jane´s F-18E back in the day.

 

Aye. We can always count on him doing it lol :smartass:

He's not our Diplomatical Officer for nothing you know :music_whistling:

 

lol

[chaos]

The F-15 AFM project has been announced a while ago. The fact that Belsimtek is coding it up is news to me... and therefor shouldn't impact the development time for ED:F-18. So, unless I'm missing something, what is all the fuss about?

[Steel Jaw]

The fact that Belsimtek is coding it up is news to me... and therefor shouldn't impact the development time for ED:F-18. So, unless I'm missing something, what is all the fuss about?

 

I have one word for you , sir: Mercantilism.

 

Meaning, resources used for something else at ED (most of which I dont care about BTW including the F15C AFM) are resources lost for the DCS F18C. Belsimtek could either be retasked to help speed up the F18C or replaced by another developer to speed up some other aspect of F18C development.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Mower

[OttoPus]

The issue I have with a DCS F15C is this:

 

There is nothing cooler on this planet than US Carrier Aviation, NOTHING.

 

And Hornets on top of that! This community needs a DCS Hornet with viable CV Ops, ASAP.

 

 

+1000

[Raven68]

I have one word for you , sir: Mercantilism.

 

Meaning, resources used for something else at ED (most of which I dont care about BTW including the F15C AFM) are resources lost for the DCS F18C. Belsimtek could either be retasked to help speed up the F18C or replaced by another developer to speed up some other aspect of F18C development.

 

[chaos]

Meaning, resources used for something else at ED (most of which I dont care about BTW including the F15C AFM) are resources lost for the DCS F18C.

 

Since when is Belsimtek part of ED?

[Pyroflash]

I would love to see the F/A-18C in DCS, it's a great bird, which has made its name in history. It is, however, a turkey. Just keep that in mind for those who want an air to air beast. For a strike fighter though? With naval aviation, you just can't get much better. Unless you upgrade to a super hornet.

[cichlidfan]

Since when is Belsimtek part of ED?

 

Since their website address was 'belsimtek.eagle.ru

[NineLine]

Since when is Belsimtek part of ED?

 

They have always been a Partner. Little bit higher on the food chain than 3rd Party dev as far as I know and understand.

[lunaticfringe]

Given that the F-15's model and animations are already complete, and the AFM is nearing completion, I can't imagine not going the extra mile for the avionics. Further, I'd expect that with them already handling the Su-27 AFM in house and having a much higher handle on that particular avionics suite, that the same would likely to be follow sooner than we expect.

 

As to mercantilism, the concern over the lack in development resources in other areas in questionable; EDGE shouldn't have resources drawn, especially since the actual artwork/modelling/engine side work is already complete for the Eagle (and likely the Flanker).

 

There's this wholly mistaken idea that programmers and artists are "just" programmers and artists, and can be dropped interchangeably from project to project at any time and have them work at maximum efficiency. This is not the case. Teams like this have people who specialize in certain areas, and if those areas of development aren't far enough along to be worked on, or are already complete, they're no use to a project at that point in time, meaning work must be found for them.

 

One of the primary factors that I would expect may be bringing this idea to fruition is the availability of resources on a short timeframe, rather than the need to pull them from other projects. If development in F/A-18 is stalled (which is entirely possible given the need for air to ground radar development- something they've not put in system before, not to mention all of the requirements for naval operations), or, resources/programmers from the EDGE side of the house are becoming available in the near term (which is even more possible given what we're seeing), those resources need to be put somewhere, and they can't always be put in the same kitchen.

 

What this reads is as grabbing low hanging fruit in a reasonable timeframe with resources that are becoming available. It's quite likely that looking at their project forecast they are finding that man hours are opening up, hours that can't be directed within a current development structure towards longer-term work.

 

So put them to work in the meantime on a salable product (or products- like I said, keep the Flanker in mind, too) that requires short hours and doesn't influence your other projects.

[cichlidfan]

So put them to work in the meantime on a salable product (or products- like I said, keep the Flanker in mind, too) that requires short hours and doesn't influence your other projects.

 

Like the projects they have already sold, for example.

[lunaticfringe]

Bug fixes don't make new sales. There also comes a point that the law of diminishing returns kicks in.

 

Further, if, for example, you consider something like EOS on the Flanker and you're already planning on *fixing* it along with symbology/avionics, do you "fix", or do you *fix*?

[cichlidfan]

Bug fixes don't make new sales. There also comes a point that the law of diminishing returns kicks in.

 

That, as a customer, is not my concern.

[GripenNG]

Before we try to convince ED to start any new projects I would like DCS to be stable and at last almost bug free. And then there is the F/A-18 to come, a Plane I am really waiting for because of the Naval theater and A2G capability

 

Could´nt agree more! ATC, AAR and AI is just horrible. I could wait far more longer for new projects, if they just started squeezing those bugs for real.

[lunaticfringe]

That, as a customer, is not my concern.

 

And that, as a business, is theirs and is the point in the value equation you may not like.

[ALDEGA]

Could´nt agree more! ATC, AAR and AI is just horrible. I could wait far more longer for new projects, if they just started squeezing those bugs for real.

As far as we know, things like AI, AAR, ATC, etc. are being handled by ED, as part of the core platform (with EDGE being an exception, as it's being developed by BST). Development of modules by third parties doesn't hold back ED in improving the core platform.

[SkateZilla]

As far as we know, things like AI, AAR, ATC, etc. are being handled by ED, as part of the core platform (with EDGE being an exception, as it's being developed by BST). Development of modules by third parties doesn't hold back ED in improving the core platform.

 

Where does it state EDGE is being Developed by BST?

[Pyroflash]

Where does it state EDGE is being Developed by BST?

 

Nowehere. EDGE started out as a partner program, but was later turned into an in-house development project. BST, however, could very well be contributing development assets towards EDGE (Or the NTTR in particular).

[SkateZilla]

Nowehere. EDGE started out as a partner program, but was later turned into an in-house development project. BST, however, could very well be contributing development assets towards EDGE (Or the NTTR in particular).

 

Im aware of the history of NTTR 3rd Party -> NTTR ED -> Edge Development -> NTTR Edge,

 

I was asking where it was stated that BST was developing EDGE, since he stated it was. I Personally haven't seen one post or announcement to lead to that statement.

[NRG-Vampire]

They have always been a Partner. Little bit higher on the food chain than 3rd Party dev as far as I know and understand.

 

that's why some official words (again) :) would be comforting and calming from Igor Tishin, NGrey, Wags, Chizh, Yo-Yo, Olgerd, EvilBivol, or PilotMi8

i can accept if their announcement was too early - and they postponed the official announcement - but some official explanation would be helpful :thumbup:

i wont be indignant angry and impatient :D

i promise :yes:

im just curious - id like to know more because knowledge is a joy :lol:

[adese]

I think everyone would want a DCS:F15, it's just at what expense that's the problem. If its delays f-18 or a new map, then no for me.

 

I agree that if F-15C dev hurt F-18 then it's not a good thing. F/A-18 means SEAD and attack runs in addition to A2A so it's much more rich in the roles it can perform; I imagine the data link also integrates with the A-10C although I'm only assuming (position and SPI data shows up from F-18's in the A-10's TAD during missions - could make for some awesome multiplayer missions).

 

The missiles in DCS still need a lot of work to make any A2A platform enjoyable - that should be a larger focus than improving the existing F-15C platform.