Agreed. Does anyone else remember when the moderators moved the VR forum to a a different sub-forum? A lot of people started losing their minds, saying it was the end of VR in DCS. ED was dropping VR support. Crazy
Plenty of comments judging anyone who expressed anger over repeated issues in the Sim. Disingenuous promises or excuses for not rolling out core elements long promised it modules that are delayed for years. Those judging, who the hell are they/you to levitate above in superiority? Strikes me as sycophantic brown nosing😂 ED themselves continually thank the community for it's passion and support, anger is part of passion! Some is just that passion being vented, get over it, you're not better to sit in judgment on those who do it. Construxtive criticism isn't always top of people's minds when yet another seemingly pathetic excuse for a long promised addition comes out, again, that passion for those additions can't be there without the emotion of anger. Honestly any time someone criticise a community getting angry, that's when I get most angry, what makes your position of reticence the right Ione, not much passion in reticence is there😂 also not much motivation for changes or additions to the SIM if it's full of reticence! Without people being passionate, you reticent zen gods passing judgment on us lesser angry beings wouldn't get ED to be as motivated in certain issues.
@ sure, there’s plenty to criticize and I’ve done much of it myself. To be clear, and I wasn’t in my comment so I apologize, I was specifically referring to people being upset about the F 35 module. Essentially claiming it meant the end of DCS as we know it.
I am really excited about the F-35A and will buy it immediately, regardless of what others think. I am getting older and older and am glad that I am still able to experience this.😁
@@InTVS One will feel a load more realistic though. And that, (despite the crying from rhe vocal minority) is a very important reason why we play DCS. MSFS helicopter modelling anyone?
Good stuff. I care very little for the F-35, but I understand and respect the community members for whom that’s their dream module. What I look forward to: F-15C, the MiG-29A, F-100 and a Razbam resolution that brings the F-15E to completion AND the MiG-23. That’s the one I really wish hadn’t been caught up in this. I do hope to see the Bo-105 in the future and was surprised to not see it in the 2025 And Beyond vid. Seeing more Cold War equipment is a high interest of mine, especially with the possibility of a Germany/Fulda Gap map. I hope to see an Mi-24V module/paid upgrade someday. Would be great for so many maps, especially a future finished Afghanistan and future Soviet campaigns.
F-15C makes sense. F-35 sounds cool, but not that interesting. It has no natural enemy in DCS. The A-7 and K’fir will be a day one purchase. Ask Wags that if a FC24 Soviet Pack would be possible or profitable. Look something like this MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-31, Su-17/22M. French pack Mystere, Mirage III/V, Etendard, Super Etendard
ED won't ever do good Russian planes because some of them are dumb enough to still live in Russia, which means they'd get tossed out a window if they tried.
Great Video as always M8, I hope that Eagle Dynamics listens to the community and really starts to become more transparent with an outlook of informing the customers rather than keeping things secret. The Video from Waggs was a very useful and informative dialogue for Us the Customers. I am looking forward to more of those video's that will inform us of what's going on in the DCS world. Thank you once again for everything you do for the community.
Kfir would be great, I don't bother with 4th gen planes, I want something simpler, 70 is looming, and active grey cells are declining. Just get Razbam sorted, I like my Mig 19.
You sure do like to shoot your mouth off without thinking don't you? They are literally making a FF MiG-29A would they do that if there was no market for REDFOR? Baka.
Core improvements are ALWAYS welcome, and it sounds like they are committed to those. The Eurofighter, the Kfir and the Tornado are day 1 purchases for me, as are the Corsair and Hellcat. I suspect I'll be waiting longer for the A-6, A-7, and F-8, but I can be patient. I agree, the F-35 is nothing to "worry" about, and we'll see (and judge) the result when it comes out (2027?). Your point that this is, after all, a simulation is well taken. The point of a simulation is to approximate the experience, and to the extent they can do so (and people with knowledge agree that it's "not bad") then we should enjoy and try to learn. This is a pastime and a hobby after all. Thanks, Prickly for keeping the sanity in the full view! And thanks for all the work.
Thanks for the SITREP as always, it’s nice to have level-headed reporting from folks such as yourself and Andrei at HIP Games, among others. I think the F-35 will be a good overall addition to the sim, it brings some future present-day relevancy for years to come and it brings more diversity to the game. Yeah, it’s yet another multirole BLUFOR fighter, but a new airframe is a new airframe, especially since it’ll be the first and likely only example we’ll ever get of a 5th gen. I agree with many people though that more REDFOR & ‘independent’ aircraft are needed, and so it’s nice to see another update on the K’fir. Not sure what'll actually come this year, but aircraft I'm excited for are: 1.) C-130J 2.) PC-9 3.) J-8II from Deka 4.) A-1H Skyraider 5.) F-100 6.) Mod, but the AH-1G by Nomad Hopefully with the F-35 inbound the USG and relevant companies will give the okay for info needed to develop a high fidelity F-117.
Looking forward to : * Full Fidelity F-15C * Full Fidelity MiG-29A * F-100 Super Sabre * IAI Kfir when it come - the South African guys (including me) will fly it as an Atlas Cheetah C. * Razbam resolution so I can buy the F-15E in confidence !
YES. I want those modules you mentioned and a Razbam resolution that includes F-15E development/updates AND the MiG-23 which, besides and F-105D, would be the module I’d want the most.
I’m a bit conflicted when it comes to the 35 primarily I’m optimistic, but overall what I’m excited for is what I think it means for the core game. For them to implement the 35, that probably means they’re gonna put more effort into radar cross section of aircraft, and hopefully more electronic warfare content, which I am terribly excited for.
I would much rather see a F117 or even a F111 before the F 35. I mean it's just another multirole fighter US fighter in the lineup. How about the SU 24 or Mig 25? Those would be really cool additions.
@@ryanhooper4660 Just replace “go home” with “eject”. Doesn’t change the standard mission and doesn’t refute my comment. He rode to the target, confirmed the preloaded target, and got locked when the doors opened. You’ve done nothing to refute my point. It would be boring in DCS.
@ryanhooper4660 how i see that going on most MP servers... (most PvP seem to avoid night rotations so going to be a flying blackwing with no protection, and no legs to run away) fly your two bombs to a target, just to have it destroyed by someone else before you get there, get gunned down by eagle eye AI defenses/Interceptors. That is why the multirole aircraft sell.
With regard to the F-35, I think it was Casmo who at some point pointed out how meticulous the dev team was regarding detail in the Apache. Even to a point that they were not pleased with something that Casmo 1. didn't notice and 2. didn't think it was important. Remembering that I do have faith that ED is careful in developing the F-35 and will make it very close to the actual plane. That said, I think they should go more public in terms of what info they have and where it came from. I think the short section in the FAQ they published is not enough
I do tend to agree, however there is something to be said about being able to fly modern jets fairly accurately. It's something the majority of us will never get to do. I appreciate that as much as the older, more hands on stuff.
@I do understand that, and I enjoy the Hornet and the A-10C 2 immensely. However, with those planes you’re more of a systems operator than a pilot, as the FBW takes care of most of the stick and rudder work, but operating what essentially is a flying weapons platform does have its own attraction, but at its core being a military pilot (to me) involves the mastery of the actual airframe before you’ve ever launched a weapon. Still, there’s no wrong answers in our hobby of flying simulated planes, just preferences 👍
Announced aircraft that I am waiting for: C-130, A-1D, F4U, PC-9 Aircraft I want: AH-1G/S/W, UH-60L/M, OH-58A/C, OV-10 Bronco, C/MV-22, CH-46, CH-53, SH-3, SH-2, M/HH-60J/R/S, Pucara, Mitsubishi F-2, Kawaski OH-1. Wanted to add the OV-1 Mohawk but it would have very little impact in DCS and I doubt people would want to buy a flying SLAR/SLIR pod that carries no weapons.
The highest impact new element that will effect and improve every user of DCS, will be the Dynamic Campaign. In fact the Dynamic campaign will actually spur the purchase of modules, based on the theatres... ED....Make the Dynamic Campaign your top priority, and yes you can charge a reasonable fee for it.
I have reservations about modeling the F35 in DCS. I can only hope the data they’re planning to use will not compromise the platform in an uncertain world where our defense depends on the successful tactical employment of this weapon system.
yeah... sure... the national security of the larges empire in the world is gonna be compromised by a copy cat model of the F35 made with dreams and a lot of imagination: what did you said? radar has 500km range and can detect a bee at that distance? ok adding it to the code
My concern with the F-35 is that it represents yet another distraction from badly needed core updates, and a sole 5th plane further fragments an already scattershot ecosystem. Some guys will love it, and I’m sure ED will sell loads of them - but it will come at a cost for players who have little to no interested in a module about which so much will be guesswork.
If you have lines of contact to Wags, ask him to check on the broken kill events. We cant get our server back up until that is fixed and it has been months.
the complaints i saw basically came from people not happy that their favorite or preferred aircraft were not being made and most of the excuses used was that they could not due to classification of documentation required to make an accurate simulation. which i get. the F-35 really does undermine that as they really admitted they are using secondary information to model the F-35. do i think the hate is over the top? 100% people overact to every little thing these days. But they are not wrong in that ED has said they have standards and are now lowering them for the sake of money.
What I suspect is that the two camps can coexist. Long term, the survivability of ED and DCS can't practically exist in a niche ecosystem that it's enjoyed for a long time.
They’re a business. They exist only to make money. Eventually they were going to run out of ‘popular’ exciting planes to model at the study sim level. They were going to have to do this eventually. Especially when Russia created that law that makes it impossible to get good info on their planes.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 i agree with you both camps can exist and will I see it as a good opportunity. if they manage to make a good F-35 flight and systems model than that completely opens the door to aircraft we cannot get reliable documentation on. it may very well allow ED to model the newer gen russian aircraft that the community wants.
@@tbe0116 Yeah its also kind of hypocritical of them to stop/block or not develop an aircraft and then switch that tune when they want more money its not a great look but i can see why they want to. the F-35 will probably bring in a ton of new interest and players to the community. which honestly is needed. they have tried to breach the casual simmer line with other projects but those never got off the ground. I will say this community should be ecstatic about the dynamic campaign system as that will breathe in a whole lot of new life into DCS for veteran simmers and people like me who don't really care about pvp but just want to fly with friends and be able to run a variety of missions and have fun without needing someone to slave away coding missions.
All I wish for is a new game engine. Yes, I'm happy and honestly astonished at what DCS has been able to do with what is essentially a DX9 ++ platform. 90+% of DCS is fighting for space on 1 single core. Yes I know we can now use both threads on that core. And that's astonishing. But it's like adding a 2nd and 3rd floor on a home with a single floor foundation. At some point, the entire structure will fall. I absolutely love DCS. I have invested well over 10 k just to get the best possible experience from DCS. I don't want it to come crashing down.
@Pricklyhedgehog72 I listened to the video and didn't hear him say anything about updating the engine. But I was also working. I will give it another go and pay more attention this time.
@@jamesmcd71 There's a question about updating to another game engine. He explains they won't do that because other game engines don't allow them options they need for DCS
@Pricklyhedgehog72 Thanks for the follow-up. I was just listening to it again. And it was the very last and most important question. I don't see a dynamic campaign or a word map without the ability to stream data. As of now, you can jump into an empty 4YA server, and it's all a 7800x3d can handle on basically 1 core. I'm not sure there is an M.2 or a CPU outside a server that can handle a world map. Vulkan will allow DCS to move more graphics off the logic core, but I haven't heard anything about that since the 2024 video. Man, that's disappointing. If you speak with them, please ask them to address this in more detail. They must have a plan. I mean, pulling off multi threading on a game engine designed before multi threading existed is quite a difficult task. Hopefully, they have something planned.
@@jamesmcd71 My guess is that Vulkan and other tweaks are necessary to achieve some of this. The world map, as you say is a monstrous amount of data that even MSFS has had trouble managing it, at least DCS has fewer players logging into streaming servers. Lots of technical impediments for now I suspect, but worth exploring.
Hear me out... A low fidelity helicopter in the FC pack for newbies to experience helis without the need of leanring a full fidelity module. Hell even the huey could fit in there
The F-35 is definitely a cool thing as an aircraft. I don't think people really understand the scale of this though regarding the commercial value for ED. It's huge. It will be a killer app all by itself. It will be the reason people buy sim gear, the reason why they get a new PC, and of course the reason they will get into DCS. It will change lots of stuff, also within the community, because it means an influx of a new generation.
Would be great if it was actually possible. At the rate ED develops modules, and considering they have not yet even begun coding/modeling, not to mention everything that would have to be added to the core engine to support the jet, its going to take them at least 4 or 5 years to reach an "early access" release with any kind of systems simulation. If they don't give up at some point I don't see a lot of the systems being simulated at which point its nothing more than an F16 with some more stealth and EW capability.
@@ethanhiggins4887 We will have to wait and see of course 🙂 But the fact that's the F-35 and not the F-105 (as an example) suggests that something new is going on at ED. Also, judging by the millions of WTF posts at forums and elsewhere, it's something the "hard core DCS community member" just don't get. According to ED the F-35 enables DCS to "grow and expand into the future". It's obviously a business decision at the very top, not just a module. As such it may bring other changes as well. I don't know what exactly will change other than more income (probably needed) and lots of new players, but it certainly is a direction few would have guessed only days ago.
My wishlist: F-104 Tornado A-6 BO-105 Gameplay: - missions which require recce flights first; recce support (e.g. taking images with simulated recce cameras (visual and IR)). I would not care if these recce cams would be added to any aircraft (e.g. F-4E recce version could have cameras). Maybe SLAR (side looking radars). To me it is not so important that a particular aircraft could or could not carry the recce equipment. It would add a slot of gameplay IMHO. - single player missions which require navigation without using GPS / F10, or too accurate INS. If using INS, INS fixes should be required or otherwise the INS drift would be too large. Especially after maneuvering. - more dynamic weather with e.g. poor visibility when returning to home airfield. Basically, I would prefer if certain elements are less realistic, but more interesting from a gameplay perspective. E.g. cockpit temperature: would be nice if it would be used in missions: maybe failure leads to icing. You have to fly back home using IFR, and cockpit would only defrost close to the airfield.
When you watch guys like the Air Warfare Group, who have actually flown some of these aircraft operationally, they seem to just “sit right in” and use the systems as if they are very familiar with them, so I believe it is as real as is possible. But you can never learn to fly (and fight) properly from a computer or a simulator, only really being in the situation can do that. Wags touched on this in his Q &A.
It really does sound like there is a lot to look forward to in 2025. I'm kinda stoked about the F-35, though I doubt we will see that one this year. I just wonder how ED is gonna get around the crazy level of classification of the F-35's advanced sensor systems. Hell, they all probably have already signed NDA's lol. One thing I hope everyone involved with the F-35 flight model & FCS does, is watch some of the Official F-35 Flight Demo Team's you tube airshow demos. I think it's kinda necessary because most people who are not involved with military aviation at the design/engineering level still view this jet through a 2012 lens. That is to say, _Can't climb, can't turn, can't run, CAN'T DOGFIGHT._ Oh yes it can. View any F-35 flight demo from 2019 thru 2025 & you will see the full 9G rated, Block 3F F-35A, and it can pretty much outmaneuver anything in the air except the Raptor and SU-57...and it is pretty damn close to them. Anything from 2018 back gets you a 5G rated, technology test bed on which key critical systems are not complete. 2019 on through 2025--Good. 2018 back to program inception--bad. Flies like an overweight duck. I'd hate to see ED pull off an awesome F-35, but with the same underperforming, clunky flight model that every mod dev who has tried to create a F-35 has saddled it with. One last thing. Has any news arrived about a resolution to the ED/RAZBAM conflict? Without taking sides, I really think that issue has hurt DCS badly, from ED to the Devs, to content creators, to the players. I just hope it gets settled in. 2025.
@skyhorseprice6591 check out my community tab post from indiafoxtecho who're supportive of ED producing the f35, and stated there's a lot of public information.
They’re tackling the F35- I’m sure getting tire and strut physics just right will go a long way toward assuring the community ED can handle 5th gen simulation.
I suspect that the F-35 would wipe the floor with the Felon...It's not even what I would consider in full production, but it'd be fun to see some sort of representation nonetheless.
Wags was finally honest and stated that the primary reason for the choice of modules to develop is what will sell best, and I'm fine with that, but let's not pretend it can be "study level", far too much must be inferred due to it still being classified.
It can still be study level and not include the classified bits. Study level is just the level of commitment you have to put in in order to fly and fight in the aircraft, and to think otherwise is foolish, and this applies to the F-16, F/A-18C and the AH-64D, and OH-58D are all study level yet there is a lot of stuff that is inferred to cover the parts that are still classified but yet, everyone want to point their finger at the F-35A and scream "There is no way it can be study level!" with out stopping to think that none of the other aircraft have their classified parts working either. So grow up.
@@ImpendingJoker if 95% of the systems are classified, and the jet is all about said systems. what makes it a study level? 3 button startup? or how to fly the jet that basically flies itself since its so full of tech that ED has no access to
Heatblur: "we can't do an F-14D because we don't know enough about the APG-71 radar" ED: "we know NOTHING about the F-35 AESA radar, buuuuut we saw some videos, read some papers, did some CFD, so we're making one" 🙄
Accessibility to data on one aircraft on the continuum of development isn't presumptive of access to data on other aircraft. As Indiafoxtecho advised, there's more public information available on the F-35 than there is on the Eurofighter. Heatblur were able to access information the F-14A/B, thanks in part to old wind tunnel testing data from NASA, not from the vaults of Grumman.
The only reason I am not totally upset with the F35 is that it will hopefully bring some new systems to DCS before they realise its a pipe dream. Advanced EW and datalink systems, IRST, datalink/LOAL missiles, advanced stealth/RCS modeling, all things that other modules could benefit from (if ED ever abandons their strict policy of only simulating a single block/year of jet). I just don't see it getting to a point for an EA release by the end of the decade due to its complexity. Not to mention everything about the jet is going to be guesswork. The flight model and FLCS alone is so much more complex than the F18/F16, not to mention DAS and its EW and ELINT capabilities which is really the bread and butter of that jet. IMO the amount of coding needed for this jet will be greater than all the previous modules combined. And considering how long it takes them just to add a sniper pod, yeah good luck... The average DCS gamer isn't going to care if its missing those systems (or if they are incredibly basic) but for people who are in the know its laughable that ED even thinks they can come close to an accurate "simulation" but like I said. If getting a bunch of people to buy an arcade F35 is what it takes to finally improve the core game that's fine with me. I just hope my 16 will reap the benefits. (and I REAAALLYY hope it will get a blk 70 variant at some point with IRST, AESA, HOBit, and modern weapons.
Forgot to mention all the data on the AIM120D and 9X block III is totally classified so now clue how they are going to replicate them when we don't even have an accurate 120C-3/4/5? model. Unless they plan to only include the weapons it had back in like 2016 since that's the software variant they said they want to simulate. Which at that point is kinda silly because now you have an early access module of an early access jet lmao Then you go back to the balancing argument because if they do add the block III 9X, you have a high off bore sight LOAL capable IR missile that should outrange every other missile in the game (in their current form).
The issue with the F-35 isn’t that - like for the C-16, f-18, etc- there are some areas that are classified…it’s that SO many systems and capabilities of the aircraft are highly classified, you can’t possibly create a simulation anywhere close to the fidelity of the current 4th gen. We know for the F-16, f-18 and others that the ECM/EW and radars are “educated” guesses in some ways, but with the F-35, there are entire systems and entire capabilities that we don’t even know about to even begin to guess. You won’t be experiencing an F-35…you will be flying an aircraft assembled by best guesses, interviews, observations and some public articles missing entire systems. It’s a f’ing money grab. Luckily, if it’s anything like the A-7, AI A-6 intruder, KFIR, etc….we will still not have it in the game in 4 years
There are systems missing from current aircraft because they can’t be done. They’re is public data available for the F-35 for many systems telling us a minimum of what they are capable of, with maximum capability being classified. Why not try waiting to see what they come out with, and then be angry? Seems like a lot of wasted energy when you have no idea what they are able to do.
the more the merrier, I've always wanted an F-111C, but the F-35 has blown my socks off. I cant imagine being upset about the sim getting more aircraft
F35 is definitely too much of stretch, your comparison is pretty poor, theres 40 years of F18 cockpit footage out there. The most footage ive seen of the F35, is some brief glimpses of the simulator, and shots of the cockpit with everything powered down. Former pilots are much more candid in 'private' (discord groups, forums, communities etc.). So there's a lot mode testimonials of how accurate DCS is, compared to things former pilots say on youtube during interviews. Don't think the module will be for me, as ill know its mostly just fiction, all the down to the inaccuracies of even basic performance numbers. If 'convincing' is enough for you, then have at it, I'd never discourage anyone from getting it. Just not my cup of tea.
From what I can gauge from the community is this: new content is fine, no one is complaining about half maps like Iraq and Afghanistan. Be nice to get them finished, but not a show stopper. Same with modules like the updated F5 Tiger II. What IS a show stopper is when you spend hours/days creating complex missions and when you run them, the AI gives you the middle finger and nothing works right. Like a Tomcat that has long range Phoenix missiles and is set for MAX RANGE LAUNCH, but it ignores the Phoenix and the Sparrows and goes full burner for 75 miles to get a gun/Sidewinder kill. Then what does it do? It is now at bingo fuel and cannot even make it back to the ship from where it launched, so it lands at the nearest base, which is an enemy airfield! Why? So you start questioning yourself "did I set it up right?" and you go look and it's all setup perfectly. The sim just ignores it and does what it wants. I can give countless other examples, but you get my drift. Makes you want to gargle Drano. If they fixed shit like that, I would be content with what we currently have no new modules for the entire year. Just make what you have work. Simple.
I'm all for new aircraft, but DCS and 3 party Devs have too many aircraft in the pipe for release, it's going to be quantity over quality, nearly every month there is a new release. As an example the KFIR was announced in 2022 and yet here we are no sign of a release date.
There may be multiple reasons for this. The challenges of a post COVID world, the massive leaps in the game engine in the last 2-3 years, and the ever increasing bar for introducing new modules within the game. Heatblur is the gold standard.
Saying that you are the community.... well i want it ! and alot of other do to. The fact that everybody acts like a child because they dont get there personal module is almost getting sad. And its just a game you should enjoy more ;)
I don't want it even if it's accurate. It has no place in the multiplayer balance and nobody will use it because no servers will allow it. There's just no point in bringing it to the game at this point.
@@potatokilr7789 Balance in a sim ...... talking about mp if thats the main mode of the sim and there is a point maybe not for you but there is for others. ... I think Wt is more your cup of tea if you look for balance .... else i want fox 3 on the chinook... for balance
The perfect F-35 Mission..... Based on Public Knowledge of its Sensors and Data Link...... That's may have happened Twice, at least, in Real Combat. One Air Force Squadron of F-35s is on Strike Mission and Destroys their assigned Targets but, uses all their Air to Ground Weapons to complete their Mission. However, while originally RTB (Return To Base) is then credited with Air to Air, Air to Ground, Surface to Surface, and Even Surface to Sea Targets Destroyed. Lastly, when the Squadron Finally Lands they Still have All their Air to Air Weapons and Canon Rounds. So in English and DCS, the F35 will act like a Mimi AWACS / JSTARS. Except all NATO Weapons (Aircraft, Man Pad, SAM Site, Warship) in range Will Shoot at Everything that appears on the F35's Weapon Lock Level Sensors...... So, I hope they do not Fully Model the Sensors and/or Data Link.
Your thoughts about the implementation of the F35 miss the point. At least for me. It's not about a realistic simulation. Well, that's not true. Ofc, this is important. The problem is, that we do not get modern redfor planes because information which isn't publicly available (according to ED). The whole time this has been the reason for ED to not give us an SU27 or SU33 or SU30, SU35, MIG29 (yea, it's coming now, but it is not the Russian version but rather the "warsaw pact" version. It's not the full-fidelity redfor plane finally capable of tackling F16's and F18's.) and I am not even talking about Chinese jets. If they can give us an F35 on the level of systems simulation we are used to, they also should be able to give us all the other jet, we so badly wait for for years now. I mean, it just doesn't make sense to me. Which admittedly doesn't say much. Just because it does not make sense to me, it doesn't mean it actualy makes no sense. Who am I to judge? I am not expert in military aviation. It al just isn't believable anymore.
Accessibility to data on one aircraft on the continuum of development isn't presumptive of access to data on other aircraft. As Indiafoxtecho advised, there's more public information available on the F-35 than there is on the Eurofighter. Heatblur were able to access information the F-14A/B, thanks in part to old wind tunnel testing data from NASA, not from the vaults of Grumman.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 Publicly available information on the sensor fusion capabilities of the F35 and more specific, the sensors and their capabilities? You gotte be kidding. Sure, the pure flight model is one thing, but simulating the systems of F35 and something like the Eurofighter? Thats exactly why I don't trust their "classified documents" argument anymore. I can't proof it, but I don't buy the whole "we can't do modern Russian jets" topic anymore. Even though, you are obviously right with your first sentence.
I think you're takes on everything up to the F-35 were pretty fair, but its stretching it a bit to justify the F-35 within the context of the game at the moment. The sensor fusion, and systems that make it so effective are very much still classified and will remain so for awhile. We see that in discussions with IRL pilots with regards to sensor fusion in other planes. If they release a half accurate F-35 it should wipe the floor in all encounters we have at the moment and I don't think that that is great for the game itself. Beyond that, the F-35 will take major resourcing from ED to complete, there are other areas that I think would've been better served having that level of resource applied to it. Clearly ED think that the F-35 will sell enough to justify the compromises they're putting in place, and the projects they are not able to work on due to this new commitment. Personally I think the F-35 is a mistake but one that will make ED a lot of money, even while it makes the overall game worse.
How the sensor fusion actually functions is restricted, but there's no reason that would stop you from modeling the displays. This is just like the Hornet.
@@mobius7089 true which is a big reason that people complain about some of that being lacking, incl irl pilots who'll hint at things not working as they expected. However that lack of info has also been used as reasoning behind not creating other modules which is now clearly inconsistent (ie sales potential overrides this issue). I suspect that this will undermine EDs comms team in the future. Beyond that, the Hornet (or any fighter we have now) does not rely on stealth. That will be very new, and given the whole point of the F-35 is stealth, and being able to act as a command node (vs being an out and out AS fighter of F/A like modules we have atm) then I really think that lacking the key real world performance of sensors, rcs, radar, etc, that has been worked around in the past could come back to haunt them. I suspect what we'll see is (large) servers just not allowing it to be used in multiplayer and people flying it in single player only. In this sense it doesn't matter what stats or characteristics they give the F-35. I just think there are more pressing issues than releasing a BLUFOR 5th Gen (unless cash is really that tight)
Not really impressed with ED at the moment. Poorly run company. They are trying to go in too many directions at once. It's becoming a Jack of All Trades, Master of None. But they are chasing profits. Wish they lived up to fixing and finishing products.
A lot of information is actually public, which may sound crazy. Aspects will be coveted by secrecy and legal copyright issues, but a lot can be done with what's online.
Funny how my comment disappeared, but I will repeat myself: They will pull it out of their rears. Nothing relevant is online. Even maintenance workers have a hard time working, because of the secrecy... Just vote with your wallet...
The ability of the DCS community to absolutely lose their minds over stuff is impressive. Thanks for the SITREP
Agreed. Does anyone else remember when the moderators moved the VR forum to a a different sub-forum? A lot of people started losing their minds, saying it was the end of VR in DCS. ED was dropping VR support.
Crazy
For real. It's never really that deep.
Plenty of comments judging anyone who expressed anger over repeated issues in the Sim. Disingenuous promises or excuses for not rolling out core elements long promised it modules that are delayed for years.
Those judging, who the hell are they/you to levitate above in superiority? Strikes me as sycophantic brown nosing😂
ED themselves continually thank the community for it's passion and support, anger is part of passion!
Some is just that passion being vented, get over it, you're not better to sit in judgment on those who do it.
Construxtive criticism isn't always top of people's minds when yet another seemingly pathetic excuse for a long promised addition comes out, again, that passion for those additions can't be there without the emotion of anger.
Honestly any time someone criticise a community getting angry, that's when I get most angry, what makes your position of reticence the right Ione, not much passion in reticence is there😂 also not much motivation for changes or additions to the SIM if it's full of reticence! Without people being passionate, you reticent zen gods passing judgment on us lesser angry beings wouldn't get ED to be as motivated in certain issues.
@ sure, there’s plenty to criticize and I’ve done much of it myself. To be clear, and I wasn’t in my comment so I apologize, I was specifically referring to people being upset about the F 35 module. Essentially claiming it meant the end of DCS as we know it.
Fascinating...
I am really excited about the F-35A and will buy it immediately, regardless of what others think.
I am getting older and older and am glad that I am still able to experience this.😁
I hear you...retirement from one job is knocking, and I will need to decide what I can do with myself until official retirement age.
its also coming to war thunder lol, and probably will be similarly "accurate", plus you can fly it in several battlefield style games xD
@@InTVS
One will feel a load more realistic though. And that, (despite the crying from rhe vocal minority) is a very important reason why we play DCS.
MSFS helicopter modelling anyone?
Underrated comment tbh
Good stuff. I care very little for the F-35, but I understand and respect the community members for whom that’s their dream module.
What I look forward to:
F-15C, the MiG-29A, F-100 and a Razbam resolution that brings the F-15E to completion AND the MiG-23. That’s the one I really wish hadn’t been caught up in this.
I do hope to see the Bo-105 in the future and was surprised to not see it in the 2025 And Beyond vid. Seeing more Cold War equipment is a high interest of mine, especially with the possibility of a Germany/Fulda Gap map. I hope to see an Mi-24V module/paid upgrade someday. Would be great for so many maps, especially a future finished Afghanistan and future Soviet campaigns.
Thanks!
F-15C makes sense. F-35 sounds cool, but not that interesting. It has no natural enemy in DCS. The A-7 and K’fir will be a day one purchase. Ask Wags that if a FC24 Soviet Pack would be possible or profitable. Look something like this MiG-23, MiG-25, MiG-31, Su-17/22M.
French pack Mystere, Mirage III/V, Etendard, Super Etendard
Been asking for FC4 style redofr packs for years. Honestly i don't see ED doing it. But man i would love it. Deffo a French one would be cool too.
The F-35s natural enemy is Russian IADS
ED won't ever do good Russian planes because some of them are dumb enough to still live in Russia, which means they'd get tossed out a window if they tried.
Depriving the community of a functioning F-15E and then slappin out an FF F-15C is kinda weird tho.
@@mrsirkosky7618ED didn’t deprive anyone of the E.
Great Video as always M8, I hope that Eagle Dynamics listens to the community and really starts to become more transparent with an outlook of informing the customers rather than keeping things secret. The Video from Waggs was a very useful and informative dialogue for Us the Customers. I am looking forward to more of those video's that will inform us of what's going on in the DCS world. Thank you once again for everything you do for the community.
Kfir would be great, I don't bother with 4th gen planes, I want something simpler, 70 is looming, and active grey cells are declining. Just get Razbam sorted, I like my Mig 19.
I wish they'd make a FF Su-25.
So many choices but we all get Fat Amy now….
The market for team red clearly isn't big enough for ED to even consider it.
You sure do like to shoot your mouth off without thinking don't you? They are literally making a FF MiG-29A would they do that if there was no market for REDFOR? Baka.
@@AdastraRecordings That is simply not true.
Me too!
Outstanding as always! Thank you!
Nice analysis. Good video.
Another good video! I am most excited for:
1. C-130]
2. F-35
3. F-15C
4. Eurofighter
5. MiG-29
Core improvements are ALWAYS welcome, and it sounds like they are committed to those. The Eurofighter, the Kfir and the Tornado are day 1 purchases for me, as are the Corsair and Hellcat. I suspect I'll be waiting longer for the A-6, A-7, and F-8, but I can be patient. I agree, the F-35 is nothing to "worry" about, and we'll see (and judge) the result when it comes out (2027?). Your point that this is, after all, a simulation is well taken. The point of a simulation is to approximate the experience, and to the extent they can do so (and people with knowledge agree that it's "not bad") then we should enjoy and try to learn. This is a pastime and a hobby after all. Thanks, Prickly for keeping the sanity in the full view! And thanks for all the work.
Thanks for the SITREP as always, it’s nice to have level-headed reporting from folks such as yourself and Andrei at HIP Games, among others. I think the F-35 will be a good overall addition to the sim, it brings some future present-day relevancy for years to come and it brings more diversity to the game. Yeah, it’s yet another multirole BLUFOR fighter, but a new airframe is a new airframe, especially since it’ll be the first and likely only example we’ll ever get of a 5th gen. I agree with many people though that more REDFOR & ‘independent’ aircraft are needed, and so it’s nice to see another update on the K’fir.
Not sure what'll actually come this year, but aircraft I'm excited for are:
1.) C-130J
2.) PC-9
3.) J-8II from Deka
4.) A-1H Skyraider
5.) F-100
6.) Mod, but the AH-1G by Nomad
Hopefully with the F-35 inbound the USG and relevant companies will give the okay for info needed to develop a high fidelity F-117.
Really looking forward to a K'Fir in DCS. It's an amazing Jet with a very, very interesting origin story.
There was a great book written about it's origin - "Mirage" by James Follett, telling of how Marcel Dassault gave his gift to Israel.
Not really, it's just an Israeli updated Mirage with canards and an ugly nose. I am not interested in a Mirage clone.
@@martinlagrange8821 awesome! I'll need to find a copy
@ Even with rocket-like acceleration courtesy of a J79 ?
Thank you Prickly.
Looking forward to :
* Full Fidelity F-15C
* Full Fidelity MiG-29A
* F-100 Super Sabre
* IAI Kfir when it come - the South African guys (including me) will fly it as an Atlas Cheetah C.
* Razbam resolution so I can buy the F-15E in confidence !
ive lost my hope on that resolution but ron's been waiting, patiently.
I want Tornado, Super Hornet and playable B1……please😊
YES. I want those modules you mentioned and a Razbam resolution that includes F-15E development/updates AND the MiG-23 which, besides and F-105D, would be the module I’d want the most.
@ A war of attrition (and hint-hint, nudge-nudge posts on Elon's X) with our apprehensive nerves paying the price...
@@nateweter4012 RAZBAM’s CEO said the MiG-23 is canned btw
I for one and very much looking forward to F-35. I know and understand the controversy but I'd really love to play it! I'm happy about it.
I’m a bit conflicted when it comes to the 35 primarily I’m optimistic, but overall what I’m excited for is what I think it means for the core game. For them to implement the 35, that probably means they’re gonna put more effort into radar cross section of aircraft, and hopefully more electronic warfare content, which I am terribly excited for.
Wags hinted something about this in his Q & A recently regarding breakthrough developments in their radar simulation...
That, to me, is what will define whether the F-35 is a success in DCS. If it'll bring improvement to the over all game like that? It's a huge W.
Would be nice to have a Nighthawk or even the F-29, and to do some missions like in those old DOS games. Stealth-o-meter included.
I would much rather see a F117 or even a F111 before the F 35. I mean it's just another multirole fighter US fighter in the lineup. How about the SU 24 or Mig 25? Those would be really cool additions.
F117 would be pretty boring. Autopilot to target. Hold button to auto release bomb. Go home.
@@Jack-Tactical Tell that to Lt. Col Zelko. Pretty sure he'd disagree.
@@ryanhooper4660 Just replace “go home” with “eject”.
Doesn’t change the standard mission and doesn’t refute my comment. He rode to the target, confirmed the preloaded target, and got locked when the doors opened. You’ve done nothing to refute my point. It would be boring in DCS.
@ryanhooper4660 how i see that going on most MP servers... (most PvP seem to avoid night rotations so going to be a flying blackwing with no protection, and no legs to run away) fly your two bombs to a target, just to have it destroyed by someone else before you get there, get gunned down by eagle eye AI defenses/Interceptors. That is why the multirole aircraft sell.
Thanks for the update. Love your videos as always. BTW, which campaign or server were you flying in this video? Cheers!
@EvansRG78 it was an instant action mission over Afghanistan. Sometimes I like to explore and see if there's areas to create missions.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 cool. Thanks! I will check it out.
With regard to the F-35, I think it was Casmo who at some point pointed out how meticulous the dev team was regarding detail in the Apache. Even to a point that they were not pleased with something that Casmo 1. didn't notice and 2. didn't think it was important. Remembering that I do have faith that ED is careful in developing the F-35 and will make it very close to the actual plane. That said, I think they should go more public in terms of what info they have and where it came from. I think the short section in the FAQ they published is not enough
I’m wholly uninspired by the F-35. I fly DCS for the older planes, they’re the most enjoyable to fly
I do tend to agree, however there is something to be said about being able to fly modern jets fairly accurately. It's something the majority of us will never get to do. I appreciate that as much as the older, more hands on stuff.
@I do understand that, and I enjoy the Hornet and the A-10C 2 immensely. However, with those planes you’re more of a systems operator than a pilot, as the FBW takes care of most of the stick and rudder work, but operating what essentially is a flying weapons platform does have its own attraction, but at its core being a military pilot (to me) involves the mastery of the actual airframe before you’ve ever launched a weapon.
Still, there’s no wrong answers in our hobby of flying simulated planes, just preferences 👍
@UkDave3856 Definitely, I enjoy it all tbh.
Announced aircraft that I am waiting for: C-130, A-1D, F4U, PC-9
Aircraft I want: AH-1G/S/W, UH-60L/M, OH-58A/C, OV-10 Bronco, C/MV-22, CH-46, CH-53, SH-3, SH-2, M/HH-60J/R/S, Pucara, Mitsubishi F-2, Kawaski OH-1. Wanted to add the OV-1 Mohawk but it would have very little impact in DCS and I doubt people would want to buy a flying SLAR/SLIR pod that carries no weapons.
The highest impact new element that will effect and improve every user of DCS, will be the Dynamic Campaign. In fact the Dynamic campaign will actually spur the purchase of modules, based on the theatres...
ED....Make the Dynamic Campaign your top priority, and yes you can charge a reasonable fee for it.
Im still convinced the 'Bandit goes left' in the intro 00:15 is me lol
I can assure you he's not...he's a member of the Air Warfare Group
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 You don't know what you are talking about. Swift was there, he would know!
@@dampsok Don't quote the dark magic to me, I was there when it was recorded
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 🤣
I have reservations about modeling the F35 in DCS. I can only hope the data they’re planning to use will not compromise the platform in an uncertain world where our defense depends on the successful tactical employment of this weapon system.
yeah... sure... the national security of the larges empire in the world is gonna be compromised by a copy cat model of the F35 made with dreams and a lot of imagination: what did you said? radar has 500km range and can detect a bee at that distance? ok adding it to the code
I promise you that DCS is neither capable nor permitted to compromise US security.
Them making an F35 is like Alanis Moriset, oddly repulsive yet strangely attractive.
lol
My concern with the F-35 is that it represents yet another distraction from badly needed core updates, and a sole 5th plane further fragments an already scattershot ecosystem.
Some guys will love it, and I’m sure ED will sell loads of them - but it will come at a cost for players who have little to no interested in a module about which so much will be guesswork.
If you have lines of contact to Wags, ask him to check on the broken kill events.
We cant get our server back up until that is fixed and it has been months.
the complaints i saw basically came from people not happy that their favorite or preferred aircraft were not being made and most of the excuses used was that they could not due to classification of documentation required to make an accurate simulation. which i get. the F-35 really does undermine that as they really admitted they are using secondary information to model the F-35. do i think the hate is over the top? 100% people overact to every little thing these days. But they are not wrong in that ED has said they have standards and are now lowering them for the sake of money.
What I suspect is that the two camps can coexist. Long term, the survivability of ED and DCS can't practically exist in a niche ecosystem that it's enjoyed for a long time.
They’re a business. They exist only to make money. Eventually they were going to run out of ‘popular’ exciting planes to model at the study sim level. They were going to have to do this eventually. Especially when Russia created that law that makes it impossible to get good info on their planes.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 i agree with you both camps can exist and will I see it as a good opportunity. if they manage to make a good F-35 flight and systems model than that completely opens the door to aircraft we cannot get reliable documentation on. it may very well allow ED to model the newer gen russian aircraft that the community wants.
@@tbe0116 Yeah its also kind of hypocritical of them to stop/block or not develop an aircraft and then switch that tune when they want more money its not a great look but i can see why they want to. the F-35 will probably bring in a ton of new interest and players to the community. which honestly is needed. they have tried to breach the casual simmer line with other projects but those never got off the ground. I will say this community should be ecstatic about the dynamic campaign system as that will breathe in a whole lot of new life into DCS for veteran simmers and people like me who don't really care about pvp but just want to fly with friends and be able to run a variety of missions and have fun without needing someone to slave away coding missions.
@ I reckon the dynamic campaign could be the panacea for the drama farming
All I wish for is a new game engine.
Yes, I'm happy and honestly astonished at what DCS has been able to do with what is essentially a DX9 ++ platform. 90+% of DCS is fighting for space on 1 single core. Yes I know we can now use both threads on that core. And that's astonishing.
But it's like adding a 2nd and 3rd floor on a home with a single floor foundation. At some point, the entire structure will fall.
I absolutely love DCS. I have invested well over 10 k just to get the best possible experience from DCS. I don't want it to come crashing down.
Check out Wags' Q & A on the reasons they won't do another game engine
@Pricklyhedgehog72 I listened to the video and didn't hear him say anything about updating the engine. But I was also working. I will give it another go and pay more attention this time.
@@jamesmcd71 There's a question about updating to another game engine. He explains they won't do that because other game engines don't allow them options they need for DCS
@Pricklyhedgehog72 Thanks for the follow-up. I was just listening to it again. And it was the very last and most important question.
I don't see a dynamic campaign or a word map without the ability to stream data. As of now, you can jump into an empty 4YA server, and it's all a 7800x3d can handle on basically 1 core. I'm not sure there is an M.2 or a CPU outside a server that can handle a world map.
Vulkan will allow DCS to move more graphics off the logic core, but I haven't heard anything about that since the 2024 video.
Man, that's disappointing. If you speak with them, please ask them to address this in more detail.
They must have a plan. I mean, pulling off multi threading on a game engine designed before multi threading existed is quite a difficult task. Hopefully, they have something planned.
@@jamesmcd71 My guess is that Vulkan and other tweaks are necessary to achieve some of this. The world map, as you say is a monstrous amount of data that even MSFS has had trouble managing it, at least DCS has fewer players logging into streaming servers. Lots of technical impediments for now I suspect, but worth exploring.
Hear me out...
A low fidelity helicopter in the FC pack for newbies to experience helis without the need of leanring a full fidelity module.
Hell even the huey could fit in there
The F-35 is definitely a cool thing as an aircraft. I don't think people really understand the scale of this though regarding the commercial value for ED. It's huge. It will be a killer app all by itself. It will be the reason people buy sim gear, the reason why they get a new PC, and of course the reason they will get into DCS. It will change lots of stuff, also within the community, because it means an influx of a new generation.
Would be great if it was actually possible. At the rate ED develops modules, and considering they have not yet even begun coding/modeling, not to mention everything that would have to be added to the core engine to support the jet, its going to take them at least 4 or 5 years to reach an "early access" release with any kind of systems simulation.
If they don't give up at some point I don't see a lot of the systems being simulated at which point its nothing more than an F16 with some more stealth and EW capability.
@@ethanhiggins4887 We will have to wait and see of course 🙂 But the fact that's the F-35 and not the F-105 (as an example) suggests that something new is going on at ED. Also, judging by the millions of WTF posts at forums and elsewhere, it's something the "hard core DCS community member" just don't get. According to ED the F-35 enables DCS to "grow and expand into the future". It's obviously a business decision at the very top, not just a module. As such it may bring other changes as well. I don't know what exactly will change other than more income (probably needed) and lots of new players, but it certainly is a direction few would have guessed only days ago.
Obviously that's why ED are doing it.
The purpose of investing in any module is to make money. So the people arguing about it being a money grab are being kind of ridiculous.
Redundant logic for sure, and it's not like anyone's forcing them to buy it...
What versions of the Kfir fighter are expected to appear ? The C2 ? The C7 ? the C21 ?
C2 & C7
C2 and F-21A on release and the C7 a little after.
Ey! 😮🫵 Appreciate the update on the A-7. That hit the spot.
My wishlist:
F-104
Tornado
A-6
BO-105
Gameplay:
- missions which require recce flights first; recce support (e.g. taking images with simulated recce cameras (visual and IR)). I would not care if these recce cams would be added to any aircraft (e.g. F-4E recce version could have cameras). Maybe SLAR (side looking radars). To me it is not so important that a particular aircraft could or could not carry the recce equipment. It would add a slot of gameplay IMHO.
- single player missions which require navigation without using GPS / F10, or too accurate INS. If using INS, INS fixes should be required or otherwise the INS drift would be too large. Especially after maneuvering.
- more dynamic weather with e.g. poor visibility when returning to home airfield.
Basically, I would prefer if certain elements are less realistic, but more interesting from a gameplay perspective.
E.g. cockpit temperature: would be nice if it would be used in missions: maybe failure leads to icing. You have to fly back home using IFR, and cockpit would only defrost close to the airfield.
Looking forward to the finished Afghanistan and Iraqi maps, the C130 and (if possible) the Tornado.
A-7 SLUF i am excited for... that and the 29. I am wondering what the status is on the F1M.
Great choices. I haven't checked in with Aerges for a bit, so stay tuned.
When you watch guys like the Air Warfare Group, who have actually flown some of these aircraft operationally, they seem to just “sit right in” and use the systems as if they are very familiar with them, so I believe it is as real as is possible.
But you can never learn to fly (and fight) properly from a computer or a simulator, only really being in the situation can do that. Wags touched on this in his Q &A.
Correct, it's suspension of disbelief, it's entertainment to a greater or lessor degree.
It really does sound like there is a lot to look forward to in 2025. I'm kinda stoked about the F-35, though I doubt we will see that one this year. I just wonder how ED is gonna get around the crazy level of classification of the F-35's advanced sensor systems. Hell, they all probably have already signed NDA's lol. One thing I hope everyone involved with the F-35 flight model & FCS does, is watch some of the Official F-35 Flight Demo Team's you tube airshow demos. I think it's kinda necessary because most people who are not involved with military aviation at the design/engineering level still view this jet through a 2012 lens. That is to say, _Can't climb, can't turn, can't run, CAN'T DOGFIGHT._
Oh yes it can. View any F-35 flight demo from 2019 thru 2025 & you will see the full 9G rated, Block 3F F-35A, and it can pretty much outmaneuver anything in the air except the Raptor and SU-57...and it is pretty damn close to them.
Anything from 2018 back gets you a 5G rated, technology test bed on which key critical systems are not complete.
2019 on through 2025--Good.
2018 back to program inception--bad. Flies like an overweight duck.
I'd hate to see ED pull off an awesome F-35, but with the same underperforming, clunky flight model that every mod dev who has tried to create a F-35 has saddled it with.
One last thing. Has any news arrived about a resolution to the ED/RAZBAM conflict?
Without taking sides, I really think that issue has hurt DCS badly, from ED to the Devs, to content creators, to the players. I just hope it gets settled in. 2025.
@skyhorseprice6591 check out my community tab post from indiafoxtecho who're supportive of ED producing the f35, and stated there's a lot of public information.
My wish is the JAS 39 C (because I'm Swedish 😜) but I'm very curious about F 35 specifically B version
Is there a flight manual in the public?
I'd love a Grippen also. I imagine it will be on their list.
Do they plan on dropping a ww2 carrier at the same time as the pacific war birds?
That's my guess, I think it'd be a big mistake not to.
LOL tire physics... How about IFF, radar, and other things that BMS has had for years instead of worrying about the elasticity of the tires rubber.
They’re tackling the F35- I’m sure getting tire and strut physics just right will go a long way toward assuring the community ED can handle 5th gen simulation.
Correct...
Which IFF and which radar? The F-16?
Maybe with the new (pneu) model, aircraft will not be inextricably stuck on a bit of grass even with full afterburner.. Not holding my breath :-)
@bobt223 this is the way...
12:00 what aircraft is this, I couldn't quite make out what you said
K'Fir
I don't think games like DCS need to be realistic given the limitations of both tech and classified info, but need to be believable.
It's going so slow that I actually forgot Aviron even exists any more.
Apparently CubanAce got the greenlight to do an AI Su-57, so there would be a natural enemy for the F-35 if either come to fruition.
I suspect that the F-35 would wipe the floor with the Felon...It's not even what I would consider in full production, but it'd be fun to see some sort of representation nonetheless.
Wags was finally honest and stated that the primary reason for the choice of modules to develop is what will sell best, and I'm fine with that, but let's not pretend it can be "study level", far too much must be inferred due to it still being classified.
It can still be study level and not include the classified bits. Study level is just the level of commitment you have to put in in order to fly and fight in the aircraft, and to think otherwise is foolish, and this applies to the F-16, F/A-18C and the AH-64D, and OH-58D are all study level yet there is a lot of stuff that is inferred to cover the parts that are still classified but yet, everyone want to point their finger at the F-35A and scream "There is no way it can be study level!" with out stopping to think that none of the other aircraft have their classified parts working either. So grow up.
@@ImpendingJoker If you're going to call me foolish and to grow up, this isn't a confab, I have an opinion, deal with it, JOKER.
@@ImpendingJoker if 95% of the systems are classified, and the jet is all about said systems. what makes it a study level? 3 button startup? or how to fly the jet that basically flies itself since its so full of tech that ED has no access to
@@ImpendingJoker
Youre indeed a clown
How do you 95% of it is classified?
Heatblur: "we can't do an F-14D because we don't know enough about the APG-71 radar"
ED: "we know NOTHING about the F-35 AESA radar, buuuuut we saw some videos, read some papers, did some CFD, so we're making one"
🙄
Accessibility to data on one aircraft on the continuum of development isn't presumptive of access to data on other aircraft. As Indiafoxtecho advised, there's more public information available on the F-35 than there is on the Eurofighter. Heatblur were able to access information the F-14A/B, thanks in part to old wind tunnel testing data from NASA, not from the vaults of Grumman.
The only reason I am not totally upset with the F35 is that it will hopefully bring some new systems to DCS before they realise its a pipe dream.
Advanced EW and datalink systems, IRST, datalink/LOAL missiles, advanced stealth/RCS modeling, all things that other modules could benefit from (if ED ever abandons their strict policy of only simulating a single block/year of jet).
I just don't see it getting to a point for an EA release by the end of the decade due to its complexity. Not to mention everything about the jet is going to be guesswork.
The flight model and FLCS alone is so much more complex than the F18/F16, not to mention DAS and its EW and ELINT capabilities which is really the bread and butter of that jet. IMO the amount of coding needed for this jet will be greater than all the previous modules combined. And considering how long it takes them just to add a sniper pod, yeah good luck...
The average DCS gamer isn't going to care if its missing those systems (or if they are incredibly basic) but for people who are in the know its laughable that ED even thinks they can come close to an accurate "simulation"
but like I said. If getting a bunch of people to buy an arcade F35 is what it takes to finally improve the core game that's fine with me. I just hope my 16 will reap the benefits. (and I REAAALLYY hope it will get a blk 70 variant at some point with IRST, AESA, HOBit, and modern weapons.
Forgot to mention all the data on the AIM120D and 9X block III is totally classified so now clue how they are going to replicate them when we don't even have an accurate 120C-3/4/5? model.
Unless they plan to only include the weapons it had back in like 2016 since that's the software variant they said they want to simulate. Which at that point is kinda silly because now you have an early access module of an early access jet lmao
Then you go back to the balancing argument because if they do add the block III 9X, you have a high off bore sight LOAL capable IR missile that should outrange every other missile in the game (in their current form).
The issue with the F-35 isn’t that - like for the C-16, f-18, etc- there are some areas that are classified…it’s that SO many systems and capabilities of the aircraft are highly classified, you can’t possibly create a simulation anywhere close to the fidelity of the current 4th gen.
We know for the F-16, f-18 and others that the ECM/EW and radars are “educated” guesses in some ways, but with the F-35, there are entire systems and entire capabilities that we don’t even know about to even begin to guess.
You won’t be experiencing an F-35…you will be flying an aircraft assembled by best guesses, interviews, observations and some public articles missing entire systems. It’s a f’ing money grab.
Luckily, if it’s anything like the A-7, AI A-6 intruder, KFIR, etc….we will still not have it in the game in 4 years
There are systems missing from current aircraft because they can’t be done. They’re is public data available for the F-35 for many systems telling us a minimum of what they are capable of, with maximum capability being classified.
Why not try waiting to see what they come out with, and then be angry? Seems like a lot of wasted energy when you have no idea what they are able to do.
the more the merrier, I've always wanted an F-111C, but the F-35 has blown my socks off. I cant imagine being upset about the sim getting more aircraft
F35 is definitely too much of stretch, your comparison is pretty poor, theres 40 years of F18 cockpit footage out there. The most footage ive seen of the F35, is some brief glimpses of the simulator, and shots of the cockpit with everything powered down.
Former pilots are much more candid in 'private' (discord groups, forums, communities etc.). So there's a lot mode testimonials of how accurate DCS is, compared to things former pilots say on youtube during interviews.
Don't think the module will be for me, as ill know its mostly just fiction, all the down to the inaccuracies of even basic performance numbers.
If 'convincing' is enough for you, then have at it, I'd never discourage anyone from getting it. Just not my cup of tea.
th-cam.com/video/1oyCzT6sB_4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9b1WZGMe0K_Zo2u9
If they had said low fidelity f35 people would have been calmer. We could do with more low fidelity stuff. Especially some newer red force stuff.
From what I can gauge from the community is this: new content is fine, no one is complaining about half maps like Iraq and Afghanistan. Be nice to get them finished, but not a show stopper. Same with modules like the updated F5 Tiger II. What IS a show stopper is when you spend hours/days creating complex missions and when you run them, the AI gives you the middle finger and nothing works right. Like a Tomcat that has long range Phoenix missiles and is set for MAX RANGE LAUNCH, but it ignores the Phoenix and the Sparrows and goes full burner for 75 miles to get a gun/Sidewinder kill. Then what does it do? It is now at bingo fuel and cannot even make it back to the ship from where it launched, so it lands at the nearest base, which is an enemy airfield! Why? So you start questioning yourself "did I set it up right?" and you go look and it's all setup perfectly. The sim just ignores it and does what it wants. I can give countless other examples, but you get my drift. Makes you want to gargle Drano. If they fixed shit like that, I would be content with what we currently have no new modules for the entire year. Just make what you have work. Simple.
Well made points. I really don't care about the F35. I would much rather see fleshed out WW2 models/maps/assets
I'm all for new aircraft, but DCS and 3 party Devs have too many aircraft in the pipe for release, it's going to be quantity over quality, nearly every month there is a new release. As an example the KFIR was announced in 2022 and yet here we are no sign of a release date.
There may be multiple reasons for this. The challenges of a post COVID world, the massive leaps in the game engine in the last 2-3 years, and the ever increasing bar for introducing new modules within the game. Heatblur is the gold standard.
Eagle Dynamics: We're going to bring the best F-35 that we can Community: we don't want it! it won't be accurate!
There is that angle on the issue...
Same community moments before the F-35A was announced: DCS sucks because full fidelity holds us back from modern aircraft!
Saying that you are the community....
well i want it ! and alot of other do to. The fact that everybody acts like a child because they dont get there personal module is almost getting sad.
And its just a game you should enjoy more ;)
I don't want it even if it's accurate. It has no place in the multiplayer balance and nobody will use it because no servers will allow it. There's just no point in bringing it to the game at this point.
@@potatokilr7789 Balance in a sim ...... talking about mp if thats the main mode of the sim and there is a point maybe not for you but there is for others.
...
I think Wt is more your cup of tea if you look for balance .... else i want fox 3 on the chinook... for balance
There's a total lack of consistency from ED...
No, as Wags indicated, I think communication has been one of the big issues.
@Pricklyhedgehog72 really, this is absolutely not the only problem they have lol
The perfect F-35 Mission..... Based on Public Knowledge of its Sensors and Data Link...... That's may have happened Twice, at least, in Real Combat.
One Air Force Squadron of F-35s is on Strike Mission and Destroys their assigned Targets but, uses all their Air to Ground Weapons to complete their Mission. However, while originally RTB (Return To Base) is then credited with Air to Air, Air to Ground, Surface to Surface, and Even Surface to Sea Targets Destroyed. Lastly, when the Squadron Finally Lands they Still have All their Air to Air Weapons and Canon Rounds.
So in English and DCS, the F35 will act like a Mimi AWACS / JSTARS. Except all NATO Weapons (Aircraft, Man Pad, SAM Site, Warship) in range Will Shoot at Everything that appears on the F35's Weapon Lock Level Sensors...... So, I hope they do not Fully Model the Sensors and/or Data Link.
Your thoughts about the implementation of the F35 miss the point. At least for me. It's not about a realistic simulation. Well, that's not true. Ofc, this is important. The problem is, that we do not get modern redfor planes because information which isn't publicly available (according to ED). The whole time this has been the reason for ED to not give us an SU27 or SU33 or SU30, SU35, MIG29 (yea, it's coming now, but it is not the Russian version but rather the "warsaw pact" version. It's not the full-fidelity redfor plane finally capable of tackling F16's and F18's.) and I am not even talking about Chinese jets. If they can give us an F35 on the level of systems simulation we are used to, they also should be able to give us all the other jet, we so badly wait for for years now. I mean, it just doesn't make sense to me. Which admittedly doesn't say much. Just because it does not make sense to me, it doesn't mean it actualy makes no sense. Who am I to judge? I am not expert in military aviation. It al just isn't believable anymore.
Accessibility to data on one aircraft on the continuum of development isn't presumptive of access to data on other aircraft. As Indiafoxtecho advised, there's more public information available on the F-35 than there is on the Eurofighter. Heatblur were able to access information the F-14A/B, thanks in part to old wind tunnel testing data from NASA, not from the vaults of Grumman.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 Publicly available information on the sensor fusion capabilities of the F35 and more specific, the sensors and their capabilities? You gotte be kidding. Sure, the pure flight model is one thing, but simulating the systems of F35 and something like the Eurofighter? Thats exactly why I don't trust their "classified documents" argument anymore. I can't proof it, but I don't buy the whole "we can't do modern Russian jets" topic anymore. Even though, you are obviously right with your first sentence.
I think you're takes on everything up to the F-35 were pretty fair, but its stretching it a bit to justify the F-35 within the context of the game at the moment. The sensor fusion, and systems that make it so effective are very much still classified and will remain so for awhile. We see that in discussions with IRL pilots with regards to sensor fusion in other planes. If they release a half accurate F-35 it should wipe the floor in all encounters we have at the moment and I don't think that that is great for the game itself. Beyond that, the F-35 will take major resourcing from ED to complete, there are other areas that I think would've been better served having that level of resource applied to it. Clearly ED think that the F-35 will sell enough to justify the compromises they're putting in place, and the projects they are not able to work on due to this new commitment. Personally I think the F-35 is a mistake but one that will make ED a lot of money, even while it makes the overall game worse.
Im certain that 95% of the avionics will be done via guesswork
How the sensor fusion actually functions is restricted, but there's no reason that would stop you from modeling the displays. This is just like the Hornet.
@@mobius7089 true which is a big reason that people complain about some of that being lacking, incl irl pilots who'll hint at things not working as they expected.
However that lack of info has also been used as reasoning behind not creating other modules which is now clearly inconsistent (ie sales potential overrides this issue). I suspect that this will undermine EDs comms team in the future.
Beyond that, the Hornet (or any fighter we have now) does not rely on stealth. That will be very new, and given the whole point of the F-35 is stealth, and being able to act as a command node (vs being an out and out AS fighter of F/A like modules we have atm) then I really think that lacking the key real world performance of sensors, rcs, radar, etc, that has been worked around in the past could come back to haunt them.
I suspect what we'll see is (large) servers just not allowing it to be used in multiplayer and people flying it in single player only. In this sense it doesn't matter what stats or characteristics they give the F-35. I just think there are more pressing issues than releasing a BLUFOR 5th Gen (unless cash is really that tight)
People should stop hyping over stuff that is not even there. This industry is cursed.
FIRST!
the slop era
Not really impressed with ED at the moment. Poorly run company. They are trying to go in too many directions at once. It's becoming a Jack of All Trades, Master of None. But they are chasing profits. Wish they lived up to fixing and finishing products.
I wonder where the F-35 data comes from since it's still classified !
They will pull it out of their buttocks. But the best to do as a customer, is to not buy this module. That is what I will do.
A lot of information is actually public, which may sound crazy. Aspects will be coveted by secrecy and legal copyright issues, but a lot can be done with what's online.
Funny how my comment disappeared, but I will repeat myself: They will pull it out of their rears. Nothing relevant is online. Even maintenance workers have a hard time working, because of the secrecy... Just vote with your wallet...
@ i did a search myself on the net and there's nothing to be found.. Zero technical specs or anything, except the dimensions maybe.