phant Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Link inside! Source: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=35619 Bye Phant Quote
+JediMaster Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 I can't wait to FINALLY have a sim where realistic ops with both A-10s and helos can be done. Best shot previously was in a TW sim, but helos there have never really been as good as fixed wing. Quote
+EricJ Posted December 25, 2008 Posted December 25, 2008 I disagree, but that's depending on the environment you work in.. Quote
+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 An Apache would be nice as next modul not a A-10 but that`S my opinion Quote
+EricJ Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 Yeah, but the A-10C is going to be easier due to most of the groundwork laid out already, so hopefully it'll take less time than BS itself.. Quote
+JediMaster Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 They'd said 9 months before, so we should expect it by the end of summer. I'm not sure if the A-10A or AH-64 is due next after that, but I'd guess the A-10A since it's just a different cockpit/avionics...FM and most weapons would be identical (like the Su-25/25T in Flaming Cliffs). I don't remember if they said they were putting the Longbow radar on the 64D or not, but I hope so. Quote
Buren Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 I don't remember if they said they were putting the Longbow radar on the 64D or not, but I hope so. Unfortunately, no, there is not going to be a Longbow version in the foreseeable future. One of the reasons ED say, is that they're too much classified information to make the aircraft DCS series compatible. There is a real (at least he says so) AH64D pilot on F16.net, who said that the classified information wouldn't be useful in the simulation anyways, and the same amount of secret data can be found in the F-16, which ED supposedly going to make... Quote
+EricJ Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Yeah.. that's the main stickler. Alot of details that would enhance the sim... are classified, and Matt knows it, so they can only get unclassified data to make approximations. Quote
+JediMaster Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 I don't know, that's been a problem with military sims since day 1, yet there have been ways around it. Either you approximate or you omit or you deliberately make inaccurate. Longbow 2 had the radar. Does ED really need to make something better than that, but if they can't they just won't do it? Sounds to me like the DCS series is going to be short-lived if they turn down platform after platform because of classified material. Quote
+Gr.Viper Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 They can still do Hind Unless specs of the fan in the cockpit are classfied for some reason. Quote
Buren Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 I don't know, that's been a problem with military sims since day 1, yet there have been ways around it. Either you approximate or you omit or you deliberately make inaccurate. Longbow 2 had the radar. Does ED really need to make something better than that, but if they can't they just won't do it? Sounds to me like the DCS series is going to be short-lived if they turn down platform after platform because of classified material. Yes.. It speculated that it is just a cheap excuse not to do it (at least not now) Actually one can see a rising tendency of the complexity in their *to-do* aircraft list in an abstract way. (at least I do) Ka-50 - base stuff: single seat, sight system, something that can be called an MFD, base code, detailed flight model A-10C - new stuff: night fightning capabality, RWR AH-64A - new stuff: two seat code Mi-24V - new stuff: troop ferry code in a relatively simple, but highly popular aircraft (at least compared to the preceding planes) F-15C/Su-27 - new stuff: AA missile and radar code MiG-29 - new stuff: basic AG ops F-16 - sophisticated AG radar + all the stuff made already (excluding: two seat and troop carrying) In this way they leave the most hard to do stuff the last ... Quote
+EricJ Posted January 7, 2009 Posted January 7, 2009 Really you're shorting the Ka-50 sim... it's very detailed, with Kamov's help. It's much more different and alot more aspects invovled than just having a single seat helicopter. And alot of the original code had to be rewritten to accommodate other issues, so they're not doing it half-baked. Quote
+JediMaster Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 This reminds me of F4:AF and LP's excuses why IFF wasn't there. I don't care how complicated the real thing is, just give me the ability to query a locked radar target! The whole AWACS procedure to do it is silly. Quote
LtFransky Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 A night targeting system would be nice for Black Shark Quote
+EricJ Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 Yeah but NVGs are useable, can't have everything Agreed Jedi Master, but I think they keep it less complicated in order to compete with F4:AF. I personally don't care as most of the time I'm skimming trees and AWACS telling me I got trouble is good enough for me Quote
phant Posted February 13, 2009 Author Posted February 13, 2009 First A-10C details Source: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=38201 Bye Phant Quote
Growler67 Posted March 10, 2009 Posted March 10, 2009 The Apache shown in the screenshots is a "D" Longbow model. If it is actually going to be/remain an "A" model, the rotodome and targeting-integrated gyro sensors need to be removed and portrayed correctly. Classified data or not, if realism is what the goal is than accurate depiction should be the road to travel, wouldn't you say? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.