+SkateZilla Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 The List of Modules in Development are the F/A-18C, SU-27SM, F-15C, FW-190, MIG-21, F-86F, L-29, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, AH-1G, Mi-24, OH-58 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WBGLb98zkFQ And now you know why the SU-27 and F-15C from FC3 both have 6DoFF Pits. 1 Quote
+Dave Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 Good stuff is coming in the DCS World. Very good stuff. Quote
paulrkiii Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 Very exciting times coming for DCS World...Nevada was even mentioned!! Quote
+Ruggbutt Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 So would the two RL Hornet drivers in my squadron. Quote
Dave63 Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 The F86 will need something to shoot down...Hint, hint. 1 Quote
+Ruggbutt Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) Where Eagle fly, Cranes cry. If ED fixes the AMRAAM to the point where it has performance as IRL the Crane fanbois will be bitching and moaning again all over ED's forums. Just do all the modules "right" and the rest of us normal folks out here will be thrilled. Good to cya here, GG. Edited January 17, 2013 by Ruggbutt had to say hi to GG Quote
+JediMaster Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I don't know that missile work is part of any particular module's work or if it's just "DCS World". Obviously AA-only platforms need all those missiles working properly, while all the existing non-beta releases only have a few IR missiles able to be used by the player and it's not been a major concern. I would suppose it would be considered part of FC3's development, but there will likely be many missiles like the French ones that won't be heavily worked on but will need proper modeling for the 3rd parties doing those planes. I'm thinking ED is in charge of the missiles, but I suppose if they're specific to a particular plane maybe the 3rd party will have to do it? Quote
+Ruggbutt Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 That's a good question, Jedi. I would imagine that ED would just incorporate the new missiles into their AFM. Quote
squid Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I just got erected. F/A-18C SU-27SM F-15C FW-190 MIG-21 F-86F (indeed i hope a MiG-15 will follow put) AH-1G (hey, where's my Apache?) Mi-24 Quote
+MigBuster Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 Where the Mi24 was announced? in the video at the start Quote
GGTharos Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Hi and thanks. Regarding the AMRAAM - the missile itself operates like the R-77, which operates like all other missiles ... type of seeker is different, sensitivity to CMs is different, but generally speaking those missiles will more or less ensure parity regardless of how they are simulated, in other words, right now all missiles use PN straight up, maybe in the future they will use different strategies to intercept a target. The thing is, if EW superiority is not modeled then yes, you'll pretty much have parity. While all of that is desired in terms of modeling, there aren't enough resources to get everything done right now. As you know, for the moment it's just the WAFM, and that's being adjusted still. If ED fixes the AMRAAM to the point where it has performance as IRL the Crane fanbois will be bitching and moaning again all over ED's forums. Just do all the modules "right" and the rest of us normal folks out here will be thrilled. Good to cya here, GG. Quote
+Dave Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Where Eagle fly, Cranes cry. You got that right GG. Welcome to CA. Quote
+JediMaster Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Does that mean that in absence of EW/CM/evasion, all missiles have a 100% PK chance? I always heard (perhaps anecdotal, perhaps verified, I can't recall) that the R-77 wasn't as reliable as AMRAAM and more likely to fail at some point in the process, from launch to guide to impact. So the R-77 was potentially as good, but in reality was not always able to live up to that. Quote
squid Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) EW = Electronic Warfare ? PK = Probability Kill ? WAFM = ? PN = ? IRL = In Real Life ? RL = Real Life ? Crane = Flanker ? Edited January 18, 2013 by squid Quote
+Stratos Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Thanks for the head ups guys. Now DCS future looks really promisng, so many cool planes!! Quote
+Ruggbutt Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 EW = Electronic Warfare ? Yes PK = Probability Kill ? Yes WAFM = ? Weapons Advanced Flight Model PN = ? Proportional Navigation IRL = In Real Life ? Yes RL = Real Life ? Yes Crane = Flanker ? Yes There ya go! Don't be afraid to ask here, especially since GG has shown up. He's quite knowledgeable about these kinds of things. Quote
Carlos_Tex Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Hmmm... I would like to see a DCS: F-14D before i jump in. The Iris one is not DCS level supposedly. Quote
squid Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) Thanks ! :) I hope we will be seeing GG here often as well :D I need to share, i developed some symptom few days back now , i think i am living for the day Su-27SM will be out ...... Edited January 18, 2013 by squid Quote
GGTharos Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 There are no failure modes simulated for these missiles - in other words, yes, if you do not attempt to defeat the missile and it is launched in valid parameters (and in the absence of lag spikes, etc, etc etc), your Pk is 1. The R-77 is comparable to AIM-120A, and it is a fairly good and scary missile. If it is not reprogrammable, like the 120A, then ECCM capability may be limited and a modern fighter's ECM could reliably mess with its radar. We don't want to simulate this driving the Pk to zero, and it's hard to simulate ECM/ECCM inequality as well. Imagine ECM breaking locks too, the deluge of bug reports there! :) That's a deeper and longer discussion though. Does that mean that in absence of EW/CM/evasion, all missiles have a 100% PK chance? I always heard (perhaps anecdotal, perhaps verified, I can't recall) that the R-77 wasn't as reliable as AMRAAM and more likely to fail at some point in the process, from launch to guide to impact. So the R-77 was potentially as good, but in reality was not always able to live up to that. EW = Electronic Warfare ? Yes PK = Probability Kill ? Yes WAFM = ? Weapon Advanced Flight Model PN = ? Proportional Navigation IRL = In Real Life ? Yes RL = Real Life ? Yes Crane = Flanker ? Yes Quote
fallenphoenix1986 Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Holding out for some western navy birds before I get into this, might be tempted if any western attack helo's show up first though. Strangely drawn to the Mil-24 as well, didnt see that coming Craig Quote
squid Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I am impressed to see the Sabre and not MiG15 on this stage of prospect modules list. My next wet dream i guess would be a Korea map and -15 ... 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.