This update was a huge let down for me. I was hoping for information on the next jet. Now it seems we are years (2-3?) away from anything.

The fact that they haven't even decided which jet they will use makes me believe there might not even be another jet, which is why they are working on so many other projects.

Oh well...come on Combat Helo, you are now my #1 looking-forward-to project!

I never could figure out the rationale behind the P-51 in a modern Caucasus region. Then I read the FAQ:



Since it started as an aside, it makes much more sense now. That and the possibility that they may (and may not) make some opposition aircraft to fly against:

Simple. They put a three in the place of a two to sell you the same product yet again. Actually the addition of FC aircraft to the DCS environment should kick the multiplayer into wide open mode. Who knows. I guess we will all be paying for future patches on each module from now on. It's the way of the future.

Wait and see - some very interesting things in the pipeline. If it isn't worth the price to you, after you actually know the details - don't buy it.

Nate

I did enjoy flying FC2 with BS1 MP, but I did it only a few times due to the lack of missions.



The Jedi Master

There is a lot of work to do before they can even start on the stuff people consider to be "working on the next jet". The problem is, when you (and many others) think "working on the next jet", I suspect you think of things like 3d models and the avionics stuff you see in the cockpit such as MFD screens etc.

The reality however is that there is a LOT of stuff to do before that point is reached. Things like RADAR for example, the sim engine has to be updated to allow for such things, and a RADAR model created before a specific aircraft's RADAR system can be modelled. The same goes for flight model stuff like transonic/supersonic flight, as well as many, many, many other things.

That is the kind of stuff going on in the background, once all that stuff is done work can then start on the specifics of an individual aircraft (i.e. the things many people think of when imagining the modelling of a new aircraft).

As for the aircraft may change, well yeah, I'm not sure why people have such an issue with that statement. Have you forgotten than to start with we were going to be getting DCS:A-10A? It was only during development that circumstances changed and allowed the switch to the A-10C. Exactly the same sort of thing could happen this early in the development process, and it in no way means that all the work already done would be thrown away.

As for the current projects getting in the way of fast mover? I'd remind you that if ED were to go out of business due to lack of cash there would never be a fast mover, no matter how many people had been working on it. It's far better for ED to work on and release other products to keep the cash flowing, and therefore have the ability to hire additional staff and make smaller changes to the DCS world that will end up making DCS:Fast Mover a better sim when it does come. Don't you think?

Remember the big picture.

Bummer out the next DCS jet not being further along!

Still, glad they let us know at least, helps adjust expectations.

It seems they have already done a lot of work on the flight/combat environment with the last aircraft. If their flight model is based on the same physics model it could just be a case of adjusting equations of lift, drag and power. If it's a fixed wing 2 engine jet, the real work lies in documentation and modelling. They already have a wealth of information on weapon systems and armament.

Imagine... projects for US aircraft that could be feasible (going under the theory that ED will only produce aircraft for which they can create a very realistic simulator):

F15C (Already have a basis to go on)
F16 (but it is already done to death with the constant stream of Falcon fans)
The F4 as a modern aircraft may be considered a 2 seater and therefore too much hastle (although i'd love to see this implemented with aircraft carriers and there's potential for so much combat history if you go back through all the variants)


Those are the modern(ish) airframes which don't seem to have been hampered too much with red tape (defence secrets wise).

The F18 hornet might be a possibilty as the technology has already been sold to a few other countries. It can be a single seater and has a good variety of roles to fill.

The F14 is a two seater and would require an imense amount of work (especially regarding the AI pilot/copilot).
Same goes for the F18 super hornet.
I don't really know if the F117 stealth fighter/bomber is really feasible.

The JSF and F22 are still far too new and I doubt the US government is willing to release a lot of information regarding their real potential, let alone their weapons and defence systems.

I'd have argued that perhaps the military wouldn't be interested in retired aircraft but I'm not sure the mustang was for the military.

So then you could start looking at even older airframes/training aircraft.

Theres the T38 talon (can't say I'd be up for flying a non combat aircraft, it's kinda why we have microsoft flight sims)
You have the F5E Tiger (could be fun, if a little limited in scope)
The A7 corsair II (I doubt it)
The F101 starfighter (same as the tiger)
The F86 Sabre/Super sabre (Hmm...)

Dunno, my hopes are all on the F4. Adjusting flight performance between the various models should not be all that difficult either once they have the different motorisations and two seater/single seater thing sorted out. It would have potential for so many combat roles and scenarios and it's primary enemies in the skies have already had some work done on them in flaming cliffs (think we are just missing the Mig 15).

I made this suggestion to them about 1 year ago, and heard nothing but excuses as to why it couldn't be done. Glad someone over there finally figured it out.