Question about F-18 future in bms
-
What do you mean by “Custom MFDs” ?
MFDs are only a representation of systems that work in the background, if all you need is nice looking MFDs then what will be the purpose of that? We basically don’t do that. If we implement something in MFD it has something in the background to back it up (With possible exception that sometimes stuff is put in as a place holder, so such a situation can technically happen but in general the purpose is not to just show nice MFDs)
With regards to the thread, I wouldn’t say that implementing Hornet avionics in BMS is an impossible task, but the way things are going, you need a developer with an interest to do it, and it means dedication for some time just for that purpose. Implementing systems that doesn’t exist, some very different than the F-16, implementing displays, HUD, dedicated weapon systems etc etc. Not trivial to code time-wise. Also another problem is available information, most documentation of the F-18 are classified AFAIK, like most combat ACs, especially those that are still in service.
God, the best answer! Thanks for replying
-
A better solution would be some standard for incorporating aircraft and systems into BMS as modules - hate to say it - similar to DCS. There, I’ve said it…
…because modelling an aircraft and it’s systems is no small task in itself, and I’m not holding my own breath for BMS to be anything but a Viper sim…to the fidelity that it is currently a Viper sim…unless there are whole new aircraft teams formed among the devs. LOTS of work in this regard…just doing the research alone. 4-6…no - 6-8 weeks…tops.
-
Frankly, I’d be happy with a fully function fuel display ( not just total and test), HMDS on IFEI knob, cockpit immersion stuff
-
…I’m just happy with the Viper!
-
I’m happy with what we have…for free.
-
I hear you guys - loud and clear. Fully implementing a BMS Bug would be a monumental task requiring serious dedication and deep pockets. I say this because the amount of time - not to mention the applicable skill sets - to develop a really classy BMS F/A-18 product with all the associated bells and whistles, would be daunting. BMS’s current Hornet ain’t bad but, it leaves a lot to be desired. However, I just can’t imagine anyone in the BMS family foregoing life and, earning a living, to deliver a quality mod for free. Hell, I’m retired with a nice pension, but still have to hold down a part time gig to enjoy a decent quality of life here in one of the most expensive cities on the face of the earth - New York. And that’s inclusive of my flight sim addiction. I’ve been siming since the tail end of the '90s, starting with Jane’s F/A-18 and moving onto DI’s Super Hornet, Graphsim’s Operation Iraqi Freedom while also putzing around with Falcon 4.0 and Allied Force. So when BMS came along, I was in seventh heaven. Note that although BMS is a refreshing undertaking (it’s free), I’ve poured a bunch of money over the years into acquiring the hardware (now dedicated to a modest Viper pit) to make the sim an immersive experience and, as realistic as possible. I love my BMS Falcon. But I also run DCS on my setup. As a U.S. Marine Veteran, who had a symbiotic relationship (close air support -with envy) with Marine Pilots supporting my ground pounder operations in a number of combat theaters during my 27 years in Corps, I also love the Bug. And frankly, I can’t wait for DCS’s final release of the Super Hornet (again, not to disparage the BMS Bug). It will be interesting to see if DCS can truly replicate a realistic avionics model (with all possible display/instrument extractions) and weapon systems, intricate on-deck carrier operations, along with decent campaign theaters and geo-specific terrain graphics, etc. A tall order for 60 bucks. We’ll see. Sorry for being so long winded. Just wanted to share my thoughts.
-
It would be much more worthwhile to create an entirely different game than try to force features into an already developed product.
-
Wow everyone seems to be happy in this thread, much happier than that DCS thread.
Their almost always angry over there, can I just rest here for a while.
I love the bug too but don’t get to fly it much this last year or two.
Why did every one leave ? Is it because so many people are unhappy ?
Pity I like being happy. :flypig:
Sorry I thought it said bug
-
A better solution would be some standard for incorporating aircraft and systems into BMS as modules - hate to say it - similar to DCS. There, I’ve said it…
Well that is an idea that I never could wrap my around over, really
I don’t know what DCS exported in terms of avionics, but from what I heard, the only “Full avionics suit” AC in DCS is the A-10, and maybe also Black shark but I’m not sure. The F-18 is coming and that will be the 2nd fixed-wing AC with “everything”.
I HONESTLY don’t know how can you export avionics? Let’s say I will create a tool that will allow anyone to modify say MFDs, draw anything you want, use some scripts to create nice “look”, OK? but my question is where exactly come the backend system?? Front-end graphics is nice, you have a MFD that look like something real, but who will write the back of it? The back is what’s important! I wrote some avionics for BMS and I can tell you once you get it the MFD coding isn’t that hard, what’s harder is the logic behind, code lines over code lines, you wouldn’t imagine how many line are sometimes necessary to simulate 1 small system as it should be, Maverick, FCC, HARM, you name it. And don’t forget testing (By the coder, as you must test code for functionality before you commit it), that also takes time, and as more as the system is complicated and has many corners with small details (And especially when you have real-pilot that giving feedback on smallest stuff, see Mavericks and SPI, for examples, and even those aren’t perfect…), it’ll take even more time.
So what I want to say is that I don’t know how avionics can be exported, it sounds more to me like maybe exporting some basic system for general behavior, because for a specific AC, if you are going to model it seriously, you must create logic systems in the code to represent the physical ones, FCC, SMS, MFD, Electrical, FLCS etc etc, every such system can be very different between 2 aircrafts, even if both American, so you need to write dedicated stuff per AC, and that isn’t a small task.
Again, I’m not saying if this will happen sometime for BMS or not, I’m just saying that it’ll take dedication, serious dedication to build something else than the viper.
-
Hornet avionics have already been added to Falcon
-
Hornet avionics have already been added to Falcon
as ihawck said, drawnig nice MFDs or Huds is not a problem at all
What matters is what is behind
for instance, F18 FLCS is totally disconnected from F16 FLCS and is totally disconnected from NASA FLCS and OFM FLCS…
That is not the hard part.
the hard part is then to Reconnect everywhere in the code where the specifics FLCS has input/output , like Autopilot , TFR , WOW , Paddle Switch behavior, TEF Laws , Trim , Throttle , Bitching bettty stall laws, etc etc etc etc etc…
-
‘‘The difference between the impossible and the possible lies in a man’s determination.’’
-
‘‘The difference between the impossible and the possible lies in a man’s determination.’’
and time
and children
and work
and wife -
‘‘The difference between the impossible and the possible lies in a man’s determination.’’
Nice saying, But the problem isn’t determination nor motivation. The problem is that numbers are limited, both time and resources (coding hands).
and time
and children
and work
and wifeAnd that
So… we must prioritize subjects, and avionics for other ACs is on low priority. Maybe it’ll change in the future, but we have so much to do in many other aspects, that I don’t know when that will happen.
-
…you forgot - $$$. Lots of $$$.
-
I dont think, considering limited resources, that there should be any deviation from the development of the f-16 and other mechanics (graphics, AI etc) in favor of other aircraft. Time spent on other planes is time that could be spent making the f-16 better. The only time i can imagine another plane to be really necessary (i.e. f35) is when the viper becomes so obsolete that the game becomes a historical sim rather than a modern combat one… and even then i would love to fly it, just as i love flying ww2 sims.
-
…you forgot - $$$. Lots of $$$.
Not necessarily. Look at what we have be given over the years in the F4 community, and I’d bet that less than 1% was payware. Yes DCS is pretty, and have many more flyable aircraft, but they ED is a big team where it’s a business. BMS is a small team of dedicated individuals working in their spare time, and just look at how good their product is.
-
**BMS is an F-16 sim …lets be completed in accurate the 70% of that SIM and…
i am sure the other a/c will have the chance to be improved too…**
-
Not necessarily. Look at what we have be given over the years in the F4 community, and I’d bet that less than 1% was payware. Yes DCS is pretty, and have many more flyable aircraft, but they ED is a big team where it’s a business. BMS is a small team of dedicated individuals working in their spare time, and just look at how good their product is.
That’s outside of what I was getting at in furthering the conversation…if you’re building a cockpit…and/or a computer…and/or a buying a TIR or ED Tracker…and/or a few 4K displays or projectors…and a HOTAS Cougar or Warthog…and some pedals…and TM MFDs…then you need LOTS of $$$. This, and that pointed out below, are the things that try men’s souls and test the limits of our determination - not the fact that BMS itself is free…
-
**BMS is an F-16 sim …lets be completed in accurate the 70% of that SIM and…
i am sure the other a/c will have the chance to be improved too…**
+1.