Development of new aircraft and cockpits
-
So a de-agg A-10 is more effective than an agg A-10 , iguess in de-agg they apply some statistical model to calculate the kills ?
Nope, just the opposite. Deagg A-10s in 3D world are impotent compared to aag A-10s in 2D world.
-
Well, the name of the kind of gives it away– it is a FALCON sim, not “whatever the developers want it to be”. Or, to put it another way, the developers want it to be a FALCON sim.
Sure, it could handle different platforms. But every minute spent by the developers on other platforms is one less minute spent on the many improvements in progress on the FALCON platform.
I’m sorry, but I’m just tired of those who want to put pressure on the BMS team to develop other planes at the expense of the F-16. There are only so many Falcon weeks in the universe, and they need to be spent on FALCON. JMHO.
What pressure? What is bothering you? Why making other airplane more fun would spoil the fun for you?
This is a brainstorming thread. Not a pressure or must do thread. Chill and cheers
-
On my side, I think it’s so dépressive to see same airplanes all the time in videogames….
I share fully this
A10 booring
F15 boooring
F5 what ???SU34 RULES !!!
-
Not at all my dear Seifer.
There is a lot still missing and not necessarily Uber complex.
TACAN REC functions, ECM pannel, STBY ADI, SMS setup page, just to name few of them. The A/G radar itself would deserve a total revamp. … And I already hear some guys thinking loud about the L16.And working VRP/VIP/A-CAL functions for early F-16C blocks.
-
Well, the name of the kind of gives it away– it is a FALCON sim, not “whatever the developers want it to be”. Or, to put it another way, the developers want it to be a FALCON sim.
Sure, it could handle different platforms. But every minute spent by the developers on other platforms is one less minute spent on the many improvements in progress on the FALCON platform.
I’m sorry, but I’m just tired of those who want to put pressure on the BMS team to develop other planes at the expense of the F-16. There are only so many Falcon weeks in the universe, and they need to be spent on FALCON. JMHO.
Hello,
I think that you missed a really important point. Not all the devs are F-16 gurus. it may look strange, but this is a fact.
Many people who strongly contributed to enhance our F-16 were not F-16 maniacs.
For many of us (I take myself as a dev even I’m no longer a member of BMS dev team), we just love to… dev, and especially within the environment of Falcon BMS.
Some of the devs almost never fly BMS. The passion for many of us is just to create, to offer something.
I’m not a F-16 guru. I like this aircraft, but I far prefer Rafale, Mirage 2000, Su-34, Su-35 Mig-29, Mitsubishi F-2, F/A-18E and F-15E. That being said, it’s always possible that I decide or not in the next weeks (do not take it as an announcement, it’s just a pure example) to rebuild F-16 external models, starting by F-16 block 52/50/72/70/15/60 (because I like them). It’s my freedom to bring what I want to.
Why do I explain this : to show you that it’s not because there is devs, that they want to work on F-16, and on the domains you would expect.
When people say : we want dev to concentrate on F-16 and not something else… It just doesn’t work like that ! It’s not because we do not work on F-16 in favor of another project that we would have worked on F-16 ianyway !
Also, something which is done without love will be often messy and this is what’s happening with DCS : money prevails on love. So, at BMS, we work with love, with our envies.
Also, we don’t need a nanny as we are big boys, most of us believe that a F-16 oriented team wouldn’t be a good idea anyway because you would have a gorgeous F-16 with an ugly environment. Being a fighter pilot is not so much about piloting a fighter aircraft, but fighting with a fighter aircraft in a complex environment.
I share fully this
A10 booring
F15 boooring
F5 what ???SU34 RULES !!!
F-5 is an elegant, small, and incredibly cute little fighter aircraft (and I love it when flying low in the Alps !)
For Su-34, you know that I love it. I just have issues to finish my model, because there is complex angles that I can’t really understand. One day, I will have the patience to come back on her !
Also, this aircraft would really be a serious candidate to me to receive an accurate cockpit. (I already hear fury in somebodie’s mind) !
Cheers,
Radium
-
I’m not a F-16 guru. I like this aircraft, but I far prefer Rafale, Mirage 2000, Su-34, Su-35 Mig-29, Mitsubishi F-2, F/A-18E and F-15E. That being said, it’s always possible that I decide or not in the next weeks (do not take it as an announcement, it’s just a pure example) to rebuild F-16 external models, starting by F-16 block 52/50/72/70/15/60 (because I like them). It’s my freedom to bring what I want to.
:woohoo:
-
Hi Chaton!
And working VRP/VIP/A-CAL functions for early F-16C blocks.
VIP/VRP/POP are implemented for years now.
A-CAL (just as FIX) requires IRS full implementation. But as long as we are using the GPS, those features are “secondary”. But, as you know, never say never. -
Hi Chaton!
VIP/VRP/POP are implemented for years now.Hi!
They aren’t, not fully, unless something changed in the very last versions. Those visual functions primarily exist to fine tune your position and aiming on the last run to a ground target. That’s not really what they do in BMS, because, as you wrote, GPS-less operations are not fully implemented for now.
But I happen to like Sidewinder-era F-16s. -
I think I see what you mean => they are not relevant because of positioning precision. But with an INS update (visual / radar / or other) prior IP, they would not be much less precise.
If you wish you can switch off the GPS (but no INS update possible other than switching GPS back on).
-
I disagree with the sentiment that Falcon is just an F-16 sim. I say it is the first in many aircraft originally envisioned by Spectrum Holobyte and later Microprose in their Electronic Battlefield Series. Case in point, SH after releasing Falcon, developed and released the Hornet and Mig-29.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(video_game_series)#Falcon_3.0_based_games_.28.22Electronic_Battlefield.22.29
I would say post VR implementation, these shis should be the order of development. Also, the A-10A(and C) is a no Brainer since there are plenty of data and manuals that are ripe for developers. Heck, Ayes, Xis and myself came pretty darn close to what many are suggesting here during the F4 Alliance days with functional releases of aircraft packages for use with the FlyAnyPlanes patch when it came out. Heck, we were pretty close to release of the B-One Bomber too. -
I thought the Rafale was pretty hard to beat in a dogfight and had to practice many times before I can earn an 11 counts of gunning it down. But the Typhoon is nearly impossible to beat, the raptor however is an easier match in F4BMS, but is it really that way for the real jet? Everything else except the Typhoon was possible to beat in a dogfight (guns only).
-
Heck, Ayes, Xis and myself came pretty darn close to what many are suggesting here during the F4 Alliance days with functional releases of aircraft packages for use with the FlyAnyPlanes patch when it came out. Heck, we were pretty close to release of the B-One Bomber too.
I remember that : )
xis
-
I thought the Rafale was pretty hard to beat in a dogfight and had to practice many times before I can earn an 11 counts of gunning it down. But the Typhoon is nearly impossible to beat, the raptor however is an easier match in F4BMS, but is it really that way for the real jet? Everything else except the Typhoon was possible to beat in a dogfight (guns only).
Yep… Typhoon’s guru have more ego problem than Rafale’s guru it seems…
-
Yep… Typhoon’s guru have more ego problem than Rafale’s guru it seems…
Pour sûr l’ami…
I think so my friend !
-
Pour sûr l’ami…
I think so my friend !
And it was changed. I used to toy against the Typhoon a few years ago, it was more a tie than what it’s now.
-
Most of Rafale and Typhoon is classified, so…
-
-
Sure !
I just meant that’s it’s impossible to make a comparison between both real life fighters !
Radium
-
Sure !
I just meant that’s it’s impossible to make a comparison between both real life fighters !
Radium
Ah, yes I see now.
-
I disagree with the sentiment that Falcon is just an F-16 sim. I say it is the first in many aircraft originally envisioned by Spectrum Holobyte and later Microprose in their Electronic Battlefield Series. Case in point, SH after releasing Falcon, developed and released the Hornet and Mig-29.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_(video_game_series)#Falcon_3.0_based_games_.28.22Electronic_Battlefield.22.29
I would say post VR implementation, these shis should be the order of development. Also, the A-10A(and C) is a no Brainer since there are plenty of data and manuals that are ripe for developers. Heck, Ayes, Xis and myself came pretty darn close to what many are suggesting here during the F4 Alliance days with functional releases of aircraft packages for use with the FlyAnyPlanes patch when it came out. Heck, we were pretty close to release of the B-One Bomber too.TheSilkMan, are you still in touch with Aeyes?