Gripen for BMS. What do you think ?
-
Hello,
I am seriously thinking about a JAS-39 for BMS.
Before making a decision, I would like to open a discussion here with you !
Of course there is pros and cons, and I don’t think there is a perfect answer.
That being said, here is a little poll :
Give me your thoughts !
Radium
-
a flyable Gripen would be fantastic to have!
All the best, Uwe
-
@hoover said in Gripen for BMS. What do you think ?:
a flyable Gripen would be fantastic to have!
All the best, Uwe
Not sure he means flyable at all.
-
Every A/C is effectively flyable.
I voted for the C, as it’s the most widespread variant and most suitable for a wide range of scenarios from ca. 2005 until today. Twinseats make little sense with the present single seat limitations.
-
JAS-39E’s features cannot be modeled… ---- > Pointless to vote on it. In fact many features or possible “gadget” of the C Gripen can’t like the MAWS pod.
Early 2000s Gripen C which has sense until early 2000s. -
C would be a good choice
-
great to try
-
both
we have so many F16 variants…
-
Beautiful Fast Jet - Do It!
-
@Radium ,
-
@LMR-74 Oh ! Philippines Air Force ! I
have a couple friends from Philippines, I would like to visit there one day.
I heard they may buy second hand Gripen. Maybe from Sweden ?
I suppose that Svenska Flygvapnet’s JAS-39C are still in a very good condition and may be sold at a reasonable price, while replacing legacy fleet with JAS-39E…
By the way many people don’t know it, but Philippines was with France the only country to operate export F-8 Crusader, and the sole to operate them as non-naval aviation carrier-borne fighters !
Cheers,
Radium
-
@Radium , Great! I hope that you could be able to make a PAF livery for it, pls let me know once your here in the Philippines I might be able to tour you around some PAF air bases.
-
@LMR-74 Honestly, no problem to make a Philippines livery for you
-
@Radium , I appreciate it very much, Thanks.
-
I’d welcome and fly ANY Gripen as long as it was a decently modeled…hard jet to find info on, though. A good two seat model would be fantastic.
-
@molnibalage said in Gripen for BMS. What do you think ?:
JAS-39E’s features cannot be modeled… ---- > Pointless to vote on it. In fact many features or possible “gadget” of the C Gripen can’t like the MAWS pod.
Early 2000s Gripen C which has sense until early 2000s.Don’t you think is it boring always say this ? always you comes with database and features.
some ppl don’t “fly” something because every features are real modelled .
And If the modell is done than after that easier to upgrade or add some new feature for it than for nothing.
The gripen and so many AC are already part of the database so what is the reason there won’t be a better 3d model for it.
If you don’t want to use those AC which is not equipped those features, so you don’t have to.And you always try to convince everybody that Your argument is the only one right and nobody can make anything else, only what you like.
-
I vote C
-
I voted E, but quite honestly I would love to see this aircraft I’m BMS full stop irrespective of varient.
Good luck with the project.
-
@repvez said in Gripen for BMS. What do you think ?:
@molnibalage said in Gripen for BMS. What do you think ?:
JAS-39E’s features cannot be modeled… ---- > Pointless to vote on it. In fact many features or possible “gadget” of the C Gripen can’t like the MAWS pod.
Early 2000s Gripen C which has sense until early 2000s.Don’t you think is it boring always say this ? always you comes with database and features.
some ppl don’t “fly” something because every features are real modelled .
And If the modell is done than after that easier to upgrade or add some new feature for it than for nothing.
The gripen and so many AC are already part of the database so what is the reason there won’t be a better 3d model for it.
If you don’t want to use those AC which is not equipped those features, so you don’t have to.Do you know how strange top see asking again and again the same nonsense things from ppl. have 0 idea about the code + DB and other limitations?
Even with the a well modeled Gripen on the level of BMS it would mean you essentially fly and F-16C with less HP and weaker performance but with the same or even less type of weapons. Because the Meteor AAM also cannot be modeled and many weapons is no available for the Gripen. Also the cockpit will be just a the carbon copy of the F-16.
What will be the next?
Asking whether and X-Wing on TIE Fighter should be modeled…?BTW I just explained AGAIN what would look like an C Gripen.
Just imagine a E Gripen in BMS which does not have:- AESA radar
- MAWS
- Meteor AAM
And you always try to convince everybody that Your argument is the only one right and nobody can make anything else, only what you like.
This is simply not true, but I’m used to such statements from you and others… When you imagined how should be make a ray traced based radar model and the countless other “brilliant ideas”.I just simply explained why is pointless to have a detailed Gripen E while it would behave like an F-16C 50/52. While in RL they are quite different in avionics as well as in flight performance.
Even if you knew all the necessary things about the engine for the Gripen E, the F-16 Block 60/70 would still be the more logical choice. But for any of these planes way too more thing is classified to model them. For ex. have you ever seen the MFD pages of the Gripen E or Block 60/70?
Moving map even on today’s F-16s is not a rare thing why we still do not have in the game.
And you and lot off ppl. dreaming about planes with MANY subsystems which do not exist in the game at any level. For God Sake even the PESA radar of the SAMs do not have real modeled radar.
-
@molnibalage Hello Molni,
You know what ? I am not discussing your points, some are obviously valid, some are far less relevant but I don’t want to debate, because I know there is no way you will change a glimpse of your point of view, which the prerequisite of an mature discussion.
That being said, I suggest you to lower your tone a little bit, because people you are talking to here may have better knowledge than you in DB and coding, you just can’t know exactly who you are talking to.
Also, I am sorry that this happy thread is getting darken by your words. You can just tell : Gripen series are not relevant for BMS in my opinion because it doesn’t fit the realism I look for. And that’s all. It’s respectful, firm, humble, and you participated.
Instead of this, you need to show off how superior you are, and this makes people feel unease. I am not talking about me because I am used to you, and I honestly waited to your reaction about this Gripen thread, hoping from you a couple of positive comments.
I remember once upon a time one guy who requested a F-20 Tigershark, which would have been realistic for your theater, from it’s requester’s point of view. Some would have told that this aircraft never became operational, and would have lead to a lot of speculations and inventions. Some would have even argued that it would have been “just another strange idea of Radium”. And you know what ? I feel it would be really cool to have somewhere a F-20 in a theater. But it’s our own perception of realism.
I know that it’s hard for you, but please remember that you are no master here, and no one is : I hate heroes. I am sure that you are a very nice guy, and I would love to debate with a beer with you somewhere (maybe you wouldn’t).
Keep calm, BMS is just a game !