[BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team
-
Since Falcon BMS models a full-scale war, modelling other jets than the F-16 in high-fidelity makes perfect sense to me. One of the really cool things in the campaigns is seeing other jets take off, meet them at the tanker, have Mirage’s do TARCAP etc.
In my view, making the other jets flyable is just a natural next step since the war-game aspect and campaigns already allude to that. I could just as well be in that Hornet Escort flight or in the Mirage TARCAP flight. It’s all BMS canon.
Next to the F-16, my personal preference is the Hornet just for the added challenge of carrier landing. You can execute your mission but will you be able to land safely? Or basket refuel?
Thanks for everything that BMS offers, looking forward to U3 !
-
@regev I’ll give you cudos to have taken the time and illustrated the entire BMS roadmap on MS Paint. Now I know what’s really going on behind the scenes. In fact, I think I can make an F16 simulator with that now. It will have link 16.
-
PvP, F-15C… Mig-29 and SU-27 seem to be around the corner.
I wonder if PvP would be a motivation for F-4/A-6 vs MiG-17/21, that would be some dev without too much avionics investment. Except avionics could be the other motivation, or the motivation.
Just a thought anyway, block 15 still need MFDs to work, for now.
-
Guys take a step back and take a deep breath. I don’t think we’re in the position to tell any of the BMS devs what they should or shouldn’t do. Every one of us have some preferences of what we’d like to see in next updates, but in the end it’s up to each dev what he(she?)'ll do in his free time. It might be new fancy gfx, new planes, some super extra features of F-16 or just plain nothing. And each of those options are fine, except tle last one which would be kinda sad, but still fine and fair.
BMS 4.37u2 is already pretty enjoyable, I don’t think there’s any need to rush u3.@LorikEolmin for blk15 (or any A model) it needs new pit, SCP screen, radar A/A pages, some tweaks to the HUD and radar A/G pages, simpler Mav/GBU15 display, pure INS nav (that one could be handy for current Viper blocks being part of GPS fail/jamming simulation) , some simplifications to HOTAS calls , new way to interact with A/c systems: radio/nav etc… via knobs and numeric pad on the left console (TBH I’d love to find how this one works).
-
i think we should look forward to 4.38 only
-
@Mav-jp said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@drtbkj said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@Mav-jp said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@drtbkj said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@MCDeedle said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@MaxWaldorf Eh I only bring it up because it would add a lot of variety without needing to model a lot of complicated avionics and computer systems.
Wouldn’t it?
Hi, McDeedle. You need to keep in mind that in BMS is bound to the Viper avionics. So, what specifically are you seeking? You’re looking for real old school maybe try the A-10C without radar, TACAN, etc. If you specifically want WWII, then that’s an issue.
this is false information !!
BMS is NOT bound to f16 avionics at all , best proof beeing the f15 that is currently under development with totally different avionics
Well, when the Eagle comes out, and is refined, then I will happily amend that statement. .However, it’s a moot point. I was answering McDeedle , who asked about other, possibly specific to WWII, avionics. And, whether he used Viper or F-15 avionics, he still would not have the old-school/more austere avionics he asked about. So, with all due respect, my statement was not false. My hope remains that in the future that won’t be the case.
BMs team can implement whatever avionics and system they want.
The day BMs wants to implement a ww2 plane there will be no issue to implement all systems related
Your statement is not valid , period
I have no desire to get into an argument, so let me say this. Yes, the BMS Devs can do what they want when they want, But, again answering what McDeedle seemed to be asking was my goal . And, right now the only fully developed avionics suite is the Viper. And, just for the record, I don’t mean to belittle the work being done on the Eagle. But the fact remains that it is a WIP, and it is a modern suite. So, there is NO option for a simpler avionics suite, at least that we could do or you have interest in doing(which apparently you don’t, and I understand your position ) .
So, I stand by my statement. I have to say, again with all due respect, that I do not like being called a liar. I put way too much effort, for myself and the OFM, to accept that.
Now, to avoid further escalation, this will be my last statement on this subject. -
@okayasugf said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@drtbkj as mav said, its just a matter of interest and time, anything is possible with the advent of the f15c
Hi, Okay. I concur, and have never said otherwise.
-
@jayb said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
Since Falcon BMS models a full-scale war, modelling other jets than the F-16 in high-fidelity makes perfect sense to me. One of the really cool things in the campaigns is seeing other jets take off, meet them at the tanker, have Mirage’s do TARCAP etc.
In my view, making the other jets flyable is just a natural next step since the war-game aspect and campaigns already allude to that. I could just as well be in that Hornet Escort flight or in the Mirage TARCAP flight. It’s all BMS canon.
Next to the F-16, my personal preference is the Hornet just for the added challenge of carrier landing. You can execute your mission but will you be able to land safely? Or basket refuel?
Thanks for everything that BMS offers, looking forward to U3 !
Good post, Jayb. That is the beauty of the platform BMS gives us. In fact, add carrier-based tankers to the list.
-
@everyone this is a status report… Not a wish list…
Let’s keep it that way!
Thank you
-
Some guys seems that haven’t read this post.
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/topic/586/hot-list?_=1697404754684&lang=el
Might be old and links are off but read until the hotlist starts.
Just read it . -
@MaxWaldorf i believe that there is a whish list in the forum. Guys can read the hotlist text first and then they can contribute to the wish list thread along thinking of actually how to assist and contribute to the community.
-
@Killroy not everyone has this preference for the F-16c…
In reality everyone has its own preferences…mine is for the Ef-2000 for example…I would pay 500 euros for a proper simulator of it. -
@Virus said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@Killroy not everyone has this preference for the F-16c…
In reality everyone has its own preferences…mine is for the Ef-2000 for example…I would pay 500 euros for a proper simulator of it.This is about it… http://wargameguru.weebly.com/classic-review---eurofighter-2000.html
-
@Icer I still play it from time to time…
A modern version of it…exactly the same, but with modern graphics and VR support would be my dream. -
I fear you’ll have a little bit more to wait, then. Heatblur on “that other milsim” will release what you wish for, someday…
-
@P-J said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@molnibalage F-104 is also outdated for BMS but it has a cockpit in BMS
It is the heritage of the FreeFalcon. As I can recall Qawa made it.
No matter how nice the frame itself the plane if way out out timeframe. -
@Virus said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@Killroy not everyone has this preference for the F-16c…
In reality everyone has its own preferences…mine is for the Ef-2000 for example…I would pay 500 euros for a proper simulator of it.Good Day, Virus. I’m curious if you have tried the EF in an OFM Theater. If memory serves, that is a jet that has “seen some love”.
We would be appreciative of more feedback from someone who knows the jet. -
@Virus said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
@Killroy not everyone has this preference for the F-16c…
In reality everyone has its own preferences…mine is for the Ef-2000 for example…I would pay 500 euros for a proper simulator of it.It is not possible to create a proper simulator because most of the advanced avionics of the EF2000 is classified, not mentioning its flight performance. When anybody thinks about a “proper simulator” is is better look back in time, far, far than early 2000s.
The SAMs and every other things became so advanced thanks to the better HW + SW which makes literally impossible to simulate then as individual systems. In fact even the SA-2/3/5 legacy systems are modeled on so “primitive” level compared to airplanes which is hard to imagine. Not even their some submodes and antenna behavior types are modeled. Just the difference between half leading and three point guidance. They have quite good missile kinematics, not so bad reaction time modeling and maybe, maybe the antenna beamwidth for RWR and now they have (as I know) some FRQ/WL modeling.
If you say that F-16C Block XY is 90% accurate and detailed compared to RL the SAMs are about ~ 20% or even lower. If we consider the reaction time, the information flow in an IADS and we go beyond legacy systems this is even lower…
If you asked me not a new plane but a better general environment is a better goal, is more easy to achieve and you can have a declassified stuff for them.
-
@molnibalage said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
It is the heritage of the FreeFalcon. As I can recall Qawa made it.
No matter how nice the frame itself the plane if way out out timeframe.look at minutes 3:20
Eric Aeyes had done it for FreeFalcon/RedViper.
I only collaborated with him on the DXM conversion. -
@Mav-jp said in [BMS Roadmap 4.37 U3] News from the BMS Team:
Remember falcon 3.0 MIG 29 module ? Why do you think our glorious dev ancestors have done a mig29 in falcon series ?
Because PvP is a very important part of the game and BMS is meant to die if we don’t offer multi platform to play with in MP. It would die by lack of users and it would die by lack of developers.
I always find this a tough question. Which red aircraft match in PvP with an F-16 block 50/52, fits into the 2000s, and is not way beyond at avionics and AA missiles? Duck hunting is fun, but only for the side with the shotgun