General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
Next military jet for acceleration
SUBS17:
--- Quote from: jimi08 on May 16, 2008, 08:41:42 am ---"I am definitely interested in an F-14 now questions will it be 2 seater and will they model the INS and rampstart reallistically?"
....yeah and maybe they will realistically model the Tomcat's stellar reliability and maintainability record as well. If Microsoft were creating a modern Combat Flight Simulator, I would be all for it as it is a great air-to-air interceptor, but in the Flight Simulator X community, this is really no place for that. Microsoft picked the hornet because it gives the costumer the best of basic, non-combat, military aviation. Something powerful (well compared to the other aircraft that are available in Microsoft's lineup), it's very maneuverable (compared to the F-14), it's still being used in today's U.S. Military (well the C,D,E,F and G variants are) and it gives the consumer the opportunity to have fun doing one of the most demanding feats in aviation, landing on a aircraft carrier. You guys have to remember that FSX is mainly for flying and training in the friendly skies, not combat. As much as some of you would like to, we cannot shoot Phoenix missiles, drop laser-guided bombs and fire Vulcan cannons from our jets. With that being said, I feel that Microsoft, along with Captain Sim and FS Dreamteam did an awesome job and made the right decision with the Hornet. Let the Tomcat R.I.P!
--- End quote ---
Actually the F-14 when first built had a pretty good maintenance record of course any aircraft that gets to the age 20 or more has problems with maintenance especially with the sort of performance the Tomcat has(well beyond that of any version of the bug). Maintenance is also a poor reason not to model an F-14 unless you're doing a full jet combat flight sim with dynamic campaign complete with airframe maintenance then is when you worry about such things. Regarding weapons I believe that it is possible to model weapons modes and delivery and destroy objects on the ground. Regarding radar you can already lock aircraft with the Hornets radar in FSX so a mod could be made which adds such features in FSX. Or you could even use MSESP and model it. Its pointless to mention FSX as just a sim for people to just cruise around in and so not model the F-14 when the F/A-18 was made by adding the CAT you would then have 2 aircraft worth landing on the carrier with. BTW Tomcats are still in active service elsewhere so it ain't RIP yet.
SUBS17:
--- Quote from: jimi08 on May 16, 2008, 08:52:26 pm ---Virtuali,
My point is that the Naval Carrier aviation side of the FSX world has already been covered with the Hornet. Why not venture into some other realm, like combat helos such as the Apache or Cobra maybe? Or maybe the Marine Corps' AV-8B Harrier? Or maybe even the Texan 2? The Harrier and its flight characteristics are a little different than most jets and would give the customer a different flight experience (much like the carrier landings of the hornet and the Red Bull Air Races with the Extra 300). The Texan 2 would be VERY beneficial to all the Naval, Marine Corps, Airforce, and Coast Guard students,future students,"I wanna fly in the military when i grow up" students, since that is the primary joint military trainer for those branches. It is also used as a multi-national trainer as well. It is a very popular, beneficial and capable aircraft. If you make it like you did the Hornet, military flight students/enthusiast as well as turboprop fans from all over the world would be singing your praises.
Razgriz,
I don't think Jack is opting for the creation of the B variant or any other type of Hornet for that matter. It's been done, no reason to redo what already has been done. I think he, like myself, realize that the Tomcat is overhyped, overdone, played out, and everything that it could offer to the FSX world has already been covered by the Hornet. Why not cross over to a different realm of military avaition and give our virtual pilots a different FLIGHT (not combat) experience instead of the same one, but with a Tomcat and Top Gun music playing in the background.
--- End quote ---
The Texan 2 has already been done(i think by Iris) and a fully detailed avionics sim of the texan 2 is also in development for another sim.
http://www.fighterops.com/
Apache is also on the horizon made by these guys
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=3&scr=newslist&lang=en
But they are doing this first
http://www.simhq.com/_downloads/air/black_shark/DCS_video2.zip
As for the F-14 something not yet done properly for any combat jet in FSX a working fully modeled 2 seater. Look at the F/A-18B it doesn't have a back seat modeled whereas the F-14 has that potential if they go the whole nine yards and put a decent pit for the front and backseat it would add alot to FSX. Also dogfighting is possible even if it is just BFM gunzo in simulate and use smoke as an indicator for a kill.
SUBS17:
--- Quote from: jimi08 on May 17, 2008, 01:57:07 pm ---Ok, ok....I see your points about your teams inexperience and Microsoft's flight modeling. That sucks because i believe the Apache or Harrier would be an awesome investment. As far as the A-4 and A-6 go, it's the same thing. It's a jet.....it lands on a boat....it's a challenge. It's kinda like riding a bicycle. It can be a 10-speed, 15-speed, or a 21-speed....if i know how to ride one of them, I can probably ride the rest of them. Looks like the only thing that is changing is the wrapping paper that it comes in. From what it sounds like, I will be getting the same high performance aircraft that can land on a carrier. The whole selling point about having someone sitting in the back seat.....how long do you think that's going to last? From what I've noticed on the multiplayer side, the majority of your customers are young men between the ages of 12-17. Most of these guys dont even have the patience to fly in a formation not alone side in the backseat while the other guy is having all the fun yanking and banking. The "backseat" idea will work for a couple of flights, but most of your audience will quickly opt for doing the flying themselves vs. sitting in the back. Which brings us back to the same thing.....a jet...a boat....same challenge. But I do understand that your company, like Microsoft is a business and it must sell products. The Tomcat is a very popular aircraft, and I'm sure it will be a great hit much like the current acceleration pack is. I must admit that I have used Microsoft Flight Sim in the past, but what has gotten me addicted to this one is not the scenery or realism, it's that fact that it finally brought something different to the table instead of the same Cessnas, Learjets and 747s. Microsoft brought it with the Red Bull Air Races and you guys brought it with your Acceleration Pack. I was just hoping that you guys could keep "changing it up" for a little while instead of possibly becoming a fancier "Abacus Fleet" expansion pack.
--- End quote ---
The A6 and A4 might appear in FS as being similar but both aircraft are quite different and if fully modeled would require alot of studying to learn to fly. The challenge is to make the aircraft detailed enough to make people to want to learn more about the aircraft. As for MP well that is the major problem with FSX MP code has too much lag for decent formations like LO.
jimi08:
Whether its a A-4, A-6, or F-14.....It's still a jet that lands on a boat. I understand that it might take a little extra studying and practice to get the feel of the particular jet, but it's still the same experience. A jet landing on a boat. Sure Iris and other companies of done Apaches and other aircraft, just like there are a TON of Tomcats, but as you stated, there are few that have accurately modeled any of them. Again, the whole "backseat concept" sounds cool in the designing phase, but I really don't think it will do so hot in the real world. I think most of you guys have the mentality that "I will be flying the jet, while the "other guy" will be in the back handling the instruments/systems." With everyone having that mentality, there will not be many people that will be regular or skilled Radar Intercept Officers. Also the whole "backseat concept" is based on playing the sim in multiplayer. If Microsoft tries put all the "bells and whistles" on it, such as FLIR, LANTIRN and the tons of moving control surfaces that are on the Tomcat, it's going to be a memory hog and kill frame rates for many players in the multiplayer sessions. As far as making "mods" to use weapons....FSX is not the place for that. A "modern warfare" combat flight simulator would be the right place for "warheads on foreheads". FSX is meant for people that like practicing flying maneuvers, techniques, radio communications, shooting instrument approaches and checking out the virtual world at 10,000 ft, not shooting at other aircraft from 10 miles. It's kinda like putting a Jeep on a racetrack or a Ferrari on an off-road course, both cars are well suited for the environment that they are designed to be in, but not well suited for EVERY environment. FSX is for civilian/corporate flying not combat dogfighting. The moment Microsoft starts adding guns and missiles to FSX, it then becomes a GAME and not a SIMULATOR. That's why a lot of old-fashioned MSFS guys weren't too happy about the Acceleration Pack because they say it made sim feel more like a game vs. a sim. Again, if Microsoft makes another Combat Flight Simulator utilizing modern aircraft, the Tomcat would be a MUST in my book. But not for FSX.
crim3:
--- Quote from: SUBS17 on May 18, 2008, 08:37:30 pm ---But they are doing this first
http://www.simhq.com/_downloads/air/black_shark/DCS_video2.zip
--- End quote ---
I saw it, too, and the review. Impressive! Everything that the real ship has it's there! I already knew it but, now that I'm seeing it in simhq I'm beginning to be scared. I won't have time to master it the day it's available to the public. Only in my dreams, when I was a teenager eager to learn everything about aviation, a sim for general public so complete could be possible. You young people around here are lucky for living these times of high tech at home in your early years of life.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version