I believe it will be coming to the in-sim marketplace at some point. Typically takes a week or two extra for them to get it up in the in-sim marketplace. @DEAN01973 might have more info to share on this aspect.
2 Likes
It will be there, definitely, probably a couple of weeks after the Just Flight launch.
@NeilPearlJam I’ve learned not to feed the trolls, they scuttle away after a while… 
9 Likes
Use the “Flag” function folks. Thanks.
You have to wonder what goes on in the mind of a troll. Like you say, best ignored. I for one am excited for the release. Looking great.
2 Likes
my guess is that some people here own the heatblur tomcat for dcs wich would explain why they are not impressed by this one , wich is my case . im still gonna get it because theres not enough jet fighters in mfs 2020
The DCS Tomcat cockpit looks very different, certainly. Heatblur have gone for a ‘very well used’ look which some people like, though others think is a bit overdone. Personally, I’d be happiest with something in between, but I can understand it if DC Designs want to work along with the MSFS ‘brand new cockpits’ look. It’s maybe unfair to compare the two to closely anyway, since they are built on very different platforms.
1 Like
The cockpit of the DC Designs F-14 does NOT look “brand new”… that I can tell you. I don’t think folks will be disappointed with this bird at all. It’s VERY different from the F-15 and it’s very rewarding to fly. I couldn’t say which I prefer - they just aren’t the same. The F-14 dials up the complexity by quite a bit too.
10 Likes
I wanted this F-14 Tomcat to be as far away as possible from Heatblur’s ( excellent ) F-14. That may seem odd, but it’s the very business model that DC Designs was founded on: “if all that’s available is ultra-detailed versions of an aircraft, build one for the masses that don’t want ultra-detail so that everyone can have a version that they enjoy.”
So, basically, I wanted the cockpit only lightly weathered to represent the aircraft in its prime, as opposed to Heatblur’s “on the verge of being scrapped” look
9 Likes
so that means, the F-14 won’t be high fidelity or even realistic?but there is no ultra-detail tomcat in msfs yet ;/
I think Dean has been clear of the intended target crowd for their products from the start. A full fidelity tomcat would unflyable for most users. The hardcore fans that want that can get the F14 in dcs. You get all the systems you want there … and you can actually use them 
Honestly you would be missing out on so much. So building something with a reasonable amount of realism and fun makes sense in MSFS.
6 Likes
I can appreciate that ‘high detail’ in terms of avionics or flight model would be overwhelming for a lot of users, but the discussion above and subsequent quote concerns visual detail. Frankly that just sounds like an excuse, why would better models and textures diminish anyone’s enjoyment? 
2 Likes
Look at it this way: before the SU5 it was impossible to fly a plane at a decent and stable FPS and we have been developing the plane since before that update. So what’s the use of a challenging plane like this one by adding super textures in 8K, if I can’t get past 15fps? You have to find a balance between performance and quality, not only of what you see visually, but also of the calculations in the background that you are not seeing. It all adds up and down on overall performance: textures, avionics, internal and external visual details (environment included) and animations.
If MSFS used the same engine from Forza Horizon 5 or Forza motorsport 7, we would not be talking about this due to how well that engine handles graphics memory or multicore processes on the CPU. But the engine of this game is what it is and therefore a balance between quality / performance has been sought the most appropriate to what the base game engine offers or lets to do. One of the things that HTML5 panels provide is a high FPS boost (40% has been gained in overall performance with this aircraft and with the F15 compared to the old xml panels) and that has allowed to increase the overall visual quality up to a certain limit.
In short, could the quality be increased? Of course, but for that it is necessary for Asobo to continue improving the base performance of the game so that the frame rate is maintained or improved.
And as a consumer that I am of DCdesings products (I am what you could call an external collaborator) I will tell you that Dean always makes improvements to textures or the overall graphic quality of the plane (and that has been noticeable in the F15 since its launch) but with caution and without sacrificing performance. So those improvements have existed around these months and I am sure they will improve over time. The f15 when it was released almost 8-9 months ago? used 2k textures, and I as a consumer had to disable panels or the HUD to be able to simply… fly (it was not Dean’s fault). Whereas today I enjoy stable rates between 45-60fps with a lot of avionics included (which was not feasible before even with my rtx3080 at 4K, and you shouldn’t need a GPU like this to do so).
Dean is not a conformist person, he is one of the most realistic people and very committed to his work I have ever met. It is not that he is not able to implement what you want (of course he can and I am a witness), but in order to do so he must make hard decisions about what to sacrifice or not and whether it is worth doing it now or waiting a bit.
9 Likes
Sorry, I’m just not buying that the polygonal or textural detail is compromised by technical limitations. How does this explain the gulf in quality between these products and the potential shown by so many other aircraft - both first and third-party?
I’m a 3D modeller by profession and have a very good idea why the DC Designs aircraft consistently look the way they do.
2 Likes
I have answered this question as someone to whom better models and textures harm my enjoyment in this platform: I am a witness to what you say about other aircraft that can be visually more detailed (I do not care if they are third-party or stock), despite the graphic performance in my case is worse and therefore I do not enjoy the experience. If it is not in your case then, I am happy for you.
On the other hand, if you are a 3D modeler by profession, and you have a better solution, maybe you two should have a private conversation. I can’t tell you otherwise :).
2 Likes
I think you’re mistaken in the belief that geometry is expensive to render. It isn’t, any modern GPU eats polygons for breakfast. Materials and shaders are, but that has no bearing on the actual modelled detail.
I did consider offering to help out when the collaborative effort was happening with the F-15. Unfortunately decided I don’t have enough spare time amongst the other things I’ve got going on.
I may be wrong and I am not going to contradict you in your statements since I assume that you have more knowledge than me and it is clear that it is your field of expertise and not mine, you are a designer by profession and I would be a consumer of your design. I just stick to what I see on my screen, the loss of performance may be somewhere else. But there will be some reason that my performance is better in these planes than with the others. It may be a coincidence and the performance that I get here is not related to the rendering or the number of polygons used. But there is something.
I encourage you to consider it or at least exchange your impressions in private. It can always be beneficial to both of you. 
[99% not like the real F14 ]
(Testeamos el nuevo F-14 TOMCAT para MSFS por DC Designs & JUST Flight (Review) - YouTube)
you’re going to have an F-14 reasonably to ready to fly (after DC fixes what ASOBO breaks) when MSFS releases their ‘Top Gun’ expansion…some of you guys should be happy about that at least.
2 Likes
I applaud the effort to bring another aircraft into msfs
But i have serious apprehensions about this msfs tomcat
Assuming heatblur’s tomcat has true to life hud, this msfs tomcat hud contains fictitious elements
I am playing a simulator, not a game
Simulator means some learning is expected (especially complex aircraft like tomcat) and the aircraft is modelled based on real world aircraft. The only difference is low fidelity or high fidelity. I don’t mind to fly a low fidelity aircraft (like TBM930) but the systems have to be real.
I am able to accept a low fidelity tomcat in a simulator but not a tomcat with fictitious systems. Then it is not a tomcat but a make-belief aircraft that is fun to fly. If it is a make belief aircraft then at least it has to be upfront about it, like got gravel vertigo.
4 Likes
How can someone ask for 100% real F14 systems,when there is no battle in MFS.
I mean,it is a fighter jet.It is made for Fighting,not flying and sightseing which is what we do in MFS in addition to some study level Airliners which they are made 100% for what MFS is.Flying ONLY !
What would you do with all the proper 100% systems of a fighter jet ? What would the radar lock on ? clouds ?
Or do you wanna lose fps just for the camera radar screen to show you the river underneath you,for no reason at all ?
Peace guys.I think some of you need to stick with DCS.
It is like me going to DCS and saying " Why the cities and terrain in general isn’t like MFS ? (Cause that was not what was made for duh ? )
Dean and Jack.Keep doing your awesome work my friends🥂
13 Likes