so is a simplified radar even a possiblity or is that considerd weaponry somehow
LOL. Why drive a bus when you can drive a sports car?
Flight of the Intruder came a short time after Top Gun but covered other important aspects of USN carrier operations. You had A2A refueling, foul weather and night launching and recovery, A2G attack and so on, featuring the A6 variants.
A module for MSFS that features moving and functioning launch and recovery carriers, along with USN and other nationality assets aircraft and helicopters, sling loads, a2a refueling capability and better radar - also maybe with carrier specific ATC would not only be welcome - but would be a game changer.
Microsoft/Asobo had no issue modeling machine guns and weapons controls on the Reno planes, even if they are non-functional. So itâs not entirely impossible we wonât see similar in other DLC add-ons, nor should it be against the rules here to merely discuss such things since theyâre part of the official sim content.
I welcome the accurate depiction of these aircraft, but itâs actually quite hypocritical of them to allow this, while not allowing other third party Marketplace vendors to have historically (and currently) accurate, non-functional models on their aircraft like the Milviz Corsair and FI Spitfire.
3 Likes
Thatâs exactly what GA and commercial aviation is, we excitedly want to fly cargo and passengers all over the world.
Why add tanks to a bus simulator?
2 Likes
dude i love that idea that would be so fun
1 Like
thanks for finding this to show him
This is a great idea, and it could be extended to the Reno Racers as well, breathing new life into whatâs currently a dead add-on. Dogfighting with electronic targeting/locks would probably be way more fun in the P-51âs and T-6âs.
1 Like
I love the idea and will buy it if the models are improved
you should work for microsoft with these ideas.
I hope they do go this route
this would also keep the game rating as e for everyone i think
1 Like
although im not sure because the milviz p51 is not a official product in the marketplace
i could be wrong
This post is nonsense on the face of it⊠FSX was a garbage fire of broken dreams. FS2020 has its issues but it leaves all the other games in the dirt, or in the air, or whatever the place is that planes go when nobody uses them⊠Any airport in Connecticut?
what are you talking about.
They have achieved something no other game has and that is a almost one to one world.I know some aircraft need alot of work but they do update there aircraft regularly so there is not need to be so harsh
I donât have an official answer.
Hereâs one perspective though after having seen the thought process of MS through the eyes of their first parties (i.e., Asobo, Gaya, Working Title, etc).
MS is historically been a survey sim - meaning a lot of planes, some depth, but more a balance of a working aviation environment - airports, weather, ATC, and a reasonably detailed inventory of planes that cover the gamut of aircraft today. Thatâs still true of MSFS.
Any effort to add or improve has to be taken into consideration as to how wide the effect might be - so notably Working Title has prioritized the order in which they will improve FMS - starting with the popular G1000, but then working their way over to the more numerous units like the 430/530 (donât ask me how they plan to co-exist with PMS - thatâs not an answer I have) - so bang for the buck - how many more planes can they improve the experience on.
Take that to your radar question - how many planes will even a basic working A2A radar affect? Yep. What level of effort would it take to create a basic A2A and how much time and resource would it be taking away from many other line items on the Roadmap (which youâve undoubtedly seen)? How many users would really know how to use the A2A, and to what purpose? If thereâs no aerial combat, what would the practical functionality be in the sim to enabling it? Thatâs not to say it wouldnât be cool - I mean I would use it, but Iâm also not representative of the bulk of MSFS flyers.
So in my mind, cool to have, but from a Project Management view - limited resources and money - unless it shows up on the Roadmap and it makes sense for the Product VIsion, itâs likely not happening.
Which aircraft r we getting?
The screenshots I posed are of official Asobo Reno Racer aircraft.
i agree i hope the f18 we have now is just a placeholder for the topgun update but did you see the dev q and a stream if not someone asked what the next sim update will be about and they said they will be adding the cfd for the sessna and they also said they are bringing a LARGE amount of improvments to the f18 and he also said that when they update it,it will be super cool to use now.Not sure what they mean by that but there is a possiblity of radar and fcs pages becoming operatable but this is purley speculation like most of this thread
1 Like
They were obligated to show the aircraft as they appear in real life. Thatâs part of the licensing requirements. And it was a nod to attempt to recreate as detailed a plane as they could given the limitations of the Product Vision as I mentioned before.
@SkipTalbot - if you think itâs hypocritical, kindly send that feedback via Zendesk. Iâm not the one who made that decision, Iâm simply pointing out what the limitations were regarding this particular DLC. I donât think itâs hypocritical if it was contractual obligations to maintain as realistic an appearance from a visual asset.
There is a great transcript of that Q&A by our hardworking Mod @N316TS. Martial certainly makes a comment about FA-18 improvements, but doesnât detail what. SU9 is only a few weeks away, so I think patience is the watchword.
2 Likes
Nah, thatâs just a waste of time.
That also isnât true since the weapons controls I posted above are from a generic version of a Reno Racer, a fictional version Asobo created that doesnât even exist in real life. So itâs much more likely they just have their policies and choose when or when not to follow them.
1 Like