Is the F-4 Phantom II the Most Important DCS Modules Yet?

www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...
store.heatblur.com/products/d...
PHH72

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Apologies for the background music volume, which seemed to rise above the levels set in editing in the final rendering and upload.

[@F22raptor46]

Music volume was fine

[@joshuapurdy7065]

song name?

[@maxjpind]

I think the feature that allows you to both read the manual in-cockpit, AND find a particular feature just by clicking on the control inside the cockpit, are game changers and should be considered standard practice for all future full-fidelity modules. Hopefully also to be retrofitted to the previous modules as well! 🤞🏻

[@michaelthebarbarian3380]

THAT is an amazing feature! I hope they retro the Cat with this.

[@billpii6314]

I liked that one too.

[@robertkelly3186]

In response to your title question - Yes. The Phantom is THE most important module. Its a cold war aircraft that can be just as relevant in the early cold war setting fighting against Mig-15s as it can be relevant in later cold war settings. It is a true jack of all trades, allowing pilots who have a preference for A2A or A2G to fly and employ it the way it suits them. I will be forever grateful to Heatblur for this.

[@jacobbaumgardner3406]

It’s the “missing link” in the evolutionary timescale of DCS module creation.

[@robertkelly3186]

@@jacobbaumgardner3406 You said it more succinctly than I did.

[@slowhornet4802]

I wonder if they include a F-4F ICE. Probably not, but with a more advanced radar and AIM-120s it would be an interesting BVR fighter. Especially since it was quite fast.

[@thurbine2411]

And their new way of simulating the aircraft as well as their new EM simulation and jester 2.0 will be important for all coming and already existing heatblur models as well. Hopefully all aircraft with rwr in dcs can take part of this development

[@kilianortmann9979]

And is also highly relevant as post cold war OpFor aircraft.

[@wabbit234]

People like to say that each plane in DCS is like a game in and of itself, but the F-14 is the only one that feels like that to me. With all the training missions, campaigns, extra instant action missions and stand alone missions. Too many modules are very scattershot in their feature set in terms of extras, and it's the little extra bits and pieces that actually make if feel like it's worth the money I think.

[@paristo]

That is the core problem of the DCS itself. Lack of content. It is not for joke to say DCS stands for Digital Cockpit Simulator. As once you spend time in DCS with all the modules, one thing comes obvious, and it is lack of content. You have three main things to fix that out of the box: 1) Module developer to invest time to create quality content (training missions, single missions, campaigns) to come installed with the module. 2) To buy some made quality campaigns, and this is bad as this should never be required to get at least 50+ hours out from module itself before investing more money to someone's else missions. 3) Do it yourself with mission editor. I leave the community made missions etc out, as those are not usually quality ones (there are, just that not most isn't) and especially to get a whole campaign (7-10 different missions, each having 3-4 sorties). That is where the DCS World really falls apart, because quickly player needs to invest time for all kind scripts and so on, to start making the missions by themselves. And that is a rabbit hole no paying customer should be required to go through. Like think about old school games, like Battlefield or Counter-Strike etc, if you would need to start making all the rules and item values etc yourself, before you get to play it on official map? And part of the problem is that DCS lacks a units, the whole warfare. It is currently even today with 2.9 version pretty same as it was 15 years ago. Graphics are majorly improved, redone etc. But we are still in the same "take-off, fly on range, drop some bombs, be happy". Only way to break out from that is when someone has spent time to create proper campaign with lots of radio voices and lot of scripted tasks etc. That is when you can immerse yourself to put time to learn and to do sorties. IMHO it is time that ED starts to collect community made content, that gets voted by the community, polish them and then offer in official kits for download via module manager.

[@thurbine2411]

⁠@@paristothat is why I still fly il2(and the cost and not as big variety of ww II dcs)

[@paristo]

@@thurbine2411 IL2 fits for those who want ww2 and nothing else. That is it's downside. But you get more fun in the long run. This is as well why I play old 90's games, as they have more content for flight simulation than DCS has. What is silly...

[@algroyp3r]

@@paristo Very true. Most modules don't even have comprehensive training missions, they cover maybe 1/2 of what you need. Most paid campaigns are also of average quality at best for a professional product. Missions are simple, voice over amateur, and scripts often break or feel very artificial. Multiplayer is where the content is, but that's up to players to create. And I don't think they are given tools to do it. We need a dynamic campaign that just works. If we look at Enigma's Cold War, it's a brilliant effort by them, but still feels like a mod hacked together, which is what it is. ED should provide scripts, tools, etc. to make an idea like this work professionally out of the box.

[@paristo]

@@algroyp3r Sadly the multiplayer is where the players are not. ED has multiple times revealed that their statics is that 10% of the players are playing multiplayer, 90% is playing single player. And considering 9:1 ratio of customers being limited to their own missions, or someone's else made missions (and sold to them!), that is catastrophic! That is unacceptable! ED should have 10 years ago redone the whole AI system. Like before any Hornet or anything else, when they still had just KA-50 and A-10C! I have told this to many people multiple times, but the challenge ED has, is that they can't do a thing about it, without breaking compatibility to everything they have done to this date, outside the cockpit. They need to redo the communication system, that the current VoIP system is opening possible, as that same and one system is thing that needs to be used not just to Human Human communication, but as well Human AI and AI AI communication! The next major thing is simulation of the radio system. That includes not just radar, but as well radio systems. Every unit that has a radio, must be limited to the simulation of radio. So one unit with handheld radio can not talk to another unit opposite side of the mountain! They can if it is on opposite side of the valley! And small handheld radio will not have power or antenna to transmit and receive radio signal past horizon, or even from 30-50 km away. So one JTAC on the ground will not be able to transmit to a pilot 30 km away up in the high. You need to be at "close-proximity" for the radios to work. This kind system then as well includes all radars. So what they are trying now to do, but with all weather effects, the trees, bushes, snow, sea etc, all that is to affect radio signals. So flying in a bad weather means as well bad radio capabilities when in specific frequencies and powers. And this leads to the AI part, where every unit needs to be simulated by creating it by the purpose of the individual soldier in the real military. Every human has five sensors: 1) Vision 2) Hearing 3) Feeling 4) Smell 5) Taste We can scrap smell and taste out of the list required. Feeling is little questionable, but it can be scratched as well over. That leaves to two sensors we must have for every soldier. 1) vision 2) hearing Every soldier must have possibility to simulate those. So when you put a infantry man standing in the desert looking north. He will not see a thing that is happening behind him. So anything in the south and he is blind for it. When the soldier is relaxed, he looks now and then around, not so much up, but around. And that soldier might spot something moving when large enough, but nothing tiny. So small fighter flying 5 km from his position and that soldier is not to spot that at all. Unless actively searching and trying to find something in tiny sector, like 10 x 20 degree area in the horizon. There are scanning methods that are trained to people to maximize the probability to see something. So at "green" state the soldier has example 90 x 20 degree FOV cone to see something large at X distance. In "red" state (alerted) that soldier has vision like 30 x 10 degree, maybe even less like 10 x 5 degree. Scanning zone and speed changes, where relaxed doesn't look around fast and much, where alerted will constantly search something when in search, and when concentrated then focused to one small area and blind to everything else. It is like a short range and unreliable radar that soldier vision is. Put that soldier inside a vehicle, with windows, and that shrinks dramatically. Put that vehicle moving, and that vision cone is now only about 10 x 5 degrees. It is like driving on the highway in car, you don't really see what is happening aside of you and even less what is anywhere above you unless just straight ahead and coming at tree top level. Now put that same soldier inside a armored vehicle, where only way to see outside is to use a small periscope, that offers something like 7x5 degree vision cone at best. No visibility up in the air. No visibility to anywhere else than the directions those persicopes are placed and where vehicle turns. Then same thing is with hearing, instead it is more question of the signal-noise ratio (SNR). So when soldier is outside middle of nowhere, that soldier will hear a supersonic fighter flying past him at 5-10 km away. Make it subsonic and you have different detection capability. And that sensor is more like a general direction with 10 degree accuracy but still 360 around him. Little bit like a RWR sensor is. Unreliable in precision, but capable to detect things. And the noise-signal ratio is simple, every vehicle has a noise level when running engine. Every gun firing has effect to change the SNR ratio. So when soldier is firing his assault rifle, he is in combat, and hearing is almost zero, so even when a tank drives near by, it can be unaware it, or attack helicopter flies somewhere under 2 km from his position. Longer the soldier is in high noise environment, lower the signal received is. So now you can have units that doesn't really hear a thing unless it is high explosive or something very obvious near by. And if this soldier is inside a running vehicle, don't even think about it hearing a helicopter or fighter flying past 500 meters or so.

[@buzzlite3]

Now available in the DCS store. 25% off.

[@rwhunt99]

I see the trajectory of modules getting more and more sophisticated and I believe ED cannot stand there and do nothing about it, so I see a F-18c -2.0 along with an F-16c -2.0 in the future. I like the ability to change things, I like the ability to check the manual on the fly. I do like the systems wear and tear but I do want to be able to turn that feature on and off if I choose. I intend to buy the F-4 as soon as it goes on sale at the DCS shop. but I don't think I will buy into the memorabilia and shirts. I grew up with F-86's, F-84's and F-100's along with B-52's and B-58's and when I was in the military, I welcomed the F-4's flying over head and dreaded the F-104's of the Luftwaffe.

[@Viper._.-]

For the f 16 2.0 and the f 18 2.0 they should make different variants

[@Church152]

As someone who only flies Cold War I can’t wait to have a jet that I can run in most servers without changing my jet and giving me far more functionality adding a wider air to ground functionality with anti radiation missiles and TV guided weapons

[@OnlyNapalm]

I agree with You. Very cool module , indeed. Heatblur has promised naval version. That will be the thing 👍

[@Kiwi_FIFO]

I will buy this module for sure, everything about this was done right, especially the downplayed prerelease hype. Even if I don't fly it much, happy to support Heat Blur and their amazing work.

[@coreybielas3246]

Lofl, a lil bit early to say "everything about this was done right" isn't it?

[@Kiwi_FIFO]

Perhaps, maybe I should have just said, better then RazBams F15.. 2 weeks

[@coreybielas3246]

@Kiwi_FIFO I'd wait at least 3 years following a dcs module's public release before making any "this module is great success" declarations

[@ryanw1433]

It looks like it’s alive - the rattles, the inertia when it rolls and yaws

[@pi.actual]

So far I have only bought the F-14 and as a DCS newbie yea, it's tough to learn but the advice was to buy the airplane you love. I was in the Navy from 72-76 when we got the first Tomcats to replace the Phantoms. When I master the F-14 I'll probably buy the F-4 next.

[@mdu2112]

It's a great aircraft but a handful.

[@krisdellalawson5484]

I am constantly blown away by ED and its third party developers. I resisted the F15E for months just because its hard to keep all these different jets in your head and be somewhat respectable in employing them in the sim, but man am I glad I picked it up. The F15 SE is incredible so far and it looks like Heat Blur is about to set a new gold standard. The Phantom is the one I've REALLY been waiting for, born in 78 I remember airshows full of Phantoms, Tomcats, Skyhawks etc. How anyone can claim DCS is not BY FAR the best SIMULATION out there is beyond me. It isn't even close.

[@mrshar1000]

In all honesty yes, the answer is yes, I find that ED and other developers (not all and I understand that there are good people in ED and in other devs) like to hide behind excuses, some of it justified and you can never expect anything to be perfect. But the community does not just love heatblur because they build some icon aircraft, yeah that helps, but its because of the passion and effort they put, its not just another job to them, its a piece of history that they want to build and give to the community and others to experience and enjoy. Even if they are just in it for the money, if this is what they can do in just 2 years, then other devs should take notice, and maybe some should be ashamed, but not discouraged, I just hope that they take something from Heatblurs F4.

[@slowhornet4802]

Well, I guess you need to have some financial power to work as Heatblur does. I wonder how many copies the best selling module (any developer) ever sold. If you sell about 20k units at about 50 USD per unit you have just 1 million USD (revenue, there are taxes etc.). Sounds a lot but how many people are involved over how many years? And I am not sure if any module sold that many units. I think HB goes into the right direction with this "module based" approach of aircraft systems. It might be much more efficient to create new modules. It might also be make modules more consistent. E.g. if you have a much more realistic radar simulation, making your radar losing lock more often in unfavorable conditions, a FC3 module with (in real life) worse sensors might be able to perform better in DCS. I think DCS would benefit a lot if the basic physics would be kind of enforced. E.g. what ED seems to do with weapons: a certain A2A missile should have the same performance (range, acceleration, speed) independent of the platform. Somebody said it a couple of months ago: in theory a consistent physics system which would be used by all module makers would result in aircrafts which would not perform true to real life, but it would be a much more consistent experience. Anyway, give me the F-4 and the F-104, and I will pretend I do not see where DCS is lacking (campaign, supply chains, persistent units and supplies, which are managed over a dynamic campaign or at least from mission to mission (a bit like DI Tornado campaign).

[@joachimbrand2314]

Heatblur never disappoints. They are the No.1 Developer for DCS.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Agreed, they have a successful formula, and are working with aircraft that are highly nostalgic and therefore popular, but are old enough to recreate without running into upfront challenges in recreating electronic systems. It's generally really good for DCS and I enjoy their approach to solving complex development like AI backseaters and interactive manuals and interfaces. They're very, very good at this.

[@Barney-ic3uy]

I was blown away by the release video and Heatblurs' comments /announcements. I agree, it's going to be the module that changes any future modules within DCS and raises the bar to all other developers. I honestly can't wait for it to be released.

[@TomWilson-sy4jo]

Personally I have been waiting for the F4 for some time. I have several modules but I can say may favorites are the analog aircraft, the A4,F5,Mig-21 and occasionally the F-14(though I think it is the best module in the game) are the ones I find myself flying the most often, so for me the Phantom is an aircraft that perfectly captures that niche. Also it is an aircraft that was in most major combat from the 1960s- through to Desert Storm so the number of campaigns is quite large, furthermore it is a platform that accomplished just about any mission asked of it whether it be Air to Ground, Air to Air, or SEAD. So for me it really captures that genre of aircraft that I am most interested in, and knowing that Heatblur are making let's me know it will be a quality product

[@agidotexe7167]

was waiting for your video on this, always love your input Prickly!

[@GolddenWaffles]

The Phantom is going to bring ground breaking dynamics to the game. I can't wait!!! I'm way too excited!!!

[@silentone11111111]

No more spamram . A more peer to peer fight is a great thing. For one that grew up in the cold war , I’d call this my no1 most wanted plane in game. 🎉

[@CaptMelonfish]

I love to fly the scooter, and I really want to see more of that 60's/70's cold war stuff, this module will happily span from this period right up to the Gulf War, it's got legs. The features they're showing off are insane, I genuinely can't wait, manual on the fly looks like a new standard I hope others adopt quickly.

[@thurbine2411]

I hope we get as good simulations of mig 23 and draken and many more

[@keithbuddrige5064]

Brilliant Video, thank you so much for the great quality you make. It is loved and appreciated.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Thank you!

[@alpenfoxvideo7255]

that "persistence" of wear and tear was present in some old modules for FSX! like the B-17 or B-377

[@nickhshshzh5979]

so far i feel that it will be a major module for dcs, hopefully though most of the player base can handle the calculations going on for component based simulations

[@jl9952]

Very cool looking model. Some kind of pilot and helmet customization option would be nice for other modules as well. Maybe ED could add later some kind of avatar lobby scene for mission planning and walking around planes, etc. Immersion and smaller details around flying is always nice when other stuff already works well.

[@utley]

Heatblur raising the bar once again...always with a swing and home run out of the ballpark. Ill forever be an instant buy customer of HB. But maybe its time they put their A6E AI tanker out there?

[@rmp5s]

I don't think I've ever pre-ordered something so fast...can't wait!!

[@michaelthebarbarian3380]

Bought mine Day 1, Baby! It will be nice to learn this beast with the Tomcat.

[@rama7267]

11:35 Dont know if you are familiar with Rally sports games. But there's also something like a campaign where you go through a championship e.g. "Rally championship Finland" and there you will drive through different roads on different occasions and after every tournament your car will carry wear and tear of different components and you only have limited resources to repair it and sometimes if you are reckless you would have caused such great damage that you get automatically disqualified.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Haven't played it for a while, but yes love the rally games. Too many Sims, not enough time to play them.

[@charlesc7723]

I think the gen 3 jets should be easier to model given the access to them. They sit in a place where there are many examples of them left to use and living pilots to use as SME’s. Older aircraft don’t enjoy the availability of either and more modern aircraft, a lot is still classified. Heatblur raised the bar once again with the Phantom and I’m glad to see it because it will push other module makers to do more. I will have to wait for release, but if it comes with most of its weapons and systems on day one, that is a big deal for me. That the F-15E, which while great visually, did not release with much in the way of weapons, limits the aircraft. Also hats off to Areges for making multiple versions of an aircraft, which is great, but Heatblur also had this with the F-14A and B.

[@nicksmith2361]

Wasn’t really that enthusiastic about the F4 but having watched your video on it and all the features it will have I think it’s a must have now for me! Thanks 👍 Blackburn Buccaneer next!

[@imellor711]

Like you PH, I'm pretty stocked over the release of this module as it looks brilliant, with some cool features, and I'm looking forward to purchasing it and using it in the game.

[@ryanhooper4660]

Flight manual interface looks like it'll be amazing!

[@Agilaz89]

Assuming Heatblur delivers everything the trailer has promised; yes (and they haven't given me a reason to doubt them yet). Heatblur is pushing a whole lot of innovation with features that no other modules currently have, but hopefully sets a new standard and encourages all the other developers to implement a lot of these features into both future modules and updates of the old modules.

[@MF-og1ct]

I am eagerly anticipating this module

[@paulf1389]

Really impressed with the pilot animation. A lot better that the mannequins that we normally get occupying the cockpit.

[@MrScar88]

Thank you for this video, gave you a sub. I would say yes. Not only because of the new tech goodies, a bit of roleplay (character customization that turns DCS in an RPG a bit) and other stuff, but also because its a great addition to the Cold War scenarios which in my honest opinion are the most diverse ones in the DCS environment. Speaking from the perspective of capability only, equally important to the F-4 i would say will be the Mig-23 done by Razbam. I love the F-4 although i am a rotorhead by heart, but i think the Mig-23 will make a great and also a necessary addition for Redfor. Hence, making the Mig-23 equally important like the Phantom. But thats just my opinion, that might be biased since i prefer Cold War stuff.

[@DasScaramooch]

The obvious extension to this amazing project would be a Heat Blur Mig - 21.

[@Savage_Viking]

Absolutely the most important. It was the most important jet fighter of the 20th century. DCS was not complete without it. There were notable aircraft such as the F-15, F-16, F-18 and even the F-14 that were significant in their own right but over 5,000 F-4's were produced. There were others but the F-4 was the standard.

[@Fred-rv2tu]

I still write notes/frequencies etc on my canopy but I use a dry erase marker instead of a grease pencil.

[@nath-hh2ff]

My answer to the question you asked is yes. Not because of the particular aircraft though. I thing the module raises the bar for new modules. I'm someone who plays the game due to the high fidelity and the new f-4 raises that bar in all the ways you discussed. Personally I'll buy the module. I play warbirds through gen 3 jets and this is one of my favorites. I can remember seeing them in the sky and loved the looks, noise, and smoke.

[@Karl-Hungus]

All I can say is I am glad that HB was the ones to make the F-4....I am very much a Cold War aircraft fan and the Phantom is a aircraft I grew up around and have loved all my life. I think HB has created something that will be massive in the DCS and the flightsim community... As it seems there are many other cold War fighters in the pipe line right now for DCS its going to be interesting the see where it all goes...

[@speed150mph]

Outside of the fact it’s an F4, I’m really looking forward to what this brings to the table and the gauntlet it throws down to others. I especially want to see the new component based model with wear tracking. In all my years, I only flew one aircraft that did something similar to that: the accusim B-17 for FSX. That aircraft had everything simulated right down to individual cylinders that wore out overtime on the wright cyclone engines. Things would break depending on wear, different parts of the aircraft would behave different depending on aircraft time, wear, and just because sometimes engines or actuators aren’t exactly the same. It came together to make the aircraft truly feel alive, like it was an actual machine you were interacting with and not just something on a screen. I really hope heatblurs new system lives up to that. I’m pretty dedicated to the F/A-18 but I might need to consider the F4 now too along side the F-15

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Great points.

[@RV6Pilot]

I hope modders will someday make an RF-4C tactical day/night recon. That’s a whole different kind of recon mission than satellites - unarmed, fast, and low.

[@lawrencepickering1564]

IMHO I feel every module should have an extensive training program, to help us better utilize the modules we purchased.

[@haackhaack4217]

A classic for sure, now we need a high fidelity light grey eagle to finish the series

[@thunderace4588]

Thank you Prickly.

[@petertress72]

Hopefully, TOP GUN SCHOOL will be in the works as well. What do you think???

[@paristo]

The pilot tailoring should be in the main menu of the game. Where you select the module at bottom, and there "tailor pilot", that opens a way to create custom pilot set for the module. You get all the skins, all the helmet types, all different characters etc. And when you go to fly, you can choose the saved pilot to admire yourself in the mirror.

[@Eleolius]

Once we get the MiG-23, If it is nearly as authentic and useful as the F4 (a tall order, I know, as the F4 really is the first true "do it all" in a modern-ish sense) platform, then I'd say those would be together the most important modules for bringing a nearly gapless aircraft set. We need a few late Cold War attack jets still (Tornado, or Jaguar come to mind), but really it's high fidelity Redforce aircraft we need most. Maybe one of the early 4th gen Chinese jets (JF 17 doesn't really count- we need one of the true J series, especially with fox 1, and such. F1M is going to be awesome for filling in the late cold war French stable... and the early Cold War is on a good track so far.

[@gregorpajdlhauser2850]

I find that the MiG-23 in development by RAZBAM is also a very important module because Redfor players suffer from a big jump between the MiG-21 and the MiG-29. There's no "Phantom" for Redfor and the MiG-23 kinda is.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Agreed. It's a must have.

[@CAL1MBO]

The MiG-21 is superior to the MiG-23 so I doubt it will have a big difference like people say it will.

[@gregorpajdlhauser2850]

@CAL1MBO The MiG-21 is very good. However, after the introduction of the Phantom it's gonna be harder for thr red team to fight it. The Phantom has medium range missiles (AIM-7) as its primarily Air to Air weapon which the MiG-21 lacks. The MiG-23 with the R-23/R-24 missile (its main armament) will close this gap.

[@mikeck4609]

It COULD be the best module if all that stuff works. I don’t think it will take over the helm from the F/A-18 in popularity only because a lot of players want all of the MFD tech and newest weapons. For me, it will be my favorite module. It’s my favorite aircraft and I’ve been wishing for one in DCS for 6 years. The F-4 opens up soooo many conflicts and time periods to be explored. I just all the rivets and bolts don’t do to my VR experience what the Hind cockpit does.

[@Bushwookie_18]

I think the delays for the Phantom have definitely been worth it, if all the features they show work as intended. The manual pop up in game will absolutely be a game changer for learning. It’s no secret that the training portions of modules within game are less than adequate, so this will be an excellent shakeup.

[@NineLineED]

All modules are the most important modules in the game, each add something new and cool and push DCS farther ahead every release. Oh and PS there is a preorder on the DCS E-shop, just no extras. Thanks!

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

I did see that after I recorded it.

[@swe-timberwolf3642]

Actually it is available in the ED store, I per-ordered it there yesterday 🙂

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

I added a correction in the video

[@Jarhead1086]

AGM 12 Bullpup, Mk 20 rockeye, AGM 45 Shrike!

[@Hotdognzz]

It was on ED's store for pre order this morning 6hr ago (ignore seen the comment on the video)

[@optimalkfrt]

I also tend to think that as low hanging fruits are picked now in terms of iconic aircraft, devs know that they need to make the best out of the remaining nameplates to make them a must buy.

[@sailromanichel4729]

They (Heatblur) sold me I ordered directly. I was not aware that DCS was going to have it listed on the Estore the next day. I would have ordered directly from DCS. I do not have a turntable, go figure. I jumped exactly the same way for the F15.😢

[@PappyGunn]

No, I would say the F18 is given the versatility of the aircraft, its low skill floor and high ceiling, enormous number of ordnance, etc. I am looking forward to the phantom, but it must prove itself and have opfor to play against.

[@JETFOURLITRE]

It's important more so than the fact it is a Phantom, in my eyes, because of the dev tech it brings and the benchmark it sets.

[@gomes389]

I don't know if it will be the most important, but it will certainly be one of the most important. Now, in terms of quality, it will currently be at the top.

[@user-qc6jr4yx2p]

it was not able for preorder yet but it is now avail for preorder on the ED store and steam.Question will jester 2.0 be on the f 14

[@welsh2266]

Would be fantastic if E.D was able to make the CH47 as good as this package

[@ligmasack9038]

I can't wait for the A-6.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Same!

[@rogeraylstock3641]

Great package. I love the Phantom and have pre-ordered. Can we please, please, please get a SE Asia map????????

[@julianmorrisco]

I’m looking forward to this, as another commenter said, this is just about the everyman plane. For the blue side, mostly I suppose the Mig-21 fills that role for the red team but it’s not much of an attacker or bomber, unlike this one! I don’t know if the component level failures will be something I’ll enjoy. Sure, it’s realistic, but having a gauge fail, or a set of brake pads. Amazing that it will be possible, but it’s exactly the part of real life I hate the most. The little shitty things that make up the human condition. Maybe it will have its place, as in the described scenario of landing too heavily damaging something. I’m not sure how much fun that would be, ‘though.

[@pcblah]

I'm sure you will be able to turn off random component failures, but I'm also sure that people will enjoy the unexpected.

[@pogo1140]

One of the issues i had was turning on the radar. There are times when i put the radar on standby to hide my presence. Problem is i cant turn it on if i am too close to a bandit because the command is not on the jester command wheel when the bandit is wvr

[@TonerLow]

It will be at home in both blufor and redfor

[@BrandonH.1911]

Its in the DCS store today

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

It was in the store earlier in the week actually, just after I recorded the original video.

[@dirkg1747]

Actually it is available in the ED store 😉

[@travis8534]

the promo video for the module is amazing and it looks like its gonna be a bad ass module. unfortunately I have 0 interest in the Phantom. I am extremely excited for Jester2 for the F-14 though and the MSFS version as well. The F-8, F-100 and F-106 would would be bad ass to have. so looking forward to 2 out of the 3

[@tflashtube]

Yes!

[@audunskilbrei8279]

I wish they would have put the effort towards something else. But I'm also happy the phantom fans out there are getting what they want. I hope the eurofighter will be just as good as this one seems to be. And to be fair I'm quite happy with the strike eagle so it would be greedy to demand more really.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

If this turns out to be the standard for the f4, I have great hope for the typhoon!

[@luisfernandopiedra5380]

Actually, the Phantom is an extremely important module, but not the only one: In order to say that DCS has a solid, complete basis where to build upon, we absolutely need examples of the Mig-23/27 Flogger and Su-17/22 Fitter families.

[@Majima_Nowhere]

Add the Su-34 Fullback to that lineup! We just got the Strike Eagle, after all.

[@luisfernandopiedra5380]

@@Majima_Nowhere Ze Hellduck!! Oh yeah! That's also a "MUST"! If it helps, you know that VSN took the Su-34 model and made it flyable through FC3, right? Since she is, in escence a Flanker, she won't suffer too much from flight model inaccuracies! Not perfect but it helps to take the edge off a bit, at least for cinematics! Is worth looking into it!😎👍

[@paristo]

I so wish that ED would finally come to senses, and start limiting the Electro-Optical systems capabilities they offer. Heatblur limits the resolution of LANTIRN for the F-14. And they limit it for this as well. But those look still be little too good for the original tapes and the specs of the monitors. The slight blurring that ED does is not at all realistic, it should be heavily more for the ATFLIR, Litening AT etc. And the best, highest resolution pod in DCS is for Harrier, it is the Litening G4. That has 1024x1204 FLIR and TV modes, where example ATFLIR has only 640x512 and Litening AT (A-10C II etc) has 512x512 in TV mode and little lower for the FLIR. The dynamic range in those older systems isn't high, and refresh rate and all are as well low. Then add the CRT monitors with 480x480 scanlines and you get very ugly 240x240 total resolution to play with. Want to know how bad does it look? Take a 8mm home video and compare it to a Full HD camera footage... This is one of the reasons why the US Navy F/A-18C pilots were disallowed to self-designate targets for Hornets until 2008, because their targeting pod was Nite Hawk to that date, and it was so awful that at 3000 meters altitude you couldn't tell are you looking a truck, a MBT, a house or even less is it friendly or enemy. You just couldn't tell what was on crosshairs. Why you had JTAC to do the target ID and designation. Excellent cameras for day-time to hit a something massively easy to recognize like bridge or airfield or harbor and ship at sea, but after that it became like looking stamp from 5 meters and try to say what picture is in it.

[@royra8562]

But what about carrier operations? Will the F-4 be carrier capable?

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

possibly in the future

[@craig8724]

I really hope the jester voice is not the same. Hopefully they changed it up or going back and forth from F-14 to F-4 will get real annoying

[@Michaelkaraz]

Y u p absolutely 👍

[@danielroncaioli6882]

Now if only someone could do a real Thunderchief. Not just one that overlays the exterior over a mig.

[@rama7267]

SO any release dates or approx. release dates

[@WesternkindUnited]

On the page for preorders they state that shirts and records for Collector's Edition will ship by February 2024, therefore, I conclude that the module ought to be released no later than this date. The fact that the module is now available for pre-purchase on the Store of DCS leads me to think that release is probably going to occur within 2 months, probably before New Year.

[@simtaylor61]

Very Probably

[@rogerlavender01]

It will be…… IF ……. We get a Vietnam Map for it to play on. We have almost everything else!

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

2.9+ might let us get there...imagine a cold war dynamic campaign...

[@johnwicks4936]

I agree. This plane looks great, but until we get appropriate maps for these Cold War planes, I have little interest in them.

[@mungo7136]

Except you do not have playable adversary ... most of. Mig-21 in DCS is too advanced for contemporary models. Well, nearly any Mig-21 would be compared to the first 2Mach WW2-avionics fighters 😁 . Thus you are left with Mig-19. And maybe Mig-15, even it is not on par with 17 that fought there. And without at least Corsair II, we are not there with "everything" (hint - my true sweetheart, regardless that F4 is nice). And we miss Thud (hint - yes, Thud over Phantom - I am the devil's advocate you have thought that did not exist 😇)

[@mdu2112]

I wonder how much CPU goes into recomputing the first and especially the second moments of inertia with all moving parts and maybe even liquid.sloshing. 😅 I feel some of the finer math can't be felt in such a sum.

[@cmdrpanorpa8631]

The F14 and F4 are easily going to be the most fun and immersive modules to fly for a long time to come thanks to the amazing work from heatblur. That's before you get to the F-4 expanding the roster of that era of aircraft and capability, with the F4E, F14A, Mig-21 and hopefully the eventual mig-23 there will be a solid era of aircraft to fly that wont be too dominated by either side hopefully. Beyond that, the F-14 is simply good to fly and quite immersive to do so with the sounds and visuals, and the f4 looks like a direct improvement in all those areas.

[@xm10922]

The Shrike is very much for the Phantom. The AGM-78 which is the STARM will be for the A-6 only.

[@rakkiswolfstar4358]

​@xm10922 yours is the correct answer.

[@cmdrpanorpa8631]

@@xm10922 ah I see now, got the numbers backwards, just trying to help, thanks for the correction

[@thatguy7085]

It is the late 60s 70s fighter

[@stscc01]

1. We have seen only the pre-release videos by Heatblur yet. They look really good, but I prefer to wait for the module, try it out on my machine in the real gane and then judge it. 2.Why should it be the most important module? Not every DCS player likes the Cold War stuff (I kow, it's very "en vogue" at the moment), but many people prefer more modern aircraft. So no, it may be an interesting module for some people, but it is definitely not "the most important module". 3. Not everybody likes to fly with Chester, and not everybody has a real RIO. That's the reason why I didn't buy the F-15E and most likely will be the reason not to buy the F-4. I own the F-14 and almost never fly it for that reason... 9:34

[@bukhariali71]

“Purchase the module even if you are not a fan of the Phantom “. Pure blasphemy I say😂. Everyone loves the Phantom.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

Lol...I know some heretics...

[@markturner6091]

Yes, Yes , Yes Yes YES!!

[@lisa-azrabroad4137]

I am very concerned that like the F-14, the polygon count will be massive. Sure this makes it look great but it throws optimisation out of the window. I am a VR flyer and frame rate is a huge factor for immersive and comfortable flying and I seriously think this is going to suffer with poor VR performance.

[@xm10922]

The F-4 is performing better than the F-14.

[@madaxe606]

As a MiG-21 guy, I hope that Heatblur doesn't succumb to the temptation to overmodel the F-4 to the point where Cold War multiplayer becomes futile. The Viggen had.... issues... that required scripts to keep it viable in competetive multiplayer. The Phantom sure looks great, and it sounds like they want to do this right. Fingers crossed.

[@shinysdcs1212]

The F-14 is not gen 3 or gen 3+ , it is the first 4th gen jet. Gen 3 aircraft like the phantom first flew in the late 50's, the Tomcat first flew in 1970.

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

You are correct, thanks for spotting my error. It is a Gen4, albeit an early one.

[@apostleofthekube3097]

Nope, the Phantom may be the highest quality addition and set a new standard of quality for the future, the most important module for DCS is still the A-10C, the Warthog cemented the status as most accurate military flightsim and is the one thing that made DCS stand out in the market, allowing ED to grow.

[@heinzkonig7057]

BlaBlaBla

[@blimeythatwasclose]

still waiting for the mig15 ejection seat to work.......

[@rampy4963]

F-111 is due

[@_Propa]

It is just a module… …unless you buy the T-shirt + module. Then it’s a module, plus a T-shirt.

[@BenTrem42]

Looks like ED knocked this one out of the park!

[@joshuapurdy7065]

Song at 0:24?

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

If you scroll to the end of the video, the songs are listed.

[@joshuapurdy7065]

@@Pricklyhedgehog72oh thanks. I assumed you might do that and looked for it at the end but I guess I didn’t let it play long enough and just assumed it wasn’t there lol

[@joshuapurdy7065]

@@Pricklyhedgehog72still can’t find the songs. Did you get them from a specific website? Cause I looked everywhere and can’t find anything

[@Pricklyhedgehog72]

@@joshuapurdy7065 audiojungle.net

[@joshuapurdy7065]

@@Pricklyhedgehog72thank you!

[@valentinstrobel1791]

#DCSWorld

[@ctguy1955]

No, The F4U Corsair is !!!