@repvez said in How hard would it be?:
@molnibalage alt text
It is always painful to see the "model something in a HC sim what we do not know and no exact public data is available " like comments when ppl. do not realize the depth of their wishes.
Even the '70s and '80s IRSTs are not modeled the game and the late
'90s towed decoy
or 70s PESA radar (MiG-31 + S-300P and PATRIOT.)
Then comes somebody who wish to model a plane based on YT cockpit video which has AESA, DAS, integrated EOTS and towed decoy, the most advanced HMD in the world and such kind of sensor fusion which was unimaginable before.
So not even more primitive subsystems can’t be modeled but hey, it is very wise to start all of them? Even if it could be doable what would be the point? Flying with such F-35 would be like cheating. You are stealth and you would have similar SA than having labels on AND seeing all the contacts on the HSD or whatever is called in the F-35.
I simply do not understand the ppl. As older a plane and as closer to the original scope of the F4.0 it makes more easier to model. Can you guess why the F-15C was the selected plane? Hm…?
Yes, oh no…
This rhymes with LOL
And it is also f*cking annoying that your only performance here and every other place such “comments” like this. If ppl. wish to understand what is reasonable or not it would be great to listen to the ppl. who understand the technical background of these requests.
Putting F-35 (any version) in the sim beyond a 3D model is close to being pointless. It simply cannot be modeled and if it was it would not be fun from gameplay perspective. Nor the 3D nor the 2D could handle them. In fact the 2D/3D has issues even with double digit AD SAMs… Or with such plane like A-10 which is insanely OP in 2D world and impotent in 3D world.
If anybody wish to make a real work on it, fine, nobody can stop it. But when comes the “based on what” question what would be the right answer beyond the “just because”?