A flyable F/A-22 in Lock on WOULDN"T be awsome and here are some reasons why.
1)Flight model and avionics detail, because many of the F/A-22's capabilities are top secret it wouldn't be possible to model it as accurately as the other flyables.
2)It is safe to asume that the F/A-22 would present an unfair technologicall advantage and be A) banned from online use or B)the only aircraft worth flying.
3)The F/A-22 as you may or may not know has very advanced features and flight characteristics and these would be difficult and exspensive to model correctly.
4)Another reason it wouldn't be awsome is it would use up developer time that would be better spent on projects such as: Flyable Jaguar, Typhoon ADV, Flyable F/A-18A/C, Mig-21, Flyable Mig-31B, Particle effects for LERX and wing condensation and engine smoke, Advanced flight models/ground handleing, Combat trainers... ETC. Many people myself included would rather any of the features on that list to a flyable F/A-22 in Lock On.
Im with you Nunsuch. This has been brought up many times, people must not read the fourms at all.
The only game I want to see the F/A-22 would be in TAW 2 but that game will never exist.
Besides its too highly classified to model. Although DID did do a good job with TAW, their cockpit was quite accurate. But they gave the Raptor an IRIST for some strange reason.
Anyway a Raptor in LOMAC would be like playing in GOD mode, no fun at all.
Nunsuch, you point is valid but please just take the sand outta your vagina.
Once airborne, the Mustang was pleasing and forgiving to fly, it could turn on a dime, but best of all, it went like hell." - Capt. Clerence E. "Bud" Anderson, 357FG, 357FS
Nice metaphor but really I have just been reading people on this thread stomping others for asking for flyables such as the space shuttle, Mig-28 and Aurora since before the game came out and I wanted my chance before nobody reads this anymore hehe.
what i think would be a good addition to the flyables....would be the F/A 18 A & C... i like the F/A 18 and also becouse there's not as many american planes as there is russian ones (now the su-25T also added). and just like there is the Mig29 in different versions..the F/A 18 could there that way (A&C) for the americans...
i like these forums, i relatively new here but i'm just as LOMAC addicted as you guys hehehe... with all the mods too.. but what do you think about the hornet?
The F/A-18A/C would indeed be an excelent add on and not just for the U.S. either it would have special significants for Canadiens such as myself as well. Indeed the F/A-18 was unnoficially planned as a future flyable before Ubisoft discontinued publication of the series[tragic]. At this point the only planned flyable aircraft for future releases are the Ka-50 and Su-25T, ED even a year ago indicated that their flyable add ons(developed independantly of Ubi) wouldn't have MFD's(the F/A-18 does) and wouldn't have more than one seat.
The only official(yeah whatever) flyables added are going to be the Su-25T (1.1) and the Ka-50(1.2) others are possible but due to founding, publication and legal issues are not going to be added.
Aicraft such as the F-14 and the Rafale are very complex and would, from the beggining have been unlikely an unlikely choice for flyables. A Mirage 2000 would have been much more likely.
It is possible to make it look from the oustside as if you were flying any of the non flyable aircraft in the game, you can even use other aircrafts weapons, but there will probably never be a community added fully featured flyable.
The F-14s not as complex or more complex than an F-15. Neither is any of those other aircraft you mentioned. With the exception of the F-22 which is very secret in certain areas so you couldn't model it accurately although you could make an educated guess regarding performance and avionics. After v1.2(Ka50) addon they are going to make a whole new Sim with a multirole aircraft(F16 or Hornet possibly) after this they might do alot of addons including anything mentioned in this thread. Goto the Eagle Dynamics forum and ask there.
The Rafale is very classified and has many MFD's among other things. I am also convinced that the F-14 is more complex to make flyable and here is why I think so:
1)Unlike the F-15 the F-14 would require two 3D cockpits.
2)The F-14 would need two sets of avionics one for the pilot and one for the RIO(admitedly I don't know how complex the RADAR is to operate but I suspect they have a second person there for a reason).
3)The F-14 has as you know a variable geometry wing system that configures the aircraft for different flight conditions by changeing the amount of lift and drag on it, this just sound really hard to make an accurate flight model of. You would sort of have to make four flight models for it to feel right.
Of course they could cut out the second cockpit feature and save a lot of effort but it would be a fairly boring aircraft then as the AI would probably not even let you know just what was happening, you would have to be in a dogfight before it got fun or realistic. I honestly think the F-14 would only work as a multiplayer aircraft with both positions flyable.
Well, all 2 seats planes are flyable with only one pilot, 2 will increase effectiveness: 4 eyes are better than only 2. The Tomcat is so old that it is only for fun i would like it (remember Top Gun... )
I don't think the Rafale is more complex to make, there were many games with the EF2000, which was only in developpement. For the model of flight, I know some persons in the army who could help me (all legal, I precise)
The F-14 is still and perhaps even more so now an extremely important aircraft and will be in service for some time to come in the Iranian air force. Iran is well within F-14 Range of the Caucasus.
I like to think of lock on as set in the late '80's and early '90's and I wish that the F-15 was more '80's-ish as it would uncomplicate problems with AMRAAMS and make it more comfortably coexistant with the Mig-29's and Su-27's, the F-14 was in widespread use on carriers during this time. Because I am more comfortable with slightly older technology less complex ECM and missiles and because I don't think that enough information is available yet to make the Rafale to the same standard as the other flyables I would rather a Flyable Mirage 2000(I love Super 530's!)than a Rafale.
My personal wish list would be for them to add or make a new sim(1985-'95 please) with the addition of the following flyables.
1)Mig-31B(thinking of navigating and useing the Zaslon RADAR at Mach 2+ in combat brings a tear to my eye). 2)F-14A(B and D varients would be nice too but the A is a must for the F-14's as it is the only international Tomcat and would allow Iraq-Iran War scenarios). 3)Mirage 2000(A non Russian non U.S. Multirole fighter with carrier capabillity and hypersonic medium range missiles that was in service in the 80's how cool is that!) 4)F/A-18A(Even if wasn't the fighter of the CRAF the Hornet would fit so nicely in this sim as a flyable; Multi Role, NATO, Carrier, Supersonic, 1980's excelent!)
I give an honourable mention for the F-16 because it could be fit into so many scenarios. Even in the tiny theatre available at least three of the countries use it (USA, Turkey, Izrael). It would be pretty hard to be competative even in the '80's though as it has no BVR missiles it would have to fly close to aircraft that did. Mostly it isn't on my list because I think it is funky lookin but that is pure opinion.
Why are so many people here telling others what they should want in a game? I could give a rats *** what you ******s think, I'm with mcnab, I want the Raptor too. You want fair, go back to childrens games like The Sims. This is a wish list, don't tell people what they should want.
It's a given that the Raptor would crush anything on the field; THAT'S THE POINT.
LOMAC stands for Lock On: MODERN Air Combat, not Lock On: 1983-1995 Air Combat. Get a grip.
Let it be up to the server admins if they wish to allow it in play. Raptor vs Raptor would be a vicious fight. One I'd like to see and do personally. If you don't want to play the Raptor, then DON'T. You don't want to go up against it, then DON'T. Play on other servers.
That said, I would like to see the Raptor and Hornet added to the next release. Plus some MAJOR bug fixing.
The good news is that the Lockon successor may well feature a F-14 some day if we're all lucky. For now I'd be happy with a Hornet or Superhornet or even an F-16 which is what I think they are planning on doing anyway.
I never told anybody what to wish for and my personal wishes for this sim are my own, I understand that. However, some people here withought even playing Lock On and withought thinking about it ask for the same irrationall things over and over and over and over and over and over again. You don't have to use the forum search(that doesn't work) to find another thread requesting an F/A-22 as flyable to say the least. People that post these sorts of threads don't understand what they are asking for, it is a knee jerk reaction to a sim labeled "modern air combat" where they automatically think that newer is better and don't hesitate to ask withought thinking.
If the developers of "Lock On" were to invest the immesurable time and effort necessary in chasing down all the kryptic heresay necessary and modeling all of the advanced systems to get the F/A-22 to even feel realsitic and compare to the other flyables it would be twice as powerfull as any other aircraft in the game and make nothing els worth flying. After all that effort the amount of whining about how it was undermodeled or had ruined multiplayer would block up the forums for a year.
So... sure you have the right to ask for whatever you want all but I have the right to laugh at you all for not even knowing what you are asking for and I rest my case by saying this thread is titled "F-22 Raptor" no such plane exists.
Joe don’t talk like that to others on the forum. Nunsuch was just making his point valid, unlike you. Think realistically...if ED wanted to add in the F-22, how would they go about to do it? Most data about the F-22 is still classified so they can’t make an accurate model. I know this is a wish forum, i am just stating the facts to show a possibility that such desires are not possible at the moment. If you really want a Raptor, then why don't you get a 3D modeling software and model the plane yourself. Then maybe you will realize how hard it is and stop criticizing others for trying to explain things to you.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: AznKamiKazeKid,
) 
