WHat cockpits are planned as free addons?

[Destraex]

Somebody mentioned that their will be more cockpits than just the old m1a1 and leo2

what is planned?

I would love to drive the challanger, bradley, lav25, t90, black eagle with fully playable cockpits

incidentally, I hate 3rd person view. but due to the lack of being able to move ones body in the cockpit to get better angles its sometimes needed to use 3rd person.

[dejawolf]

leopard 2a4, leopard 1a5, T-72M1 and the rest Nils will probably announce with trumpet fanfares and orchestraic glamour.

[Bluewings]

Abrams too Deja ?

Cheers . :3starSK:

[dejawolf]

maybe you should use the abrams a little more ;)

[Bluewings]

Hum ... :oops: :lol:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[TopKick]

Yup the Abe looks great ... btw ... damn fine work Dejawolf

[Martyr]

In addition to cockpits, what drivable vehicles (or variants) might we see in the near future? Any chance of an M1A2 Abrams or a USMC LAV-25?

[FlatTax]

I know the M1 interior isn't yet fully functional, but looking at the model, it seems not to have been given the same love as the Leo. Am I off base?

[Enrage]

I know the M1 interior isn't yet fully functional, but looking at the model, it seems not to have been given the same love as the Leo. Am I off base?

Yes. I think it has to do with the countries which use PRO for thier army's training, but I could be wrong.

[mbv]

So there will be no new tanks modelled eg. Challenger ? Given this is a tank simulator supposedly being used by the military in various countries to train tank crews it seems odd to me that it would be sold with such a very limited range of playable tanks ie. two. Presumably this is why the British military have shown no interest in the sim and other countries who use tanks other than the Leopard and Abrams will presumably ignore this sim also. The esim marketing strategy seems somewhat limited if you want to push this product with the military of anywhere other than the US and Germany.

I consider £71 a lot of money for just two driveable tanks with interiors and hope that my investment in this sim will be paid off with good support and additional content in the not too distant future.

[dejawolf]

5 crewable tanks, 2 crewable IFV's, 4 crewable APCs.

1 tank, and 1 IFV looming in the near horizon (in esim time)

[Bluewings]

Presumably this is why the British military have shown no interest in the sim

It 's actually the other way around . eSim have interest in the Challenger but the Brits do not want to give the necessary datas to build an accurate model of the Tank .

Cheers . :3starSK:

[mbv]

Really? Surely there are no great secrets about the interior workings that would be dangerous to reveal ? As for exterior modelling I guess this must be a lot easier to do from various modelling guides and examples in tank museums.

[Martyr]

mbv,

Believe me, I'd love more tanks too, and perhaps we'll get them eventually. But the "Personal Edition" product we're now getting is really a spin off of the "Professional" edition that eSim has been marketing to armies for some time. It has what it has because customers (i.e. certain national armies) have asked for those features--and now we have them too. :)

Here's hoping the USMC buys in if the US Army won't.

[mapman]

mbv, the progression has been somthing like this:

SB1 marketed to the masses after extensive research into the M1A1, Leo etc. for accurate balistic, driving, etc. models.

Later...interest was shown by militaries in having a customized version.

SB Professional development took place "custom built" to the armies specs depending on who was ordering it Danish, Aussies, etc.

With each new special order, specs were given on the desired vehicals and "new" models were added to the existing ones thus "growing" the product (the ONLY reason there is a hind there now, is because an army order (and paid for) it to be put in.

The full Professional version (think large lan trainning with instructors) was/is very expensive and did not allow the individual tanker/soldier to take it home with him/her to practice on.

The concept for Pro PE was born.

Now, a number of years later, here we are! :-)

Mind you, if eSims does NOT have the absolute correct information on the Tank, it will NOT be modeled in a version that is being used by armies for trainning (and by us for....trainning..yea...thats it!).

However, I (think) they MIGHT take a bit more licence with SB2.

Make sense?

i.e. If the UK decides it WANTS to train with Pro later on, then we will PROBABLY see the Challanger in later updates.

[mbv]

Mapman - thanks for the explanation of the way vehicles get added to the sim. It is very encouraging to know that esim take such a thorough stance with regard to correct information on the tanks modelled now and in the future. Lets hope the UK adopts the training soon.

With regard to the Russian tanks, are the Russians showing any interest in releasing tank data for the T-72/T-80 and training their crews with SB Pro? Presumably esim would have to work on localisation of their training product for Russia before we could have the interiors?

[3Star]

No, but there are other users of T-72 tanks who have bought SBP, so we'll get to use whatever version they have. (See Finland)

NTM

[Floydii]

RE the M1 interior... If the Australian Army is a customer and are getting M1A1 AIMs... would this mean a more fully modelled interior for this tank?

Now everyone just needs to hope the Brad becomes widely exported...

[dejawolf]

a more fully modeled M1A1 interior is a given since its one of the kings of SB1.

[Hellfish6]

A bit OT - I work in the defense sim business and I don't know of any sims that the UK uses at the level of SB. I'm almost sure they don't use any COTS sims at all. They have made some inquries about COTS products before, but AFAIK they never spent the money.

Australia, Finland, Sweden and to a growing extent, the US and Canada are the big proponents of COTS sims.

[stuart666]

A bit OT - I work in the defense sim business and I don't know of any sims that the UK uses at the level of SB. I'm almost sure they don't use any COTS sims at all. They have made some inquries about COTS products before, but AFAIK they never spent the money.

Australia, Finland, Sweden and to a growing extent, the US and Canada are the big proponents of COTS sims.

Well I did see something in the same vague class as SB pro as long ago as 2002 at the Larkhill gunnery show. They had setup there something that appeared to be a Challenger2 gunnery simulator and were offering goes to the public plinking Ural 375s (I passed up my chance, assuming it would be there the next year and it wasnt. Waaahhhhhhh!) Anyway it was roughly the same size as the old starwars cabinet arcade machine (maybe a wee bit larger) and used what appeared to be PC graphics. (and somewhere graphically between SB1 and SBproPE) This appeared to be all part of a project the British MOD was working on to produce a range of simulators for the British army. The problem was Operation Telic came along and the MOD didnt have the cash anymore so they pulled the plug about a year ago.
As for Esims future with the MOD and the British army (or indeed if they are even aware of it), wells thats for Esim to know and they are not saying. Suffice to say I can think of a number of TA units in the UK (mainly remounts for the Challenger2 regiments) which this would suit down to the ground. But like I say, thats up to the British MOD to look at the title, and they dont have a history of making smart decisions.

[Martyr]

Re: playable vehicles.

Is there any hope that some of the current unplayables will be made playable, even if a military customer doesn't require it? For instance, will we ever be able to drive and shoot from a Marder or an M901?

I'd be happy with somewhat generic interiors if it more quickly expands the number of playable options available.

[mbv]

I'd be happy with somewhat generic interiors if it more quickly expands the number of playable options available.

Same feelings here, particularly if it becomes difficult to get permission for the Russian tank interiors.

[-=2RTR=-SOMNUS]

I worked with Chally 2.

I think also just before serving I traveled to every museum in England and even found one that had a 3d interior of the CR2 modeled on a PC in a modern Brit kit display.

But I also know that even the German techs that worked on our tanks hulls in Fally weren't allowed into the turrets. Trust me the Brits have nothing that anyone else doesn't have in their fighting compartments.

But the Chally 2 was the best tank gunnery wise that I ever used. I fired Leo 2 and CVRT and a T72 on ranges at Lulworth. I have to say the M1 is third... Chally 2, Leo 2, then M1... I just don't like the sight moving around like it does. And the best thing about Chally 2 was the whole turret was moved with a pressure sensitive thumb hat switch. Just brilliant!


Kisses!

[3Star]

I found the TC's controller in CR2 to be rather painful to use, actually. Maybe it's my finger size, or just that my muscles weren't used to it, but keeping that damned silver lever/button thingy depressed to use the commander's periscope was very painful after a while.

The 'hat switch' was a good idea though. With the fixed control handles, less chance of involuntary input by the gunner being thrown around.

NTM