Tank50us

I'd like this. However, given how many kills a single pilot can accumulate in DCS, I think it'd have to be an available 'decal' with a preset number of kill tallies.

I mean, if ED can set it up where the airfields have a more realistic 'zones' for the AI to figure out where it is, that would go a long way. Alternatively, they could allow us to do it using the trigger zones and using the script to designate what they are so the AI can navigate them. There's certainly a few of options ED could undertake.

Agreed. Col. Robin Olds flew the P-38J in Europe... even got an accidental kill while he was in a glide and barely beat the P-38s Compressibility issue. For those that aren't familiar with the term, it basically means that as you get closer and closer to the speed of sound, the air around your leading edges 'compresses', and creates a pocket of what is effective 'dead' air behind it. This in turn means that if your plane isn't built for it, the control surfaces will attempt to 'bite' air that isn't actually there, and you get no response. Olds only survived because he got into the denser air at low altitude where the control surfaces finally had something they could bite into and control the aircraft. Right after he avoided the hard interaction with the ground, a BF109 bounced onto his tail, and only careful flying allowed him to turn the tables and score a kill. Though I think after this, his P-38 was written off as the G-load ripped bits off the plane, and bent the frame.

Yeah I can see this. Like, you place a 'marker' down on your map, and it presents a coordinate that you can program into the NavComputer for the more modern jets, or have an option where you can see a representation of your position on the map for something like a warbird (which may not be that accurate, but it'd be enough to find your way to an airfield). One thing that would also be nice is if when you're in the rearming page you get a pop-up that allows you to pre-program the GPS guided bombs, since that was usually done by the ground crews anyway. This would be accomplished by having a tick mark (like we have for the fuse) on the bomb option, and then you get a map that pops up that you can manipulate, and chose the target point for the bomb. You could also get a mark on the map that shows where you programed your other bombs so you don't accidentally program 3 of 4 bombs to hit the same target.

Actually, you have several Viper and Hornet users that could make use of such a system as per their defense strategy. Sweden, Finland, Norway all share the same basic plan for a Soviet/Russian invasion in that the fighter squadrons scatter. In those scenarios you'd need either an aircraft with a hook in order to land on those short A runways, or an aircraft that can throw the thrust into reverse (like the Viggin). So part of the turn-around for the aircraft in those scenarios is to have the ground crew reset the hook while the pilot goes and takes five minutes to get a snack.

Yeah, they have more important things on their plate at the moment. But it's possible for a 3rd party to develop it, and would probably be a good way for a 3rd party group to get their foot in the door with ED.

The new damage models are being tested out on the Warbirds. Warbirds like the P51 are a bit more simplistic since they don't have to worry about all the fancy electronics and such like a Viper or Hornet would. You'll see the results of this in the upcoming F-4E, as it'll be the first jet with this new damage model added. The reason it's taking so long isn't that it's a low-priority subject, it's that trying to realistically simulate what happens to an aircraft when it gets hit takes a lot of coding (and DCS is filled with Spaghetti code, part of what Vulkan is meant to fix), a lot of studying (there's probably TB worth of data on this stuff, from journals to wind tunnel tests to break-bird tests), and finally a lot of simple trial and error (you don't want a .303 rifle round having the same effect as an 8.8cm, right?). So, yeah. It just takes a bit of time to work on. And keep in mind, modern aircraft are made from a wide variety of materials. Steel, Aluminum, Titanium, Carbon Fiber, Rubber, etc. Part of the reason to trial it on Warbirds is that while many of the aforementioned materials were used, they were used in ways that makes damage a bit more predictable. Translating that to a modern jet takes time. As I said, you'll likely see the first iterations of this in the F-4. They've mentioned already that lights (as an example) don't just have a simple "on or off", they will flicker, flutter, and dim realistically in the Phantom. This tech and coding will eventually find its way into the existing modules, with older aircraft (like the F-86) being more prone to failures (like you gun sight taking a nap) than newer planes. With the sheer number of modules this will effect, it's gonna take some time, and I'm fairly certain ED and the third party's are going to prioritize their most popular modules over their less popular ones when it comes time for a proper rollout.

I think what he's aiming for is something like this part of ACAH (not trying to talk about the game, just using this sequence as an example of such an animation in play):

I mean, most of the animations could be ported to infantry units just fine, especially the climbing-ladders animation and salutes. If ED adopts a "common rig" for all human animations, then it would make it possible for such animations to be used by armored troops like those at a FARP reloading helicopters.

Great for Navy jets, not so much for the Viper, MudHen, or (upcoming) Phantom... since they don't have them in game.

I mean, in a scramble situation, it's even less. I don't know about other countries, but the USAF that dude is off the ladder, and has yeeted it in ten seconds. Meanwhile the pilot is clipping the straps in place. A minute would be them being casual about it, so the real time it takes is probably less than 30sec. Heck, it could just be the few seconds of the pilot getting in and putting the straps on (which itself is like... a few seconds?), and while you're doing your BIT test in the Viper the ladder is moved away followed by the CC going "You're clear for startup". The straps bit could also be hidden from view if the pilots body is hidden, but you'd still see the ground crew pull the ladder, and probably the pins/covers before clearing the aircraft.

The walk-around would be an external view of the aircraft, similar to the view VR users have of the Su33. The pilot/GIB would be just walking among the ground crew.

It takes what? Maybe a minute from the moment the pilot is in the pit until the Crew Chief is clear of the aircraft? It'll probably take that long for everything to properly load around you anyway. But, as you know from other posts for eye candy, I am always in favor of it being optional. Very much this. And in the animation you may not necessarily see them attaching the weapons to the aircraft (that is a process that takes about 10-20min IRL), but you'll see the weapons on their karts or ejector racks when attached to the aircraft. This wouldn't go full immersion, but it would give the player something more visual when selecting their weapons load. If done right, the player could even interact with some of the weapons, namely setting fuses, laser codes (especially since that last bit is done on the ground anyway), and GPS coordinates (maybe with a clickable map to represent the programming even?)

One thing that would be kinda interesting, at least to me, is when the Airfields are reworked and the ground crew added, if we could see the pilot doing a walk-around of the aircraft while we're selecting the weapons or in the 'briefing' screen. An interesting thing to add to that is that once we're "ready to fly", we get an animation of our pilot climbing into the pit, the ground crew pulling the ladder, and the crew chief giving you a thumbs-up to indicate the crew is clear and you're ok to start the plane (maybe even giving you the gesture to start the engine(s)?), and then moving away. What do you guys think? Personally, I think the latter half would be good for immersion, especially those in VR (if they can 'strap in'), and externally, players can toggle it on or off if they can't handle the extra animations going on around them.

Tactics also play a part. After all, destroying the SAM/AAA site is one thing... but finding it is another. And the best way to find them, is to get them to shoot at something. Today that part of the mission can be accomplished with drones (because who cares if a Drone doesn't come home, they don't have mothers), but within the realms of DCS, someone's drawin' the short straw and making the Radar light up.