Lace

Sounds a lot like AI wingmen to be fair.

Rarely MP, I think the fact that the mission planner is absent from the MP experience is a problem in itself, and something which requires a DTC to fix IMHO. Why is there such a rush to get airborne? In SP my step time is normally 20-30mins prior to take-off time, is this too much for MP? Also, why would two flights be fragged for the same target? Is there no strategic planning or in MP missions? Don't people talk to each other before starting to plan? Although that does remind me of some cold war wisdom - "what would you do if you approach your target and find it a big smoking hole in the ground?" - "make it a bigger smoking hole in the ground!" As I said, I believe (and hope, given the planned Dynamic Campaign engine) that the mission planner should be completely separate from the mission editor. One is for content creators, the other for pre-flight prep and briefing, and this absolutely should be part of the in-game experience. As you say, it should be an intermediate step between picking a slot, and entering the cockpit. That should satisfy most users I'd imagine. The Mission Planner as it currently stands is essentially useless. However, I have no more power than you to influence the implementation of the F-15E or any other DTC, or make any changes to the current mission planning flow.

At least modules like this require considerably less time investment to learn. I reckon it's possible to become pretty competent in a weekend or less. It may be study level, but it's a study of a simple aircraft with simple weapons. Definitely more F-5 than A-10C or AH-64! The L-39 is really showing its age now, and the Hawk is long gone. I think this might be ideal for some low-intensity type scenarios, or just general bimbling.

Sorry, I have to disagree. The only way a DTC makes sense is as part of an improved mission planner (not necessarily mission editor - I believe these should be two separate entities). Why would you change your loadout from what is planned? The whole point of planning is to ensure the aircraft is correctly configured for the mission. I can see why JSOW spammers might wan to to do it your way, but for people who want to fly (and more importantly, plan) realistic missions, then a proper planner and DTC implementation is critical. I will feel very short changed if all it becomes is a quicker way to enter LL for IAMs so Air-Quakers can get back in the sky faster. Take the Viper for example - I want the mission planner to be capable of weaponeering, MFD page ordering, CMDS programs, steerpoints, OAPs, VIPs, threat rings (these aren't magic, they need to be entered in planning and are based on intel, not an infallible map), ALOW, Comm ladders, HARM tables, etc. Basically everything which you would input IRL before you step to the jet, not after. TL;DR The whole point of a DTC is that it is a planning tool, not a hot-pit shortcut.

I know it doesn't - I was wondering why. Do you have a link to the other thread by any chance? Ok, - found it:

Just curious really, I know it trims in pitch for 1G, why doesn't it trim for roll? Surely with zero roll demand from the pilot (via the stick), the aircraft FLCS should be able to provide any required roll trim to give a zero-roll rate condition. Is there a deliberate reason they* didn't code this in? * I don't mean ED, I mean General Dynamics/Lockheed Martin. I'm referring to the real-life Viper.

I think you are eggs-aggerating there.

SWOTL was great. FF ME-163 please!

Of course, it is a while since I've seen the film, but given their role I should have remembered they were RF-8s!

That seems, erm, comprehensive.

My 8yo daughter enjoys crashing A-10s in VR and my 10yo son is becoming quite an accomplished aerobatic pilot in the Yak. Both have been at it for over a year too, but still very much casual, rather than regular players.

Not just a brief, half second glimpse, but where the aircraft has at least a supporting role in the plot of the movie. Not even going to mention the really obvious Tomcat one(s), but we have: Iron Viper, featuring the Eag... I mean Iron Eagle featuring the Viper Chevalier du Ciel - starring the Mirage 2000 Apocalypse now/Platoon/Air America/pretty much any Vietnam film - Huey Firebirds/Wings of the Apache Charlie Wilsons War/Rambo III/9th Company - Hind/Hip True Lies - AV-8B Flight of the Intruder - Skyraider and A-6 Thirteen Days - A-7 Plenty of WWII offerings, BoB, 633 Sqn, etc. There must be some good ones I've missed, what else is there? I need something to watch.

I have most of the modules. My go-to aircraft and the one I am most combat-effective in is definitely the Viper, but I can have a decent stab at killing stuff with the Harrier, Hornet, Mirage (both now), MiG-21, F-5, F-86 and A-10. I'll occasionally take a Spitfire or Mossie out for a spin, but rarely fight them and don't really 'do' WWII DCS. The Tomcat and Viggen are parked right at the back of the hanger gathering dust, next to the Apache (too complex, not enough time), L-39, CE2 & KA-50. My most used helicopters are the Mi-8 and Gazelle. I like an aerobatic session in the Yak too. So for FF modules, the Viper gets 75% of my flying time, 2 or 3 others 20%, and probably half a dozen hardly ever get flown. I never fly the FC3 aircraft as they are too much of a faff in VR what with the lack of cockpit clickyness. I think the Mudhen and Phantom will get some attention as and when they are released. Likewise Tonka and Typhoon. A-7 will probably be my go-to carrier aircraft though when that one is finally with us. And if we ever get the Kiowa, that will be my helo. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that the Phantom will fall into the same category as the Tomcat for me. Nice to take out for a quick spin now and then, but not sure if I'm really willing to put in the hours to master it.

Is it correct that RCS is a single number per aircraft at the moment, and not dependant on aspect and stores load?

The solution for the larger multi-crew aircraft is dynamic switching of positions. That way, you can play an active role in each part of the mission. Start-up, taxi, takeoff and form up as pilot, transit from the navigator seat, bomb the target from the bombardier position, hop between gun turrets as you are bounced, back to the navigator to get you home, and finally return to the pilot for landing. If you have multiple clients in the same aircraft, then you can occupy any of the vacant positions, and if you want to spend 3hrs+ as a waist gunner, then you can, the remaining positions will be AI controlled. Let's face it, it would be fairly boring as a pilot for the long missions, as you are essentially just formation flying the whole time. I don't think there is any single position I'd like to occupy for the whole flight, but the ability to swap seats could make it a entertaining experience. Microprose managed it in 1992, I'm sure ED could make it work if they wanted to.

"Spirit in the sky" Shirley?

I wonder if ED will now bundle the Channel map into DCS core, like Caucasus and Marianas, as a kind of free taster WWII map? Seems unlikely anyone will buy it once Normandy 2 is released for sale.

The Hornet was designed as a multi-role (even omni-role) aircraft from the outset, to replace several different USN/USMC types (A-4, A-7, F-4, F-14). The Strike Eagle was originally built as an F-111 replacement. Like many platforms, since the end of the cold war/GWOT it evolved into more of a multi-role CAS/bombing platform in uncontested airspace, but that was not the original mission profile. The clue is in the name, it is a strike aircraft at heart (with self-escort capability). In terms of tech - TFR is enough for me. Bring on the 100ft overcast!

Go compare fuel capacity. Tonka could do a quick dash to target, but not sustain anywhere near that speed for long. F-111 was designed to fly the whole mission supersonic at low level.

I would love to see the F-117. I know people call it a one-trick pony, flown essentially on autopilot with no real offensive or active defensive capabilities beyond putting a bomb on target. Buuut, with an improvement in the mission planner, as part of a large campaign, it could play a valuable role. The importance of ELINT gathering to plan ingress/egress routes and the tension of flying alone, in the dark, over hostile territory, would offer something different to most other modules. I know RCS/EW modelling is very basic, but with some improvements, there should need to be too much fudging. Plus, that shape! Nothing like it before or since. More realistic though, F-111.

DCS does require high winds to see much movement from the carriers. However, in real life, swell has as big an impact on vessel movement, and that is currently not modelled in DCS (AFAIK). It is these long swells that cause heavy pitching and rolling movement, and can even be found on relatively calm days, as they are sometimes a result of a weather system many thousands of miles away. I've done Pacific crossings where the water was like glass, but we were still rolling 15deg either way. Ideally, swell should be a separately defined parameter in the ME, with chop influenced by winds, which would be closer to real life, and allow for some more dynamic deck movement, without having to contend with 50kt winds. Obviously, the interaction between two sets of dynamic fluids is complicated, especially when multiple swells and complex bathymetry are in play, and given that the water in DCS is essentially a flat plane, it may be difficult to visually represent, IDK.

Good to know it's not just me doing something wrong then. I've requested it as a feature in the wish list.

Can this be a thing please?

Does anyone know if these are likely to be back in production any time soon?