Luca Kowalski

Can you be so kind as to quote the part where I said that a trainer would magically erase the friction of setting up bindings, an abysmal UX, terrible missions etc. I think I missed the part where I said that. Maybe because a good friend told them there's this great game they're playing? The sky is mostly blue with dashes of white, sometimes grey, and at night is turns black. For the rest, I refer again to a previous explanation, in which I explained that a basic setup is manageable, I suggest you read it. That's not how I experienced flying with my friends, usually it's the game that crashes, but that's another topic. No, are you?

Thanks again for the reply. I still believe we're talking about two very different things. You're discussing what it would take to make DCS more popular overall — possibly by changing the game. I'm talking about how to make it easier to get into, without changing the game. One is about the core — the other is about the door. My idea is focused on that door. And let’s be honest: Microsoft Flight Simulator comes with dozens of aircraft out of the box, for the price of a single full-fidelity DCS module. And that’s before you even add maps or campaigns in DCS. So no — price isn’t the only factor. But it’s a big one. Especially when you’re just curious, and don’t yet know if the game is for you. That’s why a free, modern, multiplayer-ready demo plane could help. Not to compete with MSFS — but to let people try DCS in a way that doesn’t ask for money, time, or friction up front.

That would be a completely different topic, one that I didn't start. I'm suggesting a way to make this game more open to public without changing its heart. I refer to my previous explanation about people being frugal with their time and effort. That wasn't why I suggested a demo plane. Cost per plane is one of those factors, which is a huge factor.

Again, that’s a perfectly valid answer — from someone who’s already on the inside. But someone like you didn’t need a demo plane to discover the game. That’s great — it just means… you’re not the target audience. Thanks for chiming in! I get it — if your main draw to DCS is fast jets, weapons, and action, a trainer might sound... underwhelming. But that’s exactly the point: this idea isn’t meant to impress someone who’s already deep into the game. It’s for the ones who aren’t there yet. The people who’ve never touched DCS, have no idea what HOTAS means, and just want to feel what it’s like to be in that cockpit — to experience the sim before deciding if it’s for them. If someone’s first question is “Where are the guns?”, they’re probably not the kind of newcomer this is designed to reach. And that’s totally fine. But for those who would otherwise bounce off the game before they even get started… this might be their way in.

Thanks again for the reply. I think we might be misreading each other a little, so let me clarify a few things: First off: I never said DCS should be simplified — I said it could be more accessible. That’s not the same thing. Making something easier to try doesn’t mean dumbing it down. Second: yes, some setup is required. But realistically, you don’t need to bind 50 keys just to ride along in the back seat. A joystick, throttle, and maybe view controls? That’s manageable. If the demo plane spawns ready-to-fly, that’s all someone needs to get a feel for the sim — and to decide if it’s worth going further. Finally, about civil sims — they do have depth and complexity, but not to the extent of DCS. That makes them cheaper, more approachable, and often more forgiving. DCS is pricier and steeper, with more systems and dynamics — which is great, but it means we need different ways to spark curiosity and draw new people in. That’s what this idea is about: not chasing the mainstream, but offering a smoother first taste — something social and promising.

That’s not what I’m proposing. The people this demo plane would be aimed at aren’t those actively searching for a trial or willing to jump through setup hoops. They’re people who don’t know DCS, and who aren’t already invested in military aviation like we are. And that’s a very large group. They’re not hesitant because of money — they’re hesitant because of effort. And people are frugal with their effort. Most won’t invest time, keybinds, or configuration steps just out of curiosity. This isn’t about convincing someone who’s already on the fence. It’s about giving someone who’s still on the sidewalk a chance to peek inside. Some observations based on the feedback so far: Some frame the idea as unnecessary — because they didn’t need it. I completely understand that: DCS works for people who are already motivated. Others suggest using existing trainer modules with the 14-day trial — which is fair, but still not the same as a purpose-built, zero-friction experience. A few point out that “if it doesn’t sell, it’s not worth making” — a valid business lens, but not the only one. But here’s the gap I think we’re missing: A lot of people in DCS got here because they already wanted to fly a Hornet, a Tomcat, a Viper. But most people outside the DCS community don’t have a favorite fighter. They don’t start with motivation — they start with curiosity. And curiosity needs one thing: a taste. Not a manual. Not a cold start. Just a moment where they sit in the back seat and go: “Whoa… this is great.” That’s what a demo dual-seat plane would offer. No bindings. No setup. Just: “Look how beautiful this is. Want to take over the stick? Here — it’s yours.” No need to install a mod — because that’s extra effort and often unreliable. No need to start a trial — because that feels like a commitment. No need to bind a bazillion keys — because no one wants to do all that just to see what it’s like. And after that moment? More people will want to learn. Will want to bind controls. Will want to take off and land. Will want to spend money on what’s considered the entry module: FC3. Will want to jump down the rabbit hole. Because now they know what’s waiting for them — if they do. And one more point that bugs me: “The vast majority of players fly single player.” That’s true — but I believe that’s not a fixed reality. It’s a result of how DCS is currently structured. Multiplayer, as it stands, is hard to approach for newcomers. Not because it’s unfriendly — but because it requires knowledge, preparation, and confidence most first-timers don’t yet have. A modern, ride-along demo aircraft could act as a natural bridge — helping players ease into the shared experience by joining someone they trust, without friction or pressure. People don’t avoid multiplayer because they want to be alone. They avoid it because the first step feels too steep.

TL;DR Letting newcomers try DCS by flying with someone — in a free, modern, two-seat demo plane — could lower the entry barrier dramatically, without sacrificing realism. Not a simplification — just a better way to share the experience. Many outside the community would love that chance. Right now, DCS doesn’t offer it. --- 1. The idea — in short A free, modern, two-seat demo plane (similar to a trainer class) that allows experienced DCS players to take friends along in multiplayer — to make the first contact with DCS smoother, more social, and more welcoming. Not a simplification of the sim, but an onboarding tool built around connection and immersion. --- 2. What I’ve learned so far from the replies Some veterans feel this isn’t needed — that those who really want to learn will find their way. Others point out that existing modules or trials already provide the necessary tools. I respect those views — but I’d argue that’s exactly the kind of thinking that keeps DCS in a tight bubble. --- 3. What people outside the DCS bubble say Several friends — intelligent, curious gamers who enjoy realism — told me they would love to try DCS… if someone could take them along. Not in a full tutorial. Not in a cold start. Just sitting in the backseat of a modern aircraft, guided by someone who knows the ropes. They don’t mind complexity. They just need a way in that doesn’t feel like boot camp. I’ve even seen this play out firsthand. My ex once tried to fly in DCS using my account — she crashed within minutes. Not because she wasn’t interested, but because there was no structure, no guidance, and no natural entry point. She never touched it again. Not because DCS was “too hard,” but because it wasn’t welcoming. A two-seater demo aircraft could have changed everything: she could’ve joined me as a passenger, asked questions, and tried flying herself — with context and confidence, and with me preventing her from pancaking herself. --- 4. Why the proposal still stands strong There’s no aircraft in DCS right now that’s: • Free • Modern (glass cockpit, GPS, clean avionics) • Multiplayer-capable for ride-alongs • Designed as a non-threatening entry point A purpose-built demo plane could fill that gap. And if built smartly, it could even form the basis for a paid variant (e.g. light attack or campaign version). Some have pointed out that the TF-51D was derived from the paid P-51D — and not the other way around. That’s true, but it doesn’t have to be a one-way street. If ED ever decides to develop such an aircraft, there’s no reason it must start as a full paid module. It could just as well begin as a smart, accessible free platform — and evolve from there. Others have said a free aircraft wouldn’t be worth the cost, since it doesn’t generate revenue. But I'd like to broaden this view. A module like this isn’t meant to sell itself — it’s meant to bring people in. If more people discover DCS through a welcoming first flight, and then stick around, the long-term gain in module, campaign, and map sales could easily outweigh the initial investment. Free doesn’t mean worthless — it means strategic. --- 5. But what about Flaming Cliffs 3? Flaming Cliffs 3 is often brought up as the “easy entry” into DCS — and yes, it simplifies controls and removes clickable cockpits. But it doesn’t lower the psychological or social barriers that most newcomers face. FC3 modules still require: • binding controls manually • setting up missions • understanding the interface • and flying alone, with no guided experience They’re simpler, yes — but not more welcoming. A modern demo aircraft, flown alongside a friend, could offer an immediate, immersive introduction — not through simplification, but through shared experience. --- 6. Final thought I’m grateful for the discussion, even the critical replies. But I hope we don’t fall into the trap of assuming that what worked for us is the only path worth having. The passion behind DCS is real — and maybe it’s time we made it a little easier to share.

Artillery gunner here. 2km is about the range we shoot within visual range, which doesn't require calculations from the FDC. Our 105mm artillery still uses manual aiming, but I can imagine that that range could easily go up to 4km with more modern (155mm) guns with electronic aiming.

Yeah, I was really looking forward to that one...

I see where you’re coming from — for someone already deep into DCS, the idea of a “ride-along” might not sound very exciting. But that’s the thing: you’re not the target audience. The idea isn’t to impress sim veterans — it’s about giving hesitant newcomers a gentle, low-friction way in, ideally guided by someone they know. You mentioned that buying and learning two planes might be a barrier — but that’s exactly why this idea suggests making the first one free. No need to buy two planes. No commitment. No pressure. Just: “Hop in the back seat while I fly. Take a look around. If you like it, you can try flying later.” Compared to the TF-51D, a modern two-seater would offer a better fit for first steps — intuitive avionics, multiplayer training, and something that feels more like a real-world trainer. It’s not about the thrill. It’s about the connection — and making the world of DCS feel accessible instead of intimidating.

I get where you're coming from — most people in DCS do tend to dive in solo and figure it out by themselves, often because there isn’t really an alternative. But that’s not the kind of player I’m thinking about. My friends — and frankly, most gamers I know — aren’t intimidated by depth, they’re intimidated by entry barriers. If something looks too complex, they won’t even give it a shot. A modern, free two-seater would allow people like me to simply say: “Hey, just hop in with me. I’ll fly, you sit back and look around — no installs, no keybinds, just enjoy the ride.” That kind of experience is incredibly powerful. It’s low effort, high impact, and suddenly what looked like a hardcore sim becomes something personal and exciting. Sure, not everyone wants to play instructor — but for those of us who do, this could finally make it fun and frictionless to bring friends in. And once you’ve shared the sky with someone like that, it becomes so much easier for them to take the next step — and start discovering the rabbit hole. And since that kind of gamer likely represents the majority, I genuinely believe it could be worth it for ED to explore this path — not just to support existing players, but to grow the community in a sustainable way.

That’s a fair point — developing full-fidelity aircraft is undeniably a significant investment. Still, I think it’s worth noting that DCS already includes a free full-fidelity aircraft in the TF-51D Mustang. While it’s not armed, it’s fully clickable and system-accurate — which shows that ED sees value in offering deep content to ease people in. The idea of a modern two-seat trainer isn’t about replicating real-world training doctrine one-to-one, but rather about improving accessibility and the learning curve within DCS itself — especially for people just starting out, or those flying in multiplayer squadrons. On the topic of cost: one angle worth considering is that a free trainer doesn’t have to be a dead-end investment. If designed with foresight, it could serve as the foundation for a paid light-attack variant — for example, an AT-6B — in much the same way the P-51D builds upon the free TF-51D. Additionally, lowering the entry barrier could help grow the active player base, particularly among those who currently feel overwhelmed or sidelined by the sim’s complexity. In the long run, that kind of community growth could well justify the upfront development effort. I really appreciate the discussion — it helps refine the idea and keep things grounded.

Thanks for the feedback — both points are totally valid. I agree the AT-6B would be great (personally, I would love it), but it’s more of a light attack aircraft than a basic trainer. My proposal focuses on improving onboarding for new players, and the T-6B Texan II in a clean, unarmed trainer config could be ideal for that. Regarding development time and cost: absolutely — a full-fidelity module takes serious time and resources. But ED already maintains two free aircraft (TF-51D and Su-25T), and recently added the Marianas as a free map — so we know they continue to support free core content. Also worth noting: the Mustang exists in two versions — the free TF-51D for basic flying, and the paid P-51D for full warbird functionality. This shows there's room for a split model: A free T-6B to welcome and train new players And a paid AT-6B for those who want combat capability in the same airframe, which could be developed by building on the free trainer. So this isn’t about asking for a “free plane,” but about suggesting a scalable and community-friendly approach to onboarding and light prop trainer development. Thanks again for the discussion — much appreciated!

Hi all, Following a suggestion I submitted via ED support, I was kindly redirected here to share the idea with the broader community and development team. So here it is: DCS World currently offers two free aircraft to get started — which is great — but neither of them is a modern two-seat trainer. New players are often introduced to the sim through aircraft that are either outdated, overly complex, or simply not well-suited for learning the basics of flight and navigation in a modern context. I’d like to propose the introduction of a free T-6B Texan II module (or a similar modern trainer) to serve as a smooth, welcoming entry point into DCS World. Such an aircraft would allow players to: Learn the basics of flight (VFR, IFR, basic formation flying) in a modern, accessible environment, Ride along in multiplayer missions as a second crew member with an experienced pilot, Transition more smoothly into advanced modules like the F/A-18C, F-16C, or future aircraft like the F-15C or F-35A. A trainer like the Texan II would combine simplicity, immersion, and modern avionics — making it attractive to newcomers without overwhelming them. It could also serve as a natural stepping stone toward paid expansions or advanced training campaigns. But perhaps most importantly: a free dual-seat trainer would give potential new players the opportunity to experience DCS from the backseat — guided by veterans — making it easier for existing players to “spread the virus,” so to speak. I believe this initiative would not only attract and retain new users, but also inspire squadrons and communities to organize structured training — strengthening the DCS ecosystem overall. Why the T-6B Texan II? Modern avionics & clean interface – A great platform to introduce new players to VFR/IFR flying, formation, etc... Two-seat configuration – Enables multiplayer flights with veteran instructors (and training squadrons!), which is perfect for onboarding. Immersive but approachable – Less intimidating than jumping straight into an F/A-18 or F-16, yet still realistic and rewarding. This would not only make the sim more accessible, but also help squadrons and communities bring in new pilots with a shared platform — possibly even reducing the need for external training mods or third-party tools. A good trainer creates good pilots... and good customers. Thanks for reading — and thanks to the team for continuing to develop such a rich and rewarding sim.

What do you know? This works!!! :D Somehow, if you load a self-made mission, a training mission or an instant action, it uses different key bindings... this makes absolutely no sense! :doh: