Tonker

Hi @Rudel_chw, thanks for these, you're a huge asset to the 'community module'...well, community! I was holding off on the SK60 until the FM update which dropped a couple of days ago, and it's downloading right now I note it includes your Taxi/Takeoff and Landing/shutdown tutorials already. Does it miss out the weapons tutorials because they rely on the Range Objects Mod? Looking forward to getting stuck in

Well named with that empty cockpit - spooky! 'kin stunning pics, the hype train accelerate

Then keep up the good work!

Never mind rivets on the outside - what about the stud and nuts on the inside?! Seasonal dynamic bugsplatters or I'm not buying...

I'm sure you lovely lot are ahead of me, but I've finally got round to this episode: and was immediately put in mind of @Reflected's genius bit of mission design to give us: Trying not to get too excited too soon, but the options for the Lanc are genuinely game-changing. Nothing we have in sim will be able offer a remotely comparable experience if the community gets behind the project with missions, supporting scripts etc. Woop woop! Merry Christmas @Scoobyon, and to all us wannabe Bomber Boys Tonker

...and then another 32 excellent in-depth systems, procedures and general interest videos. Enjoy

All fair points @rkk01, and agreed re North and South bounds. I think all Easting - at least as far as Szczecin-Berlin-Dresden - would add to gameplay for a high fidelity Lancaster module. The sense of relief at being briefed for a short run to Bremen for example...! @Reflected, the legend, is all over it: Save game option would still be great, but long range no longer holds things back like it used to.

Would the IL2 (1946, modded) approach of having a dedicated terrain optimised for long-range high-altitude/night ops be viable in DCS? This was a game changer back in the day, allowing for 'proper' Bomber Command/8th AF missions without breaking either the game or our computers. Such an approach would rely on a handful of high-detail airfields and their surroundings, and perhaps a few of famous low-level targets (I'm sure we'd all generate about the same list), but otherwise low-resource. Most of the map would be viewed in the dark and/or from angels 20+ so use those computer resources for super-size rather than super-detailing! I can see this appealing to the 'modern' DCS aircraft too - from BVR chess to decent intercept profiles for the Mig-21 and upcoming EE Lightning etc. Just a thought /offtopic

I hate to admit it in such august company, but I'm only on freeware modules* and so a) I can't really comment, but whichever gives more/better UK airfield options for 'safe' navigation training/cross-country flights b) a Tiger Force Lanc in the Marianas would be my preference...! *Spending cash on hardware for now (to help with RL gliding, using the Condor gliding sim**); between the A-4E, SK-60, OV-10A and UH-60L there's plenty to learn! **Although how long before this is a part of DCS...? (Yes yes, I know it's a Halibag...but still...!) EDIT: Just a quick costings of my 'most wanted' to check if the current c.50% sale means I could afford to jump in Map - The Channel - £20.78 Assets - WW2 - £12.49 Aircraft - Mosquito FB. IV - £24.59 Campaign - V for Victory - £7.33 Total - £65.19 I'm sure it's good value...but it's still hard to justify when so much entertainment is available for £00.00 courtesy of the community

@Scoobyon: Wibble @Rudel_chw Phew, that's a relief 'cos your training missions (please!) are going to be essential in getting to grips with this grand old lady

Bit late to the party, but good Lord is it hopping in here! Amazing work @Scoobyon Loki and team, this is a staggering project done to the highest levels. Top comms too, which always helps Looks like you're rounding the bend into the final furlong (good job none of us know how long a furlong is!), all the best! Tonker

More a canvassing of opinion than anything, but I've been thinking about what kind of plane would make me want to spend more time in DCS and have come to an unusual conclusion. Assumptions We won't all agree on these, but just to be open about where I'm coming from. DCS is at its best depicting late Cold war, say 1975-1995. It's a study sim. We like systems, getting things right and being rewarded with achieving the desired results. DCS needs more REDFOR...but I'm not particularly motivated to fly them, so this will be another BLUFOR*, sorry. Single-role aircraft are more interesting and satisfying; add more value in multiplayer; justify (and increase satisfaction with) the purchase price and time spent learning them. With the additions of the past few years and the coming dynamic campaign, it's not all 'look down, shoot down'. We're moving towards 'proper' logistics-based warfighting (a good thing). No developer puts as much love in to or gets as much soul out of, their products as Heatblur. The Viggen and/or F-14, basically! *See end. Inputs Systems intricate and complex enough for it to be a past-time to study and master them; an office that's more gauges than screens. It's got to be an evocative and interesting place to spend time. Good view out, but with lots to see and do in. Unique gameplay options - perhaps in a logistics role. Good looking. Good sounding. Good flying. Long-lived. The answer is obviously the C-130E, right? Sadly we're getting a J, the Hercules is out. Conclusion To my own surprise, what is without doubt the sexiest tanker/transport in history, the Handley Page Victor Vickers VC-10! 4 engines, 4 cockpit crew (nav, FE, two drivers), 3 drogues. The cockpit was liable to use as many notebooks as screens, lots of steam gauges. It's a cosy place under the night lights, too: So there's quite a bit going on. Lots of hands-on flying, plenty to do and loads of friends to play with: It's also fast enough that those friends won't be cursing trying to match speeds. In fact, the VC-10 held the record for the fastest transatlantic flight by a subsonic jetliner for 41 years; only conclusively beaten in 2020 (by a British Airways 747 riding the Jetstream to a casual 825mph groundspeed and sub-5hr flight between JFK and LHR, beating the VC-10 by 5 mins). Tornados typically had to engage reheat on one engine to keep up (burning 600lbs in the time it took them to take on a ton), bless 'em. With the high-mounted engines, say goodbye to those little friends having to fight your wake turbulence too. If that doesn't make you popular online what will?! Big friends are welcome too including, of course, buddy tanking. No, this isn't a spoiler for a flyable E3, but it's a cool shot from the FE's station. Given the superlative high-speed and high-altitude performance, she's probably a pig in the circuit on those hot desert maps, and high mountainous ones coming soon then I guess? High landing speeds, delicate civilian landing gear? Nope! Purpose-designed for short-field performance from unprepared strips in the hot'n'high extremes of British support requirements... ...although low'n'slow is also available: Of course, if that seems like too much hard work, you can always go hands free ...although do check for this sign on the yoke before letting go of the controls: Whilst the pilot has automation systems to play with, the Nav has got their own toybox Don't feel like using electronic aids? Okay, no worries, the VC-10 has you covered with its in-cockpit periscope mounted sextant: What's that? A sextant isn't as cool as something that allows you to shout "Up periscope!" on comms for real? Fine, you can have a proper periscope too Enjoy the view! Ridiculous, really. It's perhaps worth noting that the RAF-spec aircraft used small VC-10 bodies with overclocked Super VC-10 engines. I think the technical term for this is OPaF. Speaking of engines, what if your mate sucks a sparrow through one and is left stranded at some grim forward strip? No worries, just strap a spare under the wing in its special cowling and you're good to go The extra drag is offset by cabin climate and pressure system vents. Charming. So, a nice-sized aircraft (small enough to be handy, big enough to feel like a unit - but how long before someone put her on the deck of a Nimitz). Interesting, unique beastie to learn and fly in SP, offering unique gameplay in MP. Looks the business, flies like she looks. Mind you, that T tail always carries the risk of a deep stall to keep you honest. Okay...what next...sound? Well, although famously quiet inside, for spectators she howls and growls and generally sounds like something we moved into caves to keep safe from at night. And that's before the exhaust smoke... All at unmatched, illegal and oft falsely-reported volumes. It turns out the internet debate on whether she was louder than Concord on take-off is a lively one. a) Who knew. b) lol. I've seen the F-4 engine sound called "demure" in comparison, which should wind up plenty of readers! The Vicky-Ten carried a fair space for fuel even before sticking this lot in the trunk Probably didn't do the handling much good, but the dream was to wring every last ounce of performance out of the aircraft to get the max possible fuel load on station and return home on fumes. A new set of challenges to the ones we're accustomed to. It's not just tanking and transport though. Sniffer gear (to test the air for radioactive particles, a sign of nuclear testing) was fitted to some aircraft under the nose and wings Any other interesting features? Oh, I dunno, one or two because of course there are gull-wing doors! They were also, uniquely, individually named - after RAF recipients of the Victoria Cross. As for liveries, not many in military service. The weren't many built, and although widely used they didn't see much export volume. Still, she wears them all well don't you think? She even looks good in a coat That's quite enough, so I'll leave it there. Thanks for following to the end. A beautiful, powerful, useful aircraft. One which the devs, campaign makers, skinners and pilots could have a load of fun with. Not a suggestion for HB per se, just sharing an opinion to see how widespread it is. I suspect not very, but hope I've made a fair case that the Vickers VC-10 would be a great module to own, would push DCS into fresh territory and could even expand the player base at the same time. So, anyone else fancy this sort of carry on? One last thing I mentioned REDFOR, right? Well, here's Illuyshin's best-selling jetliner: In production till 1995, still in service with the RuAF. Anyone for a game of Spot the Difference? October, 1987, Brize Norton. The Russian crew were on a familiariastion turn before the December meeting between Thatcher and Gorbachev at the airfield.

...like AviaStorm... Cheers for all HB, have a cracking '23 you too!

Agreed! Other options exist, shown off in a lovely 3/4 shot: For more sectional and profile views, how about these courtesy of the RAAF in Vietnam trim: Better?

You mean...[pissy comment removed]...Why not just say so? A change of tack from me, returning a type I've not fanboi'd since Il-2 days: Here's lookin' at you, kid! She had a huge number of operators, roles, years in service...it's got a lot going for it. Heaps of personality, so naturally no other developer but HB could do it justice

Pity it's a glass cockpit -J, but very very cool to see the Herc come to DCS! As for what I'd like to see announced next...well, no prizes for guessing, but I'd be pretty chuffin' surprised!

Ah, thanks for clearing that up @WinterH. I was wondering what all those forum topics, dev updates and Public Roadmap were about...

Happy Friday y'all! Just cos there's no unconfirmed next HB module, there's no reason to stop speculating about the next unconfirmed HB module! I'll see myself out

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/3/1/2135131.jpg?v=v40

It's what we do best!

But they don't know how to manage their forum, and do require your help to know what the approved topics are...? You're right, this is an odd place for it, but here it is. Mods can move it if they feel so inclined, or it can just quietly die as we all (rightly) get swept up in the F4-hype. Or, you can get it repeatedly bumped as people stop by to lend some support to the thread as, unlike some, they reckon it's better to try to make a positive contribution rather than just shout others' down for no reason. +1 Tonka

...too soon?

Or, y'know, don't

...singing heeeeere we gooooo agaaaaiiiiin.... +1...although by now I think I'm at +4 or +5 on the various request threads... As to the potential tease: I would love it to be so, and have asked in other threads, but suspect it's nothing to get excited about. To me it doesn't look like a tease reveal, just cannon fodder for a player-driven AAA promo. Pity.

I suspect not, but is there anything to read into the Tornado being (I think) the only modern non-flyable in the below, at 2'56'':