Which Trainer/Light Attack Aircraft Interests You Most?

[WRAITH]

Hey@all

 

Well I voted the HAWK

 

 

also.............

 

BAE Systems supplies Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers (AJT) to 18 Nations around the world to help flight crews develop their piloting and navigational skills.

 

Hawk AJT, the world's most capable and cost effective advanced jet trainer.

 

Hawk AJT operates in environments from the Arctic Circle to the tropics. It has modern glass cockpit and avionics systems that replicate front line aircraft such as Typhoon and F-35 Lightning II, allowing a smooth transition for students moving on to these aircraft. Operators of air borne weapons and radar systems also use our jet trainers to improve their expertise.

 

I also like the McDonnell Douglas T-45 Goshawk Trainer for its carrier operations!

 

:thumbup:

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

The Alphajet, because it's used at FAP ( the Portuguese Airforce) :-)

[outlawal2]

I love the Hawk but I picked the L-39 because there are many places around the world where you can actually FLY one of these planes where the Hawk is strictly off-limits to civilians...

 

I can't wait to have the L-39 in DCS so I can take a REAL flight in the real plane and enjoy the DCS module even more!

[hollywoodvillain]

I know I'm gonna catch a lot of flak for this, but seriously? Trainers are fun, but go fly FSX/prepar3d or X-plane for that stuff. The fact that this thread is 3 pages long already is going to prolong development for far more worthy COMBAT aircraft because developers will get the false impression that that's what the community wants. Look, I would love to have every freaking aircraft in the world on dcs, but the fact is it takes a long effing time just to develop the most basic of airframes. I understand working on trainers helps the devs to practice developing AFM models in DCS, but why the need for full reproductions? I find it silly and counterproductive. Even though the Mustang and Dora are obsolete by today's standards and have no place in a modern dcs world, they at least represent another era of COMBAT operations that might one day culminate into a ww2 COMBAT environment. Are you happy waiting another 6 years for a decent modern COMBAT aircraft just so these pointless trainers can be developed? Just my 2 cents...

[outlawal2]

I know I'm gonna catch a lot of flak for this, but seriously? Trainers are fun, but go fly FSX/prepar3d or X-plane for that stuff. The fact that this thread is 3 pages long already is going to prolong development for far more worthy COMBAT aircraft because developers will get the false impression that that's what the community wants. Look, I would love to have every freaking aircraft in the world on dcs, but the fact is it takes a long effing time just to develop the most basic of airframes. I understand working on trainers helps the devs to practice developing AFM models in DCS, but why the need for full reproductions? I find it silly and counterproductive. Even though the Mustang and Dora are obsolete by today's standards and have no place in a modern dcs world, they at least represent another era of COMBAT operations that might one day culminate into a ww2 COMBAT environment. Are you happy waiting another 6 years for a decent modern COMBAT aircraft just so these pointless trainers can be developed? Just my 2 cents...

 

Yep and this has been talked about many times before.. You are certainly entitled to that opinion, but there are many of us out here that want an authentic experience and this means from start to finish... Since none (well very few for certain) have tha opportunity to train to be fighter pilots, we want the FULL true experiance of learning to be a fighter pilot and that means starting in trainer planes. Anyone can start up DCS and fly an F-15 or A-10 and fly it into the ground. We (OK I) look forward to actually learning to fly these planes PROPERLY and then progressing through different levels and planes until reaching the true fighter jets..

 

Just like real pilots do in real life..

 

That is the appeal of these planes.. (Once again for me)

:thumbup:

[hollywoodvillain]

Yep and this has been talked about many times before.. You are certainly entitled to that opinion, but there are many of us out here that want an authentic experience and this means from start to finish... Since none (well very few for certain) have tha opportunity to train to be fighter pilots, we want the FULL true experiance of learning to be a fighter pilot and that means starting in trainer planes. Anyone can start up DCS and fly an F-15 or A-10 and fly it into the ground. We (OK I) look forward to actually learning to fly these planes PROPERLY and then progressing through different levels and planes until reaching the true fighter jets..

 

Just like real pilots do in real life..

 

That is the appeal of these planes.. (Once again for me)

:thumbup:

 

Yep, and I completely understand your point about that. But the fact is this is a SIMULATION. As such, there are no reprimands, court marshals or death if you screw up, giving you the ability to fly the aircraft as many times as it takes to learn it. I don't speak for all, but I personally don't have all day every day to go fly and learn a trainer just to prepare me for a another (SIMULATED) aircraft, like I would if I was an air force pilot and got paid to do so. If you want more realism, there's far more important avenues in the sim that need much more attention

Edited July 16, 2014 by hollywoodvillain

[kontiuka]

I understand working on trainers helps the devs to practice developing AFM models in DCS, but why the need for full reproductions?

I think you said it yourself right here. They're making these trainers because they're a stepping stone to more sophisticated aircraft. So why full reproductions? Because who's going to buy something with half the functionality missing? And the bottom line is these companies have to make money so that they CAN work on the "big-guns" down the road.

[WRAITH]

Yep and this has been talked about many times before.. You are certainly entitled to that opinion, but there are many of us out here that want an authentic experience and this means from start to finish... Since none (well very few for certain) have tha opportunity to train to be fighter pilots, we want the FULL true experiance of learning to be a fighter pilot and that means starting in trainer planes. Anyone can start up DCS and fly an F-15 or A-10 and fly it into the ground. We (OK I) look forward to actually learning to fly these planes PROPERLY and then progressing through different levels and planes until reaching the true fighter jets..

 

Just like real pilots do in real life..

 

That is the appeal of these planes.. (Once again for me)

:thumbup:

 

 

Amen brother! :smilewink: No offense to outlawal2 as I also agree with his concerns, for obvious reasons as to how things really work in sim world! :cry:

 

Although if there is a willing 3rd Party Developer from FSX or other that would love to incorporate a Trainer Jet for DCS as mentioned in thread it would just make DCS even better.

 

To incorporate a realistic cadet training pipeline course by adopting a pilot qualification pipeline in rank and air craft mastery would really pump up the realism or real to life experience!

 

 

USAF Training Pipeline Diagram -

 

http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r543/picturebucket7/FFOSP/Marine_Corps_Aviation_Pipeline_zps76578ba5.jpg

 

 

Heck if could I would pay a developer millions of $$$ to make a Air Combat Sim for home entertainment as close as to the real life experience in every aspect.

 

But one step at a time much like the FSX community it has it all except the WAR aspect sadly.

 

But dont fret guys its just chatter, and a community view of interest!

 

Take care! Wraith!

Edited July 16, 2014 by WRAITH

[hollywoodvillain]

So why full reproductions? Because who's going to buy something with half the functionality missing? And the bottom line is these companies have to make money so that they CAN work on the "big-guns" down the road.

 

Well a counter point to that is FC3, which has more than "half" the functionality missing but still sells very well according to ED.

[Vedexent]

Who is doing an L39?

 

In theory, the Virtual Patriots are working on an L-39 mod/module.

 

There's a forum thread here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=92197

 

There hasn't been any update in awhile, and Tango is now working on the AvioDev C-101 Aviojet project - so I'm not holding my breath on seeing this anytime soon, or maybe at all (yes, I know developers work on multiple projects at once).

 

Which is sad, for me - as I'd really really like to try this plane.

 

It is - after all - the only one of these it's even theoretically possible for us to be able to afford to buy IRL :D (If you have $USD 300K - 1M to spare ... and can afford $400/hour operational costs).

[WRAITH]

Well maybe once the F-18E by Cortex Design is released and sales go up because so many gents hanging out for it including myself. A McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) T-45 Goshawk can be worked on as it offers carrier ops keeping in mind that Cortex Design is working on Carrier Ops as well! :smilewink:

 

Anyway lets keep in mind the original post was..............

 

As far as I know, the British Hawk, the Czech L-39, the Spanish C-101, and the French Alphajet are all currently in the works for DCS World. They're all pretty similar aircraft that fulfill the same roles, being advanced trainers and light attack aircraft.

Out of the 4, which one interests you the most?

 

The Aviojet team is very productive and active with the community, and the weapon options on the C-101CC are quite impressive. That has the most of my interest right now.

 

:thumbup:

Edited July 16, 2014 by WRAITH

[hollywoodvillain]

I'll just leave it at this: good luck to all who think dcs is the new fighter ops. I've been simming for far too long to be fooled by talk and promises. In reality, only a handful of truly AFM airframes can be developed within the game engines useful life, even by 3rd parties, leading to ever more game engine developments and hence obsolete AFM, and the cycle repeats. All I can say is have fun with your trainers before the very aircraft you're hoping to transition to become obsolete and/or never come to fruition because of time constraints.

Edited July 16, 2014 by hollywoodvillain

[kontiuka]

Well a counter point to that is FC3, which has more than "half" the functionality missing but still sells very well according to ED.

I don't see it as quite the same thing. FC3 planes are popular and well-known combat aircraft which will have an appeal to flight simmers (apart from the hard-core ones) even if they aren't of the highest fidelity. With trainers, the selling point is the fidelity. I wouldn't buy a Hawk if the startup sequence consisted of RShift-Home but I might if it were detailed and realistic.

 

Honestly, I'm not a huge advocate of trainer aircraft but if it leads to bigger and better things down the road, then I won't complain.

[WRAITH]

 

Honestly, I'm not a huge advocate of trainer aircraft but if it leads to bigger and better things down the road, then I won't complain.

 

On this point alone so much could be said, Positive and Negative!

 

I was reading early this week from FSX developers that FSX code is or has reached its end of life, meaning just cant do anything else with it.

 

Then I found another article just by clicking links that developers are looking for the next best thing as to what that is pffft who knows.

 

These nice treats called "Air Combat Sims" seem to be a dying breed of games, sadly at present time!

 

As to what the future holds when developers with skills in Flight Sims have no where to go is any ones best guess.

 

But you never know where the future holds or will be.

 

Look how gaming and home entertainment has kicked off in the last 10 years its going to become the main source of entertainment. People want more and more and I believe simulations like Air combat will turn upwards in demand just my prediction considering modern gaming trends.

 

Look at this for example................

his webpage http://viperwing.com/#curved-screen

 

Right now there are some gaming rig companies building some fancy tech for flight sims.

 

So to consider a more realistic view of what is Air Combat and a Training Pipeline adopting trainer jets would be a good move forward for future growth and expansion a more realistic approach to combat pilot career and enjoyable experience.

 

 

Just one trainer jet to be created would be fine by a 3rd Party Developer to introduce the concept would be good grounds for this project again to simulate the whole training pipeline aspect and realism.

 

 

But yes, I also would agree with concerns in this thread and simply see this as a discussion, in my honest opinion.

 

Cheers

Edited July 16, 2014 by WRAITH

[hollywoodvillain]

With trainers, the selling point is the fidelity. I wouldn't buy a Hawk if the startup sequence consisted of RShift-Home but I might if it were detailed and realistic.

 

Honestly, I'm not a huge advocate of trainer aircraft but if it leads to bigger and better things down the road, then I won't complain.

 

Again, why the need to do this in dcs when this is available in other sims? And IMO developing a FULLY functional cockpit for trainers takes away time to actually develop cockpits for useful COMBAT aircraft, that already established pilots are willing to kill someone by now just to fly. But instead there's an influx of "can we have this, and can we have that?" Without realizing the limitations and consequences of what that those developments will entail

[outlawal2]

I'll just leave it at this: good luck to all who think dcs is the new fighter ops. I've been simming for far too long to be fooled by talk and promises. In reality, only a handful of truly AFM airframes can be developed within the game engines useful life, even by 3rd parties, leading to ever more game engine developments and hence obsolete AFM, and the cycle repeats. All I can say is have fun with your trainers before the very aircraft you're hoping to transition to become obsolete and/or never come to fruition because of time constraints.

 

At first your posts had some validity, but now you are simply spouting nonsense...

 

That post does not even warrant a response..

 

:doh:

[hollywoodvillain]

At first your posts had some validity, but now you are simply spouting nonsense...

 

That post does not even warrant a response..

 

:doh:

 

Ha well I'm so happy I have your pointless blessing thanks for the intelligent conversation

 

Btw, pride is a poor substitute for intelligence

[outlawal2]

Ha well I'm so happy I have your pointless blessing thanks for the intelligent conversation

 

Btw, pride is a poor substitute for intelligence

 

And what intelligent conversation was it you were having when you made untrue statements based on your own bias?

 

And quoting my quote regarding pride has nothing at all to do with the conversation at hand so save the lame attempts at insult..

[hollywoodvillain]

At first your posts had some validity

 

:doh:

 

What was the "untrue statements"? You said so yourself! Enough though I'm not here to insult people this should be a fun community wth happened?

Edited July 16, 2014 by hollywoodvillain

[WRAITH]

Just to make note that the upgrades are very impressive for these two trainers..............

 

* BAE HAWK AJT ................ "LINK"

 

* BOEING Goshawk T-45..................... "LINK"

 

Concerning its systems and avionics for pilots in training in real life that is.

 

(IF YOU FIND BETTER REFERENCES LET ME KNOW)

 

Nice :thumbup:

Edited July 16, 2014 by WRAITH

[outlawal2]

What happened is you went from not appreciating trainer planes (Which is perfectly acceptable. If you don't like them you don't like them no problem..) Then you made statements that are simply untrue and damages any credibility you may have had.

 

1) Comparing anything FSX to anything DCS is automatically apples to oranges and of little to no value as they are worlds apart.

2) Saying that ED will only provide a few airframes over the life of DCS world environemnt is ridiculous.. Especially considering that there are currently 3 ready to release RIGHT NOW and many more in the pipeline. The DCS environment has been around 10 years plus and the next iteration (EDGE) is on it's way... It isn't going away anytime soon.

 

It is always OK to give an opinion, but when blatantly incorrect or non applicable statements are given, this will make folks disregard what you say immediately..

 

And just as a point that you may not have caught, the "Pride is a poor substitiute for intelligence" statement is in my signature and was not directed at your posting at all.. (In case that caused some confusion)

[hollywoodvillain]

What happened is you went from not appreciating trainer planes (Which is perfectly acceptable. If you don't like them you don't like them no problem..) Then you made statements that are simply untrue and damages any credibility you may have had.

 

1) Comparing anything FSX to anything DCS is automatically apples to oranges and of little to no value as they are worlds apart.

2) Saying that ED will only provide a few airframes over the life of DCS world environemnt is ridiculous.. Especially considering that there are currently 3 ready to release RIGHT NOW and many more in the pipeline. The DCS environment has been around 10 years plus and the next iteration (EDGE) is on it's way... It isn't going away anytime soon.

 

It is always OK to give an opinion, but when blatantly incorrect or non applicable statements are given, this will make folks disregard what you say immediately..

 

And just as a point that you may not have caught, the "Pride is a poor substitiute for intelligence" statement is in my signature and was not directed at your posting at all.. (In case that caused some confusion)

 

Unless you are a developer and knows the intricacies of ANY other sim, including FSX or prepare3d then I take your opinion with a grain of salt. If you are, and consider my opinions incorrect then I will bow down, but I would venture to bet that you aren't and never have been, you only have very limited experience on any sim including dcs for that matter. So please spare me your wishful thinking because that won't fill one hand up before the other fills with BS.

[hollywoodvillain]

 

Yep, just what expected from this inexperience! A meme, how cute! Did I hit the nail on the coffin then if it's gotten to this childish response?

 

Btw I love Star Trek and captain Picard just to break the ice here lol

Edited July 16, 2014 by hollywoodvillain

[outlawal2]

Yep, just what expected from this inexperience! A meme, how cute! Did I hit the nail on the coffin then if it's gotten to this childish response?

 

Btw I love Star Trek and captain Picard just to break the ice here lol

 

Actually I decided to NOT post that and deleted it immediately as I wasn't going to offend you further... Please note that this posting does not show and that is because I thought better of it and deleted it...

 

Apparently I didn't kill it before you grabbed it though..

[kontiuka]

I just had a great idea. Mods, please create a "flame" forum. No particular topic. Just a place for users to hurl random insults at one another.:D