New DCS maps guess

[Esac_mirmidon]

I am fascinated about ED newsletter so, my brain starts thinking by himself without any notification where could be the new map for DCS F-18C?

 

We have in DCS right now a 750 x 400 map theater, so a map 500 x 500 km its not so crazy. Maybe a little larger, maybe not but i think its a good guess in size.

 

So i have opened Google Maps by instinct and my fingers, PS and a little guess work......

 

 

 

 

 

[Stratos]

I vote for the Gulf, with a slightly bigger map.

[sorcer3r]

We have in DCS right now a 750 x 400 map theater, so a map 500 x 500 km its not so crazy. Maybe a little larger, maybe not but i think its a good guess in size.

 

 

IMO not big enough for a fast mover.

[Home Fries]

With 64 bit, there's no real restriction on theater size. I'd be happy with the entire Persian Gulf with Iran/Iraq/Kuwait along with Bahrain/northern Saudi Arabia and southern Turkey. In fact, why not just continue the Caucasus map south and add the Persian Gulf that way?

 

EDIT: Another fun option might be the Kurile Islands/Kamchatka Peninsula north of Japan. A good naval theater and it could bring back some nostalgia for Falcon 3.0 veterans. I have fond memories of Operation: Fighting Tiger.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Home Fries

[NineLine]

IMO not big enough for a fast mover.

 

 

How so?

[Esac_mirmidon]

Agree.

 

Lets wait for larger maps thanks to EDGE, if possible.

[NineLine]

With 64 bit, there's no real restriction on theater size. I'd be happy with the entire Persian Gulf with Iran/Iraq/Kuwait along with Bahrain/northern Saudi Arabia and southern Turkey. In fact, why not just continue the Caucasus map south and add the Persian Gulf that way?

 

The restriction is the details, and these are HIGHLY detailed maps... it takes a lot of time to build them.

[159th_Viper]

How so?

 

If you accidentally engage afterburner you're in serious danger of falling off the EDGE of the map.........:pilotfly:

[Kayos]

I would love to see the Persian Gulf. I hope that's one of the maps they are working on.

[SkateZilla]

The restriction is the details, and these are HIGHLY detailed maps... it takes a lot of time to build them.

 

Not just the 3d geometry of the map,

But the supplemental layers that go with it:

Defining roads, rivers/bodies of water for AI objects,

Building Each Airfield, Defining Runways/Taxi-Ways/Roads, Setting up their transmitters/receivers for navigation and communications.

Building scenery objects to be placed on the terrain,

 

I can go on and on.....

 

Take's A LOT of time/work.

[SkateZilla]

If you accidentally engage afterburner you're in serious danger of falling off the EDGE of the map.........:pilotfly:

 

I Dont have that problem in the F-15 on Caucaus

[NineLine]

If you accidentally engage afterburner you're in serious danger of falling off the EDGE of the map.........:pilotfly:

 

Psst... your not helping :P

[Suchacz]

It's hard to guess the scenario placement, but imho the most of the map will look like this... :D

 

[SkateZilla]

It's hard to guess the scenario placement, but imho the most of the map will look like this... :D

 

 

not everyone is gonna pull a Strike Fighters North Atlantic,.

[Eddie]

How so?

 

Well, assuming the OPs 500 KM x 500 KM size for illustrative purposes. Even a lightweight and short range fighter like the F-16 could fly from one edge of the theatre to the opposite edge and back again with a full combat load, without even needing external tanks, with ease.

 

Throw in an opposing Air Force and all of a sudden you can even take off and establish a formation etc before finding yourself on the enemy doorstep. Consider that a tanker track could easily be around 50 NM (90 KM) in length in a realistic scenario, for example.

 

A theatre of that size is too small for anything but Helicopters or ground units. Of course there would be nothing wrong with a very high detail, smaller, theatre intended for ground units and/or helicopters. But jets, old or new, need something significantly larger.

[NRG-Vampire]

but perfect for carrier ops :D

It's hard to guess the scenario placement, but imho the most of the map will look like this... :D

 

not everyone is gonna pull a Strike Fighters North Atlantic,.

[NineLine]

Well, assuming the OPs 500 KM x 500 KM size for illustrative purposes. Even a lightweight and short range fighter like the F-16 could fly from one edge of the theatre to the opposite edge and back again with a full combat load, without even needing external tanks, with ease.

 

Throw in an opposing Air Force and all of a sudden you can even take off and establish a formation etc before finding yourself on the enemy doorstep. Consider that a tanker track could easily be around 50 NM (90 KM) in length in a realistic scenario, for example.

 

A theatre of that size is too small for anything but Helicopters or ground units. Of course there would be nothing wrong with a very high detail, smaller, theatre intended for ground units and/or helicopters. But jets, old or new, need something significantly larger.

 

 

In the past few theaters that the Hornet has operated, say from a carrier, how far do they normally travel, one way for a mission? Just asking cuz I honestly dont know.

[Suchacz]

...and Im still keeping in mind, that Wags once talked about planned improvements of simulation of naval warfare and its integration to CA :smilewink:

[REPUBLICANO]

1- Yugoslavia:Mig-21, Mig-29 vs F-15, F-16, F-18 (high level map detail)

 

2- Israel/Siria: Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-29 vs F-15, F-16, Mirage (medium level map detail)

 

3- Persian Gulf: Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-25, Mig-29, Mirage vs F-14, F-4, F-5 (Low level map detail)

[will-]

My Programming teacher once said you cannot eat a whole elephant in one bite. But you can piece by piece.

 

If the only thing stopping us from one unity map would be work involved. Could it be possible to join maps? If only more work is the downfall.... Sounds like a yes to me for a whole world map oO

[NineLine]

My Programming teacher once said you cannot eat a whole elephant in one bite. But you can piece by piece.

 

If the only thing stopping us from one unity map would be work involved. Could it be possible to join maps? If only more work is the downfall.... Sounds like a yes to me for a whole world map oO

 

Far as I understand, that maps can be expanded, but very little details are out right now.

[Revelation]

My Programming teacher once said you cannot eat a whole elephant in one bite. But you can piece by piece.

 

If the only thing stopping us from one unity map would be work involved. Could it be possible to join maps? If only more work is the downfall.... Sounds like a yes to me for a whole world map oO

 

That is supposed to be one of the benefits if EDGE. The question becomes will our computers handle it?

[Esac_mirmidon]

In the El Dorado Canyon Operation against Lybia, the A-6 Intruders and F-18 Hornets attacked from the aircraft carriers targets in Lybia after 40-50 minutes of flight time from the carriers.

 

I can´t find the exact location of the three carriers, but 40 minutes in route time is not far way from Lybian shores.

[Eddie]

In the past few theaters that the Hornet has operated, say from a carrier, how far do they normally travel, one way for a mission? Just asking cuz I honestly dont know.

 

It does vary quite significantly, but using a few examples and not just for the Hornet but across the board.

 

Kosovo/FRY around 150-300 NM depending on Target/Station area

Iraq - 200 - 600 NM

Afghanistan - anything from 10 (for jets based in country) to 350-500 for jets on carriers.

Libya - 400 NM for land based, around 100-200 for carrier based.

 

COIN ops are an exception, but IRL we always try and base aircraft well out of reach of any credible hostile threat, while also being close enough to do some good. COIN aside, I've never seen anything less than 100-150 NM. But it also depends on this like tanker availability and the aircraft type. You'd put you Vipers or Warhogs closer than you Strike Eagles if at all possible, for example.

 

Best thing to do would be open up Google Earch and run the ruler from the NATO bases used in conflicts over the past few decades to their target areas.

 

Lastly, the design spec combat radius for most western fighters is at least 300NM for a Hi-Lo-Hi air-ground mission profile. The F-16, F-18 and A-10 all being in that bracket.

[Eddie]

In the El Dorado Canyon Operation against Lybia, the A-6 Intruders and F-18 Hornets attacked from the aircraft carriers targets in Lybia after 40-50 minutes of flight time from the carriers.

 

I can´t find the exact location of the three carriers, but 40 minutes in route time is not far way from Lybian shores.

 

40 mins is 250-300 NM in most aircraft, altitude dependant of course. You wouldn't want to park a carrier much closer than 100NM from hostile shores, especially if they have aircraft/land based anti ship missiles etc.