Trainer versions of current aircraft?

[OrangeFr3ak]

Would you like to see the trainer versions of current planes added? I'm refering to the F-15D, MiG-29UB, Su-25UB and Su-27UB. Also the F-16B/D, F/A-18B/D and Mirage 2000B once these are available.

[Rongor]

Since we lack multicrew cockpit, I don't see any use of this. ED should invest all hands into EDGE finalizing instead.

 

Also the mentioned a/c are all FC3-level. So ED would need to implement advanced systems modelling for them first, to get them out of their current simplified state. This will probably happen in some distant future. Until then: ED should invest all hands into EDGE finalizing instead.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Rongor

[OrangeFr3ak]

I see. Well I'd like to have Aggressor F-15D and F-16D over the Nevada terrain.

[King_Hrothgar]

The big question I have is simply why? Very few people play anything but single player. Anything with more than 1 seat is problematic for these players as they have to hop seats constantly unless they are duplicates. In MP, what does adding a second seat offer? If you're trying to train someone, it would be just as easy to be sitting next to them in the same plane type as it would be to be sitting in the backseat. The reason I argue against 2 seat trainer versions is not because I'm against them but because they would come at the expense of the more capable single seat combat variants. And they do this without really offering anything that a single seat version doesn't in the context of a video game.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

Not only is the two seat trainer/ combat variants a good idea but if you look at it from a military training aspect this game and the unlimited possibilities can lead to some excellent simulator experiences for pilots and training crew. I also think it's a great idea because it gives players that next level of emersion especially virtual squadrons and two is always better in my books, relieves you of alot of duties and passes them on to another person who may be good at something else other than flying but may for instance be good with radios/ radar. It just creates more options and possiblities that I am most eager to welcome.

[McBlemmen]

I think its a very good idea but only for real DCS aircraft , not FC3. Multiplayer doesnt interest me so much but the idea of flying with a real co pilot does. I don't see why i can't be done , i can't imagine making a 2 seat variant of an already existing aircraft being too hard. F-18D would be awesome.

 

Though if i'm honest i don't see it happening anytime soon. And by soon , since we're talking about a flight sim i mean "in the next 5 years".

[Catastrophy]

I've been dreaming of co-op manning ships, starships, tanks and planes for years. It'd be very useful to split the workload in a ground attack plane in two.

 

Actually one of my very first flight sims had this - one controlled the flight stick - the other one could slew the targetting reticle around. It was on the ZX Spectrum, though...

[Sierra99]

Not only is the two seat trainer/ combat variants a good idea but if you look at it from a military training aspect this game and the unlimited possibilities can lead to some excellent simulator experiences for pilots and training crew.

 

We need to remember WHY we have training aircraft in the Real World...Destruction, Dismemberment and Death along with the fiscal cost of crashing a military aircraft dictate we not turn "Skippy The Wonder Pilot" lose with an F-15C the first day he walks through the door of the Squadron.

 

It takes years of training and guidance to teach someone how to properly operate modern military aircraft without killing themselves or someone on the ground NOT in need of (or deserving) killing. With few notable exceptions, in the real world most of this training takes place in procedural simulators and dual seat aircraft with an Instructor Pilot sitting in back keeping an eye on the Student to ensure he doesn't do something to hurt himself, the instructor OR the multi-million dollar aircraft the taxpayers have loaned him for the day.

 

We simply don't have to worry about that with DCS World. It's not necessary for the instructor to be sitting in the back seat of the airplane to prevent Skippy from becoming Hair, Teeth and Eyeballs when he screws up. If / When Skippy gets shot down or crashes his airplane, he simply re-spawns and try's it again.

 

Please don't get me wrong. If the tech required for a T-6 trainer leads to the ability for 2 crew-members in an F-15E I'm all for it. If the F-14A/B leads to an F-15D or F-16D or any other 2 seat variant...bring it on.

 

But from a pure "For Training" aspect...Trainers are simply unnecessary in a simulator environment.

[Eddie]

Trainers are simply unnecessary in a simulator environment.

 

As someone who has spent much of the last 10 years of my simming life teaching others as part of MP groups, I strongly disagree.

 

No a mistake won't kill you in a sim, but so many things would be exponentially easier (and more enjoyable/cooler) if you could be sat in the same jet seeing what the student sees, and vice versa.

 

I'd like to see the twin seat variants of jets just as AI jets/only flyable from the front if nothing else. It was always a nice detail to have trainees flying training jets back in previous sims, and also have them as "scenery" at airfields.

[Vampyre]

I would like to see the multi-crew combat types for use as fast FAC's as well as the run of the mill procedural trainer. In a virtual squadron setting they will be indispensable for some of the more difficult to fly types such as the Harrier's. I'd like to see the Harrier T4/10/12 and TAV-8A/B. Carrier types will be important as well due to the dynamic nature of the operating environment so there will be a need for an F/A-18B/D and possibly the TA-7C as well.

[pepin1234]

I think the trainer versions is very important for a simulator like this. The training and teaching skill with a two seat variant is much better and fast. An old pilot can teach a new pilot very fast and easily sitting behind and looking at real time all the mistaken that do the new pilot.

 

Is a shame that the Mig-29UB is not bild with radar

Edited May 27, 2015 by pepin1234

[OnlyforDCS]

Well I for one can't wait to get into the front seat of Leatherneck's F14 A (or B) and have an experienced pilot (not RIO, I really mean Pilot) take a seat behind me and give me some pro tips and tricks on how to operate the aircraft in its various regimes.

 

I realize that the F14 is not a trainer, and that there are a few 2 seat trainers already coming, but it's a start at least.

[MBot]

As someone who has spent much of the last 10 years of my simming life teaching others as part of MP groups, I strongly disagree.

 

No a mistake won't kill you in a sim, but so many things would be exponentially easier (and more enjoyable/cooler) if you could be sat in the same jet seeing what the student sees, and vice versa.

 

If training is your top priority, wouldn't it be way more effective if you and your student both sit in the same front seat of a single seater? You would see what the student sees, you would even see what the student does.

[Bushranger]

If training is your top priority, wouldn't it be way more effective if you and your student both sit in the same front seat of a single seater? You would see what the student sees, you would even see what the student does.

 

In most training aircraft that are two-seaters, or 'tubs' you see all of the students inputs on the throttle, stick and switches, that is why we want two seater 'trainers', as they're more realistic, and having two people sitting in the front would be both unrealistic and pretty weird. :huh:

 

But that's just my opinion though.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Bushranger

[MBot]

In most training aircraft that are two-seaters, or 'tubs' you see all of the students inputs on the throttle, stick and switches, that is why we want two seater 'trainers', as they're more realistic, and having two people sitting in the front would be both unrealistic and pretty weird, that's just my opinion though.

 

Sure, but if your concern is the best possible training, a back seat is a crutch. I guess any instructor would like to sit inside his student, being ready to take over or show something any moment. In reality this is not possible that is why there are two-seater trainers. On a computer it is no problem.

 

Of course if your concern is not actual training but role-playing RL training, then I agree that a two-seater is required.

[McBlemmen]

Mbot i agree , this is something i've been thinking about ever since they started confirming 2-seaters in DCS was gonna be a thing. I think it would be a very wise descision to let people fly single seaters in co-op, it would make teaching and learning aircraft systems so easy its crazy.

[Eddie]

If training is your top priority, wouldn't it be way more effective if you and your student both sit in the same front seat of a single seater? You would see what the student sees, you would even see what the student does.

 

In some situations, i.e. if you're instructing the very basics of button pushing to a simulator newbie then yes that would be the perfect situation. However once you move onto the tactical/procedural subjects, no it wouldn't. In fact in some cases it'd make life more difficult as you'd be stuck looking at the exact same cockpit config as the student without the ability to manipulate display pages/settings etc to suit what you need/want as the instructor.

 

Remember, many twin seat training variants have specific systems setups and tweaks in the back seat designed to give the instructor certain capabilities. But even in jets that don't you often want to be looking at different things than the student.

 

Personally I'm not talking about teaching newbies how to ramp start a jet, I'm looking at teaching everything from basic manoeuvring and airfield operations to complex real world tactics, techniques, and procedures.

 

Besides, this is a simulator, the simulation of the real world capabilities and limitations and the challenges they bring is where much of the enjoyment comes from. Well for me anyway.