Civil Aviation Wish List

[kolga]

Then it is not a Short Tucano, it's an EMB 212. :P Either way, the EMB 214 was suggested, not the EMB 212. The point is they are not the same aircraft and so Sukoi25 wouldn't be stepping on anyone's toes by making it.

 

Yup, just pointing it out.

 

:megalol::megalol:

 

Yea that's true. Now i am trying to do the external 3d of Super Tucano.

It's a completely different plane from Short Tucano.

Look at the cockpit:

 

EMB312/T-27

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Brazil---Air/Embraer-T-27-Tucano/0949524/L/

EMB314/A-29

So it's good to try do one! :)

 

The 314 is definitely more advanced! Thanks for the pictures!

What level of flight model are you planning to do?

I wish you the best of blessings

[Sukhoi25]

I am not so practic but i think it will be either SFM because it should be easier.

[FoxHoundELite]

what the....did i hear Super Tucano?

[Sukhoi25]

Yes but please slow down be calm and don't excite to much. ;)

I can't promise anything outside i will release it definitely in this millenium...

I am still at start and have a 3d model to heavily improve (now don't become angry please :(:D)

[kolga]

I am not so practic but i think it will be either SFM because it should be easier.

 

Will be looking forward to it!

[PiedDroit]

Yes but please slow down be calm and don't excite to much. ;)

I can't promise anything outside i will release it definitely in this millenium...

I am still at start and have a 3d model to heavily improve (now don't become angry please :(:D)

I hope you'll be able to get something working eventually ;), good luck.

 

Speaking of COIN aircraft, I ran into this cool little beast (while searching stuff on the net): IA-58 Pucará

It's from Argentina, fought during the Falklands war against the brits and in Sri Lanka against the Tamoul Tigers.

[FoxHoundELite]

how about A-37 Dragonfly?it's still being used in many countries :)

[PiedDroit]

how about A-37 Dragonfly?it's still being used in many countries :)

Yeah I proposed that one on the "cessna" thread (after all nobody said which cessna).

[LNR212]

Guys, don't be so narrow-minded. DCS can grow and be THE ultimate flight-sim and could kill all those others like FSX, X-P, P3D...

 

The more we get, the better! If people don't like civvie stuff - don't buy it...

 

BUT: the more players (oh sorry, simmers) we get and the more the community grows, the more we have the chance that 3rd party devs stop making modules for these lower immersive and outdated flighsims like mentioned above. And if we have 3rd party devs, they won't only make A/C's i guess, they will also make maps. And that means more playground, also for you hardcore-bomber-killer-fighterpilots.

 

Just imagine how our comunity could grow, if we could get those FSX boys and girls to the "dark" side of simming...

 

and for all you virtual-airborne-killers, just don't join General Aviation servers and all is green...

 

In my understanding, DCS is a Sandbox - where everything could be possible. again, if you dont like it, just don't buy it. it's easy as that :-)

 

You all want 100% immersion - but if you got shot down you just respawn?!? maybe it would be better to get yourself ace combat for playstation? or tom clancys hawx :lol:

 

I for my self would love to have some GA's like Skymaster, C152/172, Caravan, King Air and so on... (+ all/most in military version) all in usual DCS quality. i think it should be easier to build, because of simple systems. like those WWII aircraft i guess.

oh... and we need definitely more helos! :-)

 

DCS NEEDS TO GROW!!!

Edited July 13, 2015 by LNR212

[Sierra99]

Just wondering if anyone else would like a lowly Cessna in there with all the gazillion dollar jets?

 

It's an iconic aircraft both in real life and flight sims (being the MSFS aircraft), and heavily used by the military as well for both training and combat. In today's wars they are actually becoming more and more common, with several weaponized versions.

 

It could serve as a trainer in the sim too, which is always a good thing and could even bring in some civvie simmers, and on top of that it could fly combat missions. Anyone else like the idea?

 

Digital Combat Simulator World (DCS World) is a free-to-play digital battlefield game, focusing on simulation of military aircraft...seems pretty cut and dry what this simulator is supposed to be about.

 

Now, The argument can be made to include some non-combat trainers...personally, I don't see a need for trainers in a simulator...if I crash, I don't die. I can get the A-10 and F-15 airborne well enough without every setting foot in a "trainer" with someone teaching me what to do...but to each their own.

 

That being said, unarmed civilian aircraft just don't belong in this game. This is a combat simulator...if you wanna fly a Cessna or a Jumbo Jet, get a copy of MS flight simulator of X-Plane and knock yourself out.

[PiedDroit]

Guys, don't be so narrow-minded. DCS can grow and be THE ultimate flight-sim and could kill all those others like FSX, X-P, P3D...

 

The more we get, the better! If people don't like civvie stuff - don't buy it...

 

 

Why do you call people narrow-minded? I don't see many narrow minded people around here (on this topic at least).

If you read carefully most people are saying what you're saying (the don't buy it part)...

Those who don't want the civs are only expressing their expectations, just like the ones who do.

 

And I hope that DCS won't render FSX and others obsolete, that would be not good, having different kind of sims is good, what's not is trying to do everything.

 

EDIT: I'll add an explanation on that one: The expectations for combat sim and civ sim are too different. Hardcore combat simmers want realistic combat environment and missions, detailed terrain at low level. Hardcore civ simmers want realistic civilian trafic experience and every part of the world flyable with photo-realistic textures and all the airports in the world (feel free to correct me here).

The requirements just don't intersect well, you can't do all that with a normal sized development crew without making compromise, which in the end will hurt somebody's expectations.

DCS being the only good all around combat sim out there, that would be sad for us combat simmers to have it watered down.

So, OK to add civ airframes to mix (more targets, I won't buy them) but you can't make DCS an FSX killer, that won't work (that's why I put the bad rep on your post, you have a mindset that is dangerous for DCS).

 

You all want 100% immersion - but if you got shot down you just respawn?!? maybe it would be better to get yourself ace combat for playstation? or tom clancys hawx

Please, no, just no.

Edited July 13, 2015 by PiedDroit

[Exorcet]

I'll add an explanation on that one: The expectations for combat sim and civ sim are too different. Hardcore combat simmers want realistic combat environment and missions, detailed terrain at low level. Hardcore civ simmers want realistic civilian trafic experience and every part of the world flyable with photo-realistic textures and all the airports in the world (feel free to correct me here).

The requirements just don't intersect well, you can't do all that with a normal sized development crew without making compromise, which in the end will hurt somebody's expectations.

You're assuming there are two completely distinct categories, which might not be the case. What I want in a civil flight sim is what I want in a combat sim, mainly great physics and realistic aircraft. DCS is one of the best when it comes to this, so by default it's better at civil aircraft than FSX (which I might add doesn't even look better).

 

DCS being the only good all around combat sim out there, that would be sad for us combat simmers to have it watered down.

What would be watered down by adding civil aircraft? It does the opposite, now you can create more combat scenarios like hijacking, drug wars, etc.

 

 

So, OK to add civ airframes to mix (more targets, I won't buy them) but you can't make DCS an FSX killer, that won't work (that's why I put the bad rep on your post, you have a mindset that is dangerous for DCS).

DCS is already a FSX killer as far as I'm concerned. FSX has ATC and world map. DCS is supposedly getting better ATC with 2.0 (which is good for combat and civil) and a world map, or at least large map, shouldn't be out of the question, although it might not be the same as FSX. Still, DCS's pros still far outweigh the cons for me.

[PiedDroit]

You're assuming there are two completely distinct categories, which might not be the case. What I want in a civil flight sim is what I want in a combat sim, mainly great physics and realistic aircraft. DCS is one of the best when it comes to this, so by default it's better at civil aircraft than FSX (which I might add doesn't even look better).

 

 

This is where our opinions diverge, and why you don't get my points (hence discussing every single one of them).

To me a sim is more than aircraft modelling and physics (which are very important too, don't get me wrong).

 

The biggest work is on the maps and the scenarios, to make the environment alive.

So, I think the sim would be watered down because of civ environment support, not because of the addition of civ aircraft.

I agree with you drug dealers hunting will be fun. As I wrote, targets.

Edited July 13, 2015 by PiedDroit

[lxvanwyk]

Cargo planes with script that relies on them to resupply ordinance/troops/vehicles to fighter bases/farps etc?

[msalama]

OK guys, a solution to this: by all means bring in civvie craft, but concentrate on those having a role in warfare as well. I.e. a C-47 for us vintage enthusiasts and a C-130 for all ye turboheads! And happy campers abound again :smartass:

[lxvanwyk]

Maybe like UH1- C130 with option to convert to AC 130 spectre

[Exorcet]

This is where our opinions diverge, and why you don't get my points (hence discussing every single one of them).

I think I do get them, at least to a degree. You're worried that catering to civil modules would take away from combat. That's a legitimate concern, but I don't think it's a natural consequence of civil module development.

 

To me a sim is more than aircraft modelling and physics (which are very important too, don't get me wrong).

But you don't want civil modules (in DCS at least). I do, I'd be one of the people buying, and aircraft modeling is sufficient for me to make a purpose. Specifically this means that ED does not need to do about recreating FSX in DCS because there are civil flyers who don't need that to be convinced to buy. ED doesn't actually have to do anything as I'd envision civil modules coming from 3rd parties, possibly ones that don't do military aircraft at all.

 

The biggest work is on the maps and the scenarios, to make the environment alive.

The maps are fine as far as I'm concerned. AI air traffic from DCS would be nice, but there are scripts and the ME for this.

 

So, I think the sim would be watered down because of civ environment support, not because of the addition of civ aircraft.

I agree with you drug dealers hunting will be fun. As I wrote, targets.

DCS doesn't need to be FSX, it just needs to be DCS with civil aircraft to compete because that's something FSX doesn't offer. In that case, there would be no watering down.

 

However I think that civil and military are fairly synergistic. ATC is needed for both. Civil or military, takeoff, landing, and air traffic are part of the experience. I don't think the graphics requirements are very different for either type of aviation. Low flying helicopters like detailed terrain, but so do slower light civil aircraft (which can also be helicopters). Weather also impacts both civil and military aviation, I've seen a lot of interest in improved DCS weather when it comes to both flying (wind, turbulence, replayability) and combat (vision, tactics, replayability); it also applies to civil flight. On maps, I think that military sims actually require the larger maps, unless you're restricting yourself to helicopters or other short range aircraft. There are many things for ED to do that would make civil flying in DCS better than it would be now while also supporting the combat modules.

 

Also, on civil aircraft being only targets, you could have someone flying the drug smuggling aircraft in MP, so it's as much about flying as it is shooting.

 

Again I think you have valid concerns, but there is more than one way to approach a civil aspect to DCS. It doesn't need to go full FSX. I think being a sandbox sim is a great strength, and so is allowing 3rd party devs into the mix. Taking a wider scope does not mean things will have to watered down, it's also about how you can approach it, and I think DCS is well suited to taking a broader focus than other sims and doing it successfully.

[PiedDroit]

...

Ok, we're more or less on the same line then :thumbup:

At first (when you entered the discussion) I was answering to that guy saying that DCS should kill all sims including FSX, which I don't want.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2432201&postcount=88

Edited July 13, 2015 by PiedDroit

[Devil 505]

I think the Cessna needs to be brought in without a doubt, but for the obvious reasons. I would be willing to bet with more Vietnam Era aircraft coming out and the ability to add new maps to DCS World 2, a Vietnam map will not be far behind. That being said, we need to see forward air controllers flying The O-1 Bird Dog and O-2 Skymaster. I would love to see these two editions brought to life in DCS world. Along with a AC-47 Spooky. I am pretty sure there are some of us out there who would enjoy these aircraft. Let me know what you guys think.

[Sierra99]

Guys, don't be so narrow-minded. DCS can grow and be THE ultimate flight-sim and could kill all those others like FSX, X-P, P3D...

 

Why does not agreeing with you mean we're narrow minded? Competition is good for the end users because it forces innovation.

 

BUT: the more players (oh sorry, simmers) we get and the more the community grows, the more we have the chance that 3rd party devs stop making modules for these lower immersive and outdated flighsims like mentioned above. And if we have 3rd party devs, they won't only make A/C's i guess, they will also make maps. And that means more playground, also for you hardcore-bomber-killer-fighterpilots.

 

This comment is condescending to everyone mentioned on several different levels.

First. There is indeed a difference between players and simmers. Mocking people for being "simmers" is childish. This is OUR hobby and any effort and detail we CHOOSE to pursue is not something any of us NEED you to approval of or mock.

 

Second, You act like you're mad because 3rd Party Devs are are working on projects for what you consider "lower immersive and outdated flighsims" instead of what YOU want them to work on. How very childish. The fact that many of the companies developing modules for the "lower immersive and outdated flighsims" you abhor are using those efforts to bring new modules to DCS world is completely lost on you. And it seems the people playing those "lower immersive and outdated flighsims" you find so abhorrent seem to enjoy them...That's why they play them.

 

Finally, The fact that you refer to people as "hardcore-bomber-killer-fighter pilots" is woefully disrespectful. This comment alone displays gross arrogance and borders on Stupid...a word I seldom use. You don't have the first clue what a real fighter pilot is. In real life "Killer" is probably the last word used to describe them. Professional, hard working Smart, determined, those words come to mind but not killer. Since you don't have the first clue about what a fighter pilot is you probably don't have the first clue about what motivates most of the the people playing this game. You assume they're "hardcore-bomber-killer-fighter pilots" and lump us into one tinny little mold but hats probably not a fair representation of the facts. And in the end it doesnt matter, you certainly have no RIGHT to pass judgement on us no matter what our motivation.

 

and for all you virtual-airborne-killers, just don't join General Aviation servers and all is green...

 

This comment is just as condescending and arrogant as the previous. This isn't about killing. The fact you don't understand that explains a lot.

 

In my understanding, DCS is a Sandbox - where everything could be possible. again, if you dont like it, just don't buy it. it's easy as that :-)

 

Digital COMBAT simulator is a sandbox...Yes. It's not Digital AIRPLANE simulator. If an aircraft has a valid reason for being here great. There are lots of planes included that don't drop bombs or shoot bullets but they have a military mission.

 

You all want 100% immersion - but if you got shot down you just respawn?!? maybe it would be better to get yourself ace combat for playstation? or tom clancys hawx :lol:

 

This comment is condescending and arrogant. Yes we want the sims to be as immersive as possible...that's part of the fun. No I'm not going to close the program and go watch TV the first time I get shot down while dog fighting MiG-29s. To suggest I should is arrogant and again boarders on stupid. To suggest we should be playing ace combat or something else is condescending. We get shot down because this is a Combat sim. NOT a general aviation sim...Again you seem entirely lost on the concept and I'm not going to try and explain it to you.

 

DCS NEEDS TO GROW!!!

 

DCS is growing. Its just not growing the direction YOU want it to and since you're not in charge...The point is moot.

[PiedDroit]

...

Thank you!

[Sukhoi25]

Why does not agreeing with you mean we're narrow minded? Competition is good for the end users because it forces innovation.

 

 

 

This comment is condescending to everyone mentioned on several different levels.

 

 

 

This comment is just as condescending and arrogant as the previous. This isn't about killing. The fact you don't understand that explains a lot.

--------

This comment is condescending and arrogant.

 

Guys, please stop it here! It wasn't what i wanted when i started my thread. Otherwise it's gonna be flamewar :D:mad:

And it's not what we want, right?!

[PiedDroit]

Guys, please stop it here! It wasn't what i wanted when i started my thread. Otherwise it's gonna be flamewar :D:mad:

And it's not what we want, right?!

Some good. points were raised so it's not totally wasteful.

But you're right the thread derailed a bit :music_whistling:

[LNR212]

Wooohaa... hey guys, why so agressiv? Theres really no need for it Sierra99/PiedDroit!

i just wanted to be a bit sarcastic and i didnt want to hurt somebody...

we are all here for the same hobby, but with different opinions i guess.

i am a pilot in RL - both, military and civil. i love DCS as it is, whith its immersion or better for its immersion. and thats much more than all other sims together. but it could get better - and will ;-)

 

especially with civil stuff :music_whistling: (my opinion)

 

that wasnt my intention to prompt something. these words are no apologies, just my "two cents"

 

and i'm not native english, so maybe some of us got something the wrong way...

 

so now lets have all a nice day and happy DCS'in

[Sukhoi25]

Or if you want to confirm your idea you could go against the other in a big air-gunnery duel. like wild west! The one who will survive has the right idea. Gentlemen, please choose your plane!

:D:mad: Sorry for OT