[POLL] S-3B Viking in DCS

[shagrat]

As FC2 was discontinued a couple years ago, most likely not... ;)

[Bananabrai]

I would definitely vote for such an aircraft. +1

 

 

Lately I read a good comment about balancing. I guess this wouldn't be an issue as we mainly not really getting eastern and European planes and even a Christen Eagle has a chance (hopefully not offending anyone here right now...).

We're also getting a bunch of 'more-or-less'-fighters now and such an aircraft would even balance things a bit more.

 

 

1.It would be a reason for ED to improve the Naval aspect of CA and how the Naval stuff works in DCS.

2. It wouldn't be something like a C-130, which some people also don't like, because it would "only be for transporting". (not my opinion)

-> it would right fit in-between. A little bit of A/A refuelling, a good amount of ASW and ASuW, and a little bit of transporting goods. Lets get a bit of logistics but with weapon capability.

 

 

At least the forum is present so that ED can read our thoughts and think about it. I would also prefer other planes in advance, but who is wanting their favourite airplane of childhood days...

Edited January 30, 2018 by Bananabrai

[Freeroamer]

If we we're to get something like a later model S-3B it would actually be quite interesting because of it's implementation of multi-crew as well as being quite an effective ground striker.

[Jester986]

I'd like to see an S-3 in DCS...

[Bad_Karma-701]

Honestly ID like to see the A-6

 

A-6E

Or

they could actually make the proposed F version to save development time since it was going to use the Same radar and F404's without the burners as the F/A-18C. which if I was ED id go that route and use the same assets for the Intruder. the aircraft sits on the deck of the intrepid museum so access to the cockpit is there i would think.

[todd022]

Isn't there a "wish thread" clearly reserved for this stuff?

[Jarlerus]

Isn't there a "wish thread" clearly reserved for this stuff?

Yes. It's called "DCS Wishlist" and this post is currently in that sub-forum. ;)

 

//Jarl

[shagrat]

Yes. It's called "DCS Wishlist" and this post is currently in that sub-forum. ;)

 

//Jarl

^this +1

[Evoman]

Now that DCS has Submarines that got me thinking that now its the perfect time to introduce a sub hunter like the S-3 Viking. Plus it could also serve double duty as an Ariel refueling tanker as well.

 

 

[Hammer1-1]

Flying this thing, I can easily see a couple of frat kids in the backseat chugging beer while mom and dad drive the minivan around town screaming at the idiots in the back. Ironically, those minivans look like Hoover dustbusters....isnt that what this aircrafts nickname is?

[wiz_of_wuz]

"They would never expect us to come back". "Nobody would go through that again"

 

Bring us the "Double Ugly". :)

Edited February 28, 2020 by wiz_of_wuz

[FlankerKiller]

Well we now have working subs in DCS. Plus it can do refueling, and some air to ground. I suspect I would fly it often. It, an A-7E, and the Cat would fill out a Forstall’s deck pretty well.

[jojyrocks]

It seems everyone voted for yes. I guess the purists will buy. But for me...I am into combat types. Be it attack, air to air or just plain multi role. But this...is an odd slow-mo plane that's primarily meant for air to air refueling and Submarine search hunting.

 

 

I'd rather have DCS spend time on a much marketable plane that offers something a bit more engaging like ground attack, air to air or even a multi role than into this VERY specific craft thats a 4 crew plane which can only do air to air refuel and Submarine search hunt and secondary ground attack.

 

 

This plane is much better remaining as a mere AI.

 

 

I'm pretty sure I'll be passing this even if its made and on sale. This isn't marketable or even profitable for DCS and the developers. Only a few purist simmers would buy this. A6 is more marketable than this and it would be VERY tedious for the developers as well.

Edited February 28, 2020 by jojyrocks

[Bobik2002]

It would be good.

[Hammer1-1]

hmm...necro thread.

[ngreenaway]

hmm...necro thread.

 

Or viewed another way, a previously ahead of it's time thread has become more relevant in the current dcs ecosystem.

 

 

It could be interesting, count me in

[Evoman]

It seems everyone voted for yes. I guess the purists will buy. But for me...I am into combat types. Be it attack, air to air or just plain multi role. But this...is an odd slow-mo plane that's primarily meant for air to air refueling and Submarine search hunting.

 

 

I'd rather have DCS spend time on a much marketable plane that offers something a bit more engaging like ground attack, air to air or even a multi role than into this VERY specific craft thats a 4 crew plane which can only do air to air refuel and Submarine search hunt and secondary ground attack.

 

 

This plane is much better remaining as a mere AI.

 

 

I'm pretty sure I'll be passing this even if its made and on sale. This isn't marketable or even profitable for DCS and the developers. Only a few purist simmers would buy this. A6 is more marketable than this and it would be VERY tedious for the developers as well.

 

 

I have come across several comments on youtube and other forums including this one of people that are not interested in the typical combat missions. But they still like to fly in DCS because of the high fidelity flight model that DCS has to offer. Most of them just like flying from one airfield to another. So don’t you think something like the S-3 Viking, C-2 Greyhound or E-2 Hawkeye could lure that customer base and attract new ones to DCS because they would actually be attracted to a non-combat aircraft that would offer them a mission set that they would actually find interesting.

 

Just because you don't see a market for the Viking does not validate that there might not actually be market for it. It’s no different than saying that there is no market for wagons in the US market because SUV’s are the top sellers. But then that thinking is proved wrong by the Subaru Outback.

Military is not only about combat. Many military flights are boring long hours loiters, where nothing happens at all. Fighters alone have not won any war.

Besides DCS already has many combat jets, a few trainers and even an aerobatic airplane the Christian Eagle but not one support fixed wing aircraft.

Edited March 1, 2020 by Evoman

[Evoman]

I highly recommend everyone seeing this S-3 Viking documentary to not only refresh your knowledge but to learn of how much more versatile the S-3 really was. There really has not been any other aircraft that is carrier capable that has so many capabilities like anti-submarine warfare, aerial refueling, surface surveillance, surface warfare and electronic warfare. Even I was was surprised to find out that its versatility came in very useful during dessert storm.

[KWard]

 

 

A modern-day Dauntless, huh? Okay, I'm sold.

 

 

 

Also, lol at the part about accidentally dropping a buddy store along with the bombs.

[dbestinfla]

Viking? YES!!!!

 

As a retired Aviation Boatswains Mate (Equipment), I've hooked up everything from a RAC-5 Vigilante, to the Hornet and all in between. Each one is different, and each one is vital for the mission of the Navy, so I'm saying a big YES for the add-on for a few good reasons. Mainly because DCS World has submarines, and if you have subs, you must have the "Hunter", dropping sonor bouys in the water to locate them. Also with the new Supercarrier, it's the perfect compliment in creating a complete Airwing for deployment.

 

So for those who wish NOT to have it, that's fine with me. Just don't buy it...Simple. Nobody's forcing you. It would also add a totally different sound as it's engines sound like Hoover vacuum cleaners...So I say YES, bring it too me

[Evoman]

I have been looking more into the S-3 Viking now that the state of DCS has made it very fitting for sub hunting. Plus the Viking can do a variety of other missions thanks to the load out diversity that make it one of the few Jack of all trades with a specialization in maritime patrol and Sub hunting.

 

 

 

Armament

 

Up to 4,900 lb (2,220 kg) on four internal and two external hardpoints, including:

 

10 × 500 lb (227 kg) Mark 82 bombs

2 × 1000 lb (454 kg) Mark 83 bombs

2 × 2000 lb (908 kg) Mark 84 bombs

6 × CBU-100 cluster bombs

2 × Mark 50 torpedoes

4 × Mark 46 torpedoes

6 × mines or depth charges

2 × B57 nuclear bombs

2 × AGM-65E/F Maverick missiles

2 × AGM-84D Harpoon missiles

1 × AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER missile

 

The two underwing hardpoints can also be fitted with unguided rocket pods or 300 US gal (1,136 l) fuel tanks.

[jojyrocks]

S3 Viking can happen LATER when DCS World is stable. The reason is, this plane would be VERY complicated to make as a flyable module, and only a few purists would buy it. DCS devs would not make much profit for their HARDwork on this. A module usually take 2-3 years.

 

 

There are far more interesting aircrafts for example; like F-104, F-105 and the Tornado that would sell like hot cakes than this, more returns for their hard work. It already take quite a LOT of work and time to make a module and a 2 seater at that.

 

 

 

S3 Viking is a 4 seater. It would be an absolute PAIN to develop and a lot more complicated systems.

 

 

 

The A-6 has more chance than this. S 3 is better as an AI for now, an updated AI. S3 can happen MUCH later.

[Evoman]

S3 Viking can happen LATER when DCS World is stable. The reason is, this plane would be VERY complicated to make as a flyable module, and only a few purists would buy it. DCS devs would not make much profit for their HARDwork on this. A module usually take 2-3 years.

 

 

There are far more interesting aircrafts for example; like F-104, F-105 and the Tornado that would sell like hot cakes than this, more returns for their hard work. It already take quite a LOT of work and time to make a module and a 2 seater at that.

 

 

 

S3 Viking is a 4 seater. It would be an absolute PAIN to develop and a lot more complicated systems.

 

 

 

The A-6 has more chance than this. S 3 is better as an AI for now, an updated AI. S3 can happen MUCH later.

 

 

 

 

From your comments I can clearly see you are seeing things from your own perceived perspective. You are not seeing that there is actually another market out there that has a desire for anything else that is not a military fighter jet. I have seeing several comments over the years of people that just like flying around from air base to air base and enjoying the view without any interest in combat. While I do agree that any Vietnam era airplane or a Tornado that is highly coveted by Europeans would sell well. I also think that other supporting military aircraft would be a hot sellers because they are NOT just another fighter jet. From what I have seen aircraft like the C-130, E-2 Hawkeye, S-3 Viking and even the C-2 Greyhound would sell well because they are totally different than what is currently available in DCS. I can even see these aircraft attracting new interest from other flight simmers that have not had interest in DCS before because they have not been interested in combat. But something like a C2 Greyhound where they might be lured into flying support combat missions where they could just fly around as usual but have the thrill of delivering cargo to and from aircraft carriers. So even though these type of aircraft might not interest you personally they will affect you in one way or another by the extra sales that can keep funding DCS to deliver the aircraft that would interest you.

 

 

 

Here are just a few comments to put things in perspective.

ThorBrasil: “What DCS lacks is a transport plane. F-16 was the last fighter I will buy.”

Montes: “Yes, airplanes that are not just fighter, we don't all want to fight all the time.”

Aluminum Donkey:

“I've blown a thousand bux or thereabouts on DCS World, and all I ever really do in it is some furballs and fly around like a civilian flight sim, admiring the scenery. Maybe try to strafe the civilian traffic now and then.”

Edited March 21, 2020 by Evoman

[jojyrocks]

From your comments I can clearly see you are seeing things from your own perceived perspective. You are not seeing that there is actually another market out there that has a desire for anything else that is not a military fighter jet. I have seeing several comments over the years of people that just like flying around from air base to air base and enjoying the view without any interest in combat. While I do agree that any Vietnam era airplane or a Tornado that is highly coveted by Europeans would sell well. I also think that other supporting military aircraft would be a hot sellers because they are NOT just another fighter jet. From what I have seen aircraft like the C-130, E-2 Hawkeye, S-3 Viking and even the C-2 Greyhound would sell well because they are totally different than what is currently available in DCS. I can even see these aircraft attracting new interest from other flight simmers that have not had interest in DCS before because they have not been interested in combat. But something like a C2 Greyhound where they might be lured into flying support combat missions where they could just fly around as usual but have the thrill of delivering cargo to and from aircraft carriers. So even though these type of aircraft might not interest you personally they will affect you in one way or another by the extra sales that can keep funding DCS to deliver the aircraft that would interest you.

 

 

 

Here are just a few comments to put things in perspective.

ThorBrasil: “What DCS lacks is a transport plane. F-16 was the last fighter I will buy.”

Montes: “Yes, airplanes that are not just fighter, we don't all want to fight all the time.”

Aluminum Donkey:

“I've blown a thousand bux or thereabouts on DCS World, and all I ever really do in it is some furballs and fly around like a civilian flight sim, admiring the scenery. Maybe try to strafe the civilian traffic now and then.”

 

 

 

 

Do you even realize the complication of making such an aircraft? I already said it take 3-4 years to create a fighter module of single or twin seat.

 

 

So how long would it take to create very complicated planes like Greyhound, C-130, S-3 Viking? All that heavy work for so little...:noexpression:

 

You've shown me comment examples...but those are only VERY select few. MAJORITY would rather pick an F-4 Phantom over a S-3 viking anyday, if there was a choice.Undoubtedly, there would be more takers for F-4 Phantom. S-3 or Greyhound would cost even more coz the work complications of building that jets would surely tank the developers.

 

 

 

DCS is already tanked with so many fighters in the pipeline to create a real complicated plane like C-2 Greyhound or S-3 for that matter. A B1B sounds interesting, though. Its complicated and pretty sure its going to cost, but I'd still buy that instead of maybe a C2 Greyhound and the C-130 which would also cost just the same. B-1B has MORE fun factor than C-2 and C-130...

 

 

 

I would prefer they come MUCH later.

 

 

You also forget the maps are not big enough to make good use of these planes. Its not X-Plane 11. There is the upcoming Microsoft Flight simulator 2020 coming and they are geared towards scenic long range flights.

[Evoman]

Do you even realize the complication of making such an aircraft? I already said it take 3-4 years to create a fighter module of single or twin seat.

 

 

So how long would it take to create very complicated planes like Greyhound, C-130, S-3 Viking? All that heavy work for so little...:noexpression:

 

You've shown me comment examples...but those are only VERY select few. MAJORITY would rather pick an F-4 Phantom over a S-3 viking anyday, if there was a choice.Undoubtedly, there would be more takers for F-4 Phantom. S-3 or Greyhound would cost even more coz the work complications of building that jets would surely tank the developers.

 

 

 

DCS is already tanked with so many fighters in the pipeline to create a real complicated plane like C-2 Greyhound or S-3 for that matter. A B1B sounds interesting, though. Its complicated and pretty sure its going to cost, but I'd still buy that instead of maybe a C2 Greyhound and the C-130 which would also cost just the same. B-1B has MORE fun factor than C-2 and C-130...

 

 

 

I would prefer they come MUCH later.

 

 

You also forget the maps are not big enough to make good use of these planes. Its not X-Plane 11. There is the upcoming Microsoft Flight simulator 2020 coming and they are geared towards scenic long range flights.

 

 

I can totally understand the E-2 Hawkeye and the S-3 being a complicated aircraft because of its radar systems. However the C-2 Greyhound is probably one of the simplest aircraft to develop because it has no radar or weapons systems. It is basically a pure transport aircraft that provides critical logistics support to carrier strike groups over short to medium ranges. Which makes it perfect for the current map size. Plus it would be a hot seller because it would be the only transport aircraft in DCS that would also be capable of landing on an aircraft carrier. In real life the C-2 is a life line to a Carrier group. Fighter jets alone don't win wars. Its up to the C-2 to bring in the spare parts to keep those fighter jets running.

Edited March 22, 2020 by Evoman