[POLL] A-6E (TRAM) Intruder in DCS

[SPEKTRE76]

Hello,

 

Many of you have seen my S-3B poll. I generated that so maybe a third party developer would be intrigued enough to take it on. There are a lot of yes votes for it. And like someone said, "The engine is already in game". So, that data wouldn't be hard to get.

 

I would like to propose another Naval aircraft. This one is none other than the infamous A-6E Intruder. It's the only plane that the Navy had that could carry 1/2 it's wet weight in ordinance (18,000lb max) and still do a barrel roll. That's 2.5 B-17G's worth.

 

 

 

 

SPECIFICATIONS:

 

 

General characteristics

 

Crew: two (pilot, bombardier/navigator)

Length: 54 ft 7 in (16.64 m)

Wingspan: 53 ft (16.15 m)

Height: 15 ft 7 in (4.75 m)

Wing area: 529 ft² (49.15 m²)

Airfoil: NACA 64A009 mod root, NACA 64A005.9 tip

Empty weight: 25,630 lb (11,630 kg)

Useful load: 34,996 lb (15,870 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 60,626 lb (27,500 kg)

Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney J52-P8B turbojets, 9,300 lbf (41.4 kN) each

Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0144

 

Performance

 

Maximum speed: 563 knots (648 mph, 1,040 km/h)

Range: 2,819 nmi (3,245 mi, 5,222 km)

Service ceiling: 40,600 ft (12,400 m)

Rate of climb: 7,620 ft/min (38.7 m/s)

Lift-to-drag ratio: 15.2

 

Armament

 

Hardpoints: 5 total: 4 wing and 1 fuselage with 18,000 lb (8,170 kg) load

Rockets:

2.75 in (70 mm) FFAR Rocket Pod

5 in (127 mm) Zuni Rocket Pod

Missiles:

AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missile

AGM-45 Shrike anti-radiation missile

AGM-62 Walleye TV-guided glide bomb

AGM-65 Maverick air-to-ground missile

AGM-84 Harpoon air-to-ground missile

AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile

Bombs:

Mk 81 250 lb (113 kg) GP bombs

Mk 82 500 lb (227 kg) GP bombs

Mk 83 1,000 lb (454 kg) GP bombs

Mk 84 2,000 lb (907 kg) GP bombs

Mk 117 750 lb (340 kg) GP bombs

Mk-20 Rockeye II cluster bombs

CBU-89 GATOR mine cluster bombs

Mk 77 750 lb (340 kg) incendiary bombs

GBU-10 Paveway II laser-guided bombs

GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bombs

GBU-16 Paveway II laser-guided bombs

B43 nuclear bomb

B57 nuclear bomb

B61 nuclear bomb

B83 nuclear bomb

Various air-dropped landmines

Various air-dropped underwater mines

Various practice bombs [Mk-76, BDU-45, LGTR, etc.]

Others:

Up to 5× 330 US gallons (1,200 L) external drop tanks for extended range/ferry flight/loitering time

 

 

[YOUTUBE]

[/YOUTUBE]

 

 

Good Documentary:

 

 

[YOUTUBE]

[/YOUTUBE]

 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2015 by SPEKTRE76

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

You point me to someone you don't like and I will end them if I could get an A-6 of any stripe in DCS or FC.

[WinterH]

Wow... such precision, even stating what year it should be added in :P.

 

For record, this is one of the aircraft I want most to see in DCS, probably a day one buy for me. Really, it's in my top list.

 

On the other hand, I don't think polls like these have that much value or effect on developers, and "funny" options or titles does not help either. Oh well... that's just me anyway.

[FraserNZL]

We are getting the A-7 from Razbam so there's a start

[eurofor]

There aren't many aircraft I would like to see more in DCS than the A-6. Preferably from LNS (;)) to complement the F-14.

[Plague2Delta]

Love it!!! I am all for it. This and the F-18C are my top two on my wishlist. The F-18 is being done already, so yes please make this one too :thumbup:

[PiedDroit]

Yes! Bring it!

[LcSummers]

Of corse, i love it.:thumbup:

 

 

I have ordered the 1/48 scale model kit from Hobby Boss with the #80710.

 

Wild thing:pilotfly:

[RabidRider]

There aren't many aircraft I would like to see more in DCS than the A-6. Preferably from LNS (;)) to complement the F-14.

+1

[mrmach]

2017?

No!!!.

Bring it now!

[SPEKTRE76]

Well, I was being realistic. If a 3rd Part Dev wanted to start now it would probably take that long.

Edited September 9, 2015 by SPEKTRE76

[westr]

I would love to see an A6 but she would be a complex aeroplane and I'm sure would take a long time to develop. We are approaching 2016 so depending on who would develop the module 2017 may not be realistic. Having said that I would say the A6 would be a perfect module for Leatherneck to develop, I just feel it would be their sort of aeroplane, and I have a suspicion that it could be one of their unannounced modules. Its just a suspicion though as they may feel one carrier-borne aeroplane is enough.

But yes A6 would make a really enjoyable and exciting module.

[Silver_Dragon]

The people missing the point meanwhile a external and internal 3d model can be "easy" to make, all internal code, some functions, and resolve bugs, take the 70% - 80% develop time.

[WildBillKelsoe]

Standby to get dragged to (Next US fixed wing... thread).

 

Well if this ever makes it to DCS, I'd buy it as a kickstarter or prepurchase..

 

As a fan of flight of the intruder movie (yes watched it for the first time this year), I'd love to get my hands on it.

 

Question is: will we get Willem Dafoe in mustache, as AI? I'd love to have a 'mustache' AI.

[Mainstay]

The F-14's would be incomplete without the A-6's on the deck.

 

[Slazi]

Yes. This and the Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler.

[hannibal]

add this plane when there is carrier ops..

[CheckGear]

Its hard to believe the A-6 was never simulated, with the exception of the game adaptation of Flight of the Intruder.

[FlankerKiller]

Its hard to believe the A-6 was never simulated, with the exception of the game adaptation of Flight of the Intruder.

Wings Over Vitamin.

[Flogger23m]

Would I like it? Sure, in a fantasy world we would have every plane we wanted. Realistically, no. Better air frames to be done, like an F-16, Super Hornet, MIG-29K ect. IMO.

[Vampyre]

Would I like it? Sure, in a fantasy world we would have every plane we wanted. Realistically, no. Better air frames to be done, like an F-16, Super Hornet, MIG-29K ect. IMO.

 

Funny, I don't really care for any of the types you listed. I'd would like to have a complete flyable mid-70's/80's era carrier air wing. A-6's were the heavy punch of the CVW's for over 30 years and would be fun to operate in a simulated tactical environment.

The point is that not everyone wants a present day ultra modern multirole fighter. I'd buy an A-6 module... or almost anything from the mid/late cold war, Vietnam era or WWII. I am just glad we have developers that have similar tastes and don't just focus on the platforms that have already been done to death in other simulations.

[mjmorrow]

I did not vote in the poll, but would really like to have this ride, a whole lot. I mean, the Intruder is an incredibly sharp looking plane and I would love to sim fly the Intruder. If the Intruder is made with a fully clickable cockpit and the ability to work with another team player in the same pit, I am absolutely going to purchase the Intruder, no doubt. My problem with the poll is that unless some team is already working on the Intruder, I don' t see how it could be in the DCS store by 2017. :thumbup: MJ

Edited September 16, 2015 by mjmorrow

[Evilducky]

As I stated in another thread - from Razbam - https://www.facebook.com/RazbamSims/posts/736930756393565

 

(if you dont have facebook) - Complete new model, FSX tac pack only. P3D v2.x native (Pro Plus version), and, it´s the foundation for the eventual DCS version..

[Flogger23m]

Funny, I don't really care for any of the types you listed...

 

And I still don't care much for the A-6. These threads are pointless, because everyone expects a "yes!" and when someone says they would prefer something else others get upset.

 

An A-6 would be a poor choice right now due to the lack of time period equipment. There is some overlap, but we're still missing a lot of older equipment. Carriers (US) are absent. It will require a whole lot of work. I would rather have a plane which can be utilized properly now than wait 2-3 years post release for appropriate units to go with it. Kind of like the WWII stuff. The only things they can go up against are the handful of prop planes. No bombers to escort, shoot down, or tanks to destroy.

 

Once some of the time period correct equipment is filled in I'd be more interested.

[WinterH]

And I still don't care much for the A-6. These threads are pointless, because everyone expects a "yes!" and when someone says they would prefer something else others get upset.

 

An A-6 would be a poor choice right now due to the lack of time period equipment. There is some overlap, but we're still missing a lot of older equipment...

 

And I still much prefer the A-6 over the types you've listed :music_whistling:

 

And there haven't been posts with an upset undertone before yours, you are perfectly entitled not to be interested in A-6, but like you said above, people can say when they prefer things other than you do ;).

 

No reason to get riled up when people reply to your subjective opinion with theirs, %90 of the posts over the forum just tends to be that anyway : subjective opinions, therefore I do actually agree with you on these threads mostly being useless (more so the ones with funny polls with funny titles and funny options).