GA Planes

[hotshotmike1001]

Please make GA planes Cessna and pipers etc Beechcrafts Cirrus Learjets Douglas DC-3

[=DECOY=]

Please make GA planes Cessna and pipers etc Beechcrafts Cirrus Learjets Douglas DC-3

 

 

This is DCS not FSX mate

[Teapot]

This is DCS not FSX mate

 

Quite a reasonable wishlist from hotshotmike, but ok ... mate ... we come to you to vet these kinds of things now?

Edited June 18, 2016 by Teapot

[=DECOY=]

This is DCS not FSX mate

No its not a valid wishlist. A valid wishlist for a combat simulator would be a f16, su34 and so on... this is a combat simulator NOT a civilian simulator which provides crap like a cessena or a beachcraft....

 

If someone's wish list contains such aircraft. They should use fsx or P3d

 

 

End of.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[NeilWillis]

Someone's wishlist can contain anything they want it to contain!

 

If you wanted to say that ED and the 3rd party developers wouldn't ever be likely to bother with GA modules, then that is what you should say. However, censoring someone's wishlist isn't really something you should get into.

 

You certainly shouldn't banish anyone from DCS World for having a wishlist you don't agree with!

[Diemos]

Not to mention that the US Air Force flies plenty of Cessnas, Beechcrafts, etc...

[Dragonslayer]

Someone's wishlist can contain anything they want it to contain!

 

If you wanted to say that ED and the 3rd party developers wouldn't ever be likely to bother with GA modules, then that is what you should say. However, censoring someone's wishlist isn't really something you should get into.

 

You certainly shouldn't banish anyone from DCS World for having a wishlist you don't agree with!

 

 

aehm - rubbish what you post here.

 

They only tell him that DCS is not an civilian simulator which is true. nothing more.

 

They dont insult him and they can have, in my opinion, their point of view.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

It would be nice to have civvie offerings for the sake immersion. If any were to be flyable, I'd want the caveat that they'd require some kind of combat role they were capable of, like the AC-208 or the UH-1H we have. The Huey really is the perfect example. Same with the Mi-8.

[Oubaas]

This is Digital COMBAT Simulator.

 

As much as I'm sure that the FSX/P3D/X-Plane crowd would love to completely take over the best flight sim on the market, HELL NO!

 

My time in DCS World is for military combat aircraft, not 747's and C172's.

 

I'm dead set against it, to the point that if that transition ever happens, I'll find another hobby and that will be the end of DCS World.

 

You want civilian aircraft? Go fly the civilian simulators!

 

:furious:

[Texac]

I think ED and the 3rd party developers have better things to introduce and create for this Combat Simulator than GA planes.

 

Like others mentioned it is a simulation of combat aircrafts and won't be a simulation for civilian planes in the future. Maybe a tanker or a military transport aircraft but that is very unlikely to happen.

[msalama]

You want civilian aircraft? Go fly the civilian simulators!

 

To model, say, a DCS-level C-47, or even a plain DC-3, would be entirely justified because you need cargo planes too. Would love such an add-on for the coming Normandy theatre myself :thumbup:

[NeilWillis]

aehm - rubbish what you post here.

 

They only tell him that DCS is not an civilian simulator which is true. nothing more.

 

They dont insult him and they can have, in my opinion, their point of view.

 

So they can have opinions but the OP can't, is that what you're saying? Who says the Cessnas have to be civil anyway? Think Bird Dog, and you may reconsider?

 

Incidentally, what does aehm mean?

[SageOT]

I'm with the majority here, just not quite as violently as some. As a flight sim hobbyist who enjoys all those listed sims I have to admit I don't understand why folks keep requesting civilian planes in -this- sim. All sims of course have their issues but Xplane, P3D, FSX all offer excellent GA and large civilian aviation experiences, and just as important to that type of flying offer complete access to the full world to fly in without any need to build a mission.

 

If ED or a 3rd party were to release a GA plane, you'd be paying an equal price for a much more limited experience. Why would you want to do that? For those that only want to simulate military aviation, this simulator is basically their only choice, why use up time and resources creating anything other than military planes/helos for -this- sim?

 

To that end, look at the (overall) negative reaction of this community (as a whole) any time even a trainer is announced. If I'm a 3rd party dev who would like to make money why in God's name would I release a Cessna 172 made for this game where it would be lambasted by the community and most likely barely sell. I'm going to use my time and effort to make it for a sim where people want it and will spend money on it.

 

All that said... I think Mig21* said it best earlier. I believe there is a place for other types of aircraft here that are not fighters and bombers. A Bird Dog, a Bronco, C130, transport helos, ect... planes that are GA-like, but have a place in a military simulation and can play a role in missions. If we are going to see non-combat aircraft in this sim I would hope, and I expect, those are the kind of things we would get eventually.

 

Finally, because this got long winded... The others are right. The OP has all the rights in the world for a wishlist, but I just think there is no need for that list as that stuff is already out there on the market elsewhere.

 

Sage

[Bidartarra]

I'd rather see developer resources go towards combat aircrafts. Between P3d, xplane and FSX there's a lot of ga planes around.

But every one has the right to their own opinions.

[USSInchon]

I would like to see AI civilian aircraft as they do have a place in the modern battle space. Look at the routes of Georgia and the SoH theaters. The UAE is home to 2 of the largest airlines in the world, not to mention one of the heaviest traveled air corridors on the planet. The NTTR map (once they are added) is home to some of the busiest GA airports in the US, not to mention Las Vegas International is a Hub for Southwest and a major destination for many airlines and GA Jets. Adding these aircraft will allow for even more realism dealing with intercepts of suspicious aircraft, airspace violators, etc. the DCS NIMBYs need to lighten up and realize there is a place for everything in this world.

[SageOT]

USSInchon, I'll give you that one AI plane models could definitely have a place but that is still not nearly as resource-intensive it's creating playable modules

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[shagrat]

This is not a "new" discussion... anyway, I guess from ED to any 3rd party, if they want to make an Airbus A-320, a Boeing 727 or a Cessna 172 they will neither ask Jameson1982 nor Oubaas for permission.

 

I doubt DCS will focus on GA planes soon, but ED never ruled out anything.

 

Just a hint, you can simply omit putting civil planes in the mission you run on your server and voilà no GA pesters your combat experience...

 

As for a Simulator i would love DCS to have more AI air traffic make a lively sky, but for MP I doubt players in GA aircraft will enjoy the occasional "accident" with a missiile up their a.. :D

[Vedexent]

ED is a business.

 

If there's enough money behind GA aircraft, they'll build them, or license the 3rd party FSX developers to port/build for DCS.

 

If there isn't, they won't.

 

Very little in the forums, one way or another, is likely to affect that.

 

That said - I agree that it's probably not likely that we'll see GA aircraft anytime soon.

[Teapot]

There are plenty of GA planes in the military

 

A proper *sandbox* sim won't channel the player into a specific role. Basically what a sandbox should provide is an open world where the player is pretty much left to their own devices on how the world will operate and develop. It's NOT on rails, so players are free to recreate RL environments if they choose, but equally free to fly in a polka-dot C-47 transports airlifting popsicles into beleaguered Berlin in a heavily modified WWII scenario.

 

Courtesy of Wikipedia

 

L-19/O-1 Bird Dog, used by Forward Air Controllers during the Vietnam War

 

The Stinson L-5 Sentinel was a World War II era liaison aircraft used by all branches of the U.S. military and by the British Royal Air Force.

 

Douglas C-47 flareship FACs began the forward air control mission in South Vietnam

 

During the 1960s and 1970s, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-controlled airline Air America operated up to 23 PC-6s at a time. Many of these were operated in the South-East Asia region, including South Vietnam during the Vietnam War. The type was used for various missions including paradropping supplies to troops, passenger transport, psy ops, reconnaissance, prisoner conveyance, airborne radio relay, and other intelligence operations.

 

GAF Nomad is a twin-engined turboprop

Military operators

Nomad N22B at the Museum of Australian Army Flying in 2007.

 

Indonesian Navy Nomad N24A in 2007.

Philippine Air Force Nomad N22SL at Mactan–Cebu International Airport in 2012.

Australian Army Aviation

173rd Aviation Squadron - one N22 (prototype, leased), 20 N22B , four N24A

School of Army Aviation (two N22B seconded from 173rd Aviation Squadron specifically to train Papua New Guinea Defence Force student pilots)

Royal Australian Air Force - one N22B, one Nomad Searchmaster, three N24A

No. 75 Squadron RAAF

Aircraft Research and Development Unit

Indonesian Navy - 42 N22B and N24A Nomad - 23 in storage: status AOG, 19 airworthy and six in service.[13]

Papua New Guinea Defence Force

Philippine Air Force - 20 Nomads (three in service)

Philippine Navy - 15 N24A Nomad

Royal Thai Air Force (N22B)

Royal Thai Navy (N24A)

Australian Customs Service (Coastwatch)

United States Customs Service

 

DHC-3 Otter - Military operators

Argentine Air Force: Former operator

Royal Australian Air Force: Two Otters (RAAF serial A100-1 and 2) were in service with the RAAF from 1961 to 1967. The aircraft were used for passenger and freight transport duties at the Weapons Research Establishment, Woomera, South Australia.

No. 1 Air Trials Unit

Bangladesh Air Force: Former operator

Burma Air Force

Khmer National Air Force: Former operator

Royal Canadian Air Force .. etc etc

 

DHC-6 Twin Otter

CC-138

Twin-engine STOL utility transport, search and rescue aircraft for the Canadian Forces. Based on the Series 300 aircraft.

UV-18A

Twin-engine STOL utility transport aircraft for the U.S. Army Alaska National Guard. Six built. It has been replaced by the C-23 Sherpa in US Army service.

UV-18B

Parachute training aircraft for the United States Air Force Academy. The United States Air Force Academy's 98th Flying Training Squadron maintains three[30] UV-18s in its inventory as free-fall parachuting training aircraft,[31] and by the Academy Parachute Team, the Wings of Blue, for year-round parachuting operations. Based on the Series 300 aircraft.

UV-18C

United States Army designation for three Viking Air Series 400s delivered in 2013.[32]

Operators[edit]

 

Beechcraft

Military aircraft

 

A USAF T-6A Texan II out of Randolph Air Force Base

Beechcraft UC-43 Traveler Earliest and impressed examples were stock, others had minor alterations to meet Military specifications.

Beechcraft AT-7 Navigator/C-45/UC-45/CT-128 Expeditor Model 18s built for the Military with minor modifications.

Beechcraft AT-11 Kansan Military derivative of the Model 18 fitted for training bombardiers and gunners

Beechcraft CT-134 Musketeer Canadian military derivatives of the Musketeer/Sundowner series.

Beechcraft AT-10 Wichita Twin-engined trainer built primarily of wood.

Beechcraft XA-38 Grizzly Prototype 1944 twin-engined attack aircraft.

Beechcraft T-34 Mentor & T-34C Turbine Mentor Single-engined two-seat trainer loosely derived from straight tail Bonanza.

Beechcraft XT-36 Cancelled trainer and transport aircraft.

Beechcraft L-23, U-8A through U-8E Seminole Off-the-shelf Twin Bonanza.

Beechcraft T-42 Cochise Off the shelf Baron.

Beechcraft Model 73 Jet Mentor Prototype for two-seat tandem jet trainer.

C-6 Ute/U-21 Ute Off the shelf King Air.

Beechcraft U-8F (or later) Seminole Military version of Queen Air.

Beechcraft C-12 Huron/RC-12 Guardrail/CT-145 Super King Air Super King Air for US and Canadian militaries.

Beechcraft T-1A Jayhawk Military version of Model 400 used as a trainer for pilots of large aircraft in the US military.

Beechcraft T-6 Texan II/CT-156 Harvard II redesigned Pilatus PC-9 turboprop two-seat trainer for JPATS competition.

 

Beechcraft King Air C90

Military operators

 

US Army VC-6A,(LJ-153), used by Wernher von Braun, displayed at White Sands Missile Range Museum

Algeria

Algerian Air Force[26]

Argentina

Argentine Army Aviation - One King Air 100.[27]

Barbados

Barbados Defence Force[citation needed]

Bolivia

Bolivian Air Force - One King Air 90, One King Air F90.[28]

Canada

Canadian Forces Air Command / Royal Canadian Air Force

Eight C90A King Airs were operated by Bombardier Aerospace as civil-registered trainers on behalf of the Canadian Armed Forces between 1992 and 2005.[29] Since 2005 the Allied Wings consortium has operated seven civil-registered C90B King Airs on behalf of the CAF/RCAF.[30][31][32]

 

Cessna's - don't even get me started on the Cessna's - 337, 185, 210, 182 ... etc

 

There are plenty more examples.

 

Most people who say *NO* to GA planes in a purportedly *sandbox* sim have a very narrow point of view as to what combat roles aviation can participate in. E.g. I mostly play casevac and resup roles ... or WWII.

The fast jests and the A10 leave me cold and uninterested apart from the fact that they're airplanes ... I love em all.

From my own military experience I can say that the bulk of the flying I did (as a grunt) was in aircraft that have a civvie counterpart E.g Nomad, P-6, Kiowa, Huey

 

You want fantasy? Go fly around in a sky exclusively full of F-18's, SU-27's & A-10's ... if you want real, then put some meat into the sim.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Teapot

[Teapot]

Oh .. and there's a reason people keep asking for GA in DCS ... it's called *physics*.

[Enduro14]

Well said teapot, I think it's exactly what dcs needs as its a pretty shallow sand box as is and the combat aspect has allot to be desired. Bring on civilian air traffic and hopefully a weather modeling system along with it that mimics other said sims. People around here sound like kids at work who think they are Tab protectors getting all angry for no reason.

Again teapot you hit the nail on the head!

[Buzzles]

No its not a valid wishlist. A valid wishlist for a combat simulator would be a f16, su34 and so on... this is a combat simulator NOT a civilian simulator which provides crap like a cessena or a beachcraft....

 

If someone's wish list contains such aircraft. They should use fsx or P3d

 

They only tell him that DCS is not an civilian simulator which is true. nothing more

 

 

This is Digital COMBAT Simulator.

 

As much as I'm sure that the FSX/P3D/X-Plane crowd would love to completely take over the best flight sim on the market, HELL NO!

My time in DCS World is for military combat aircraft, not 747's and C172's.

I'm dead set against it, to the point that if that transition ever happens, I'll find another hobby and that will be the end of DCS World.

You want civilian aircraft? Go fly the civilian simulators!

 

You can all be against it all you like, ED on the other hand disagree with you and seem to be supportive of GA being added in the future:

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/world/

DCS is a true "sandbox" simulation that can and will cover multiple time periods covering many types of combat and civilian units. DCS World allows both realistic game play and more relaxed game play to suit the player.

DCS World also has awesome physics for the flight models, which is a very strong primary reason why people would want GA in the engine. Edited June 19, 2016 by Buzzles

[ShalashakaDS]

An DCS L-19 would be quite something. Such a nice little plane.

[Mike Busutil]

The advanced level of systems management and flight physics that DCS has is perfect for GA aircraft. ED would own the flightsim community if they went that route.

 

Not everyone wants to see a Cessna in DCS but not all flight simmers want to go bomb a bride in an F-18 either.

 

I say bring all the aircraft in that we can and if you choose not to fly one, don't...

[PiedDroit]

The advanced level of systems management and flight physics that DCS has is perfect for GA aircraft. ED would own the flightsim community if they went that route.

 

Not everyone wants to see a Cessna in DCS but not all flight simmers want to go bomb a bride in an F-18 either.

 

I say bring all the aircraft in that we can and if you choose not to fly one, don't...

My only concern with that approach is how this will drive the sim's development (the core features).

While any 3rd party can make a GA plane, the expectations and priorities - in terms of environment - of GA flyers are very different from those of milsim flyers.

Both will want better ATC and maybe other features, but then GA flyers will want realistic civ traffic, more airports, worldwide maps, photorealistic land, etc.

As a mil sim flyer I want more/dynamic scenarios, improved AI, better damage model, better effects, better FLIR, etc.

I want more maps too although I'd be fine with only a couple more to add diversity (e.g. SoH, Normandy).

 

So, if GA planes come to DCS and their pilots are fine doing combat related missions, or hopping between the same airports and see the same landscape all the time and/or serving as targets for the weaponmongers, then I'm OK with that.

But if at some point DCS development is diverted to GA-exclusive features to the detriment of combat stuff, I would be a bit irritated and would probably wish they'd stayed on FSX/P3D/whatever.

P.S.: note that I'm not against it. that's why I write "to the detriment of". I think both could exist within DCS. What I don't want is combat stuff left aside for GA sim.

Edited June 20, 2016 by PiedDroit