S-3 Viking

[Devil 505]

Well Gents,

 

I am sold. I was in the Navy and never really paid to much attention to the Viking. I just realized the damn thing had internal stores with bay doors for Anti Sub warfare. I always thought it was just external stores. I was there when the final ones came in off the carriers.

 

I am now a big proponent of getting this bird into DCS and I think Heatblur should be the one to do it. They seem to have a solid lock on Navy modules. Now of course I would rather see the A-6 and F-4 first, but any Navy bird is a must in my book. Whos down for the Viking?

[probad]

asw is beyond unfleshed in dcs, you're asking for a lot very casually.

[Silver_Dragon]

A S-3 with a new 3D model has imperative to complete the future carrier air wings (as SH-60/MH-60). The good part as ED has added two new /updated kilo submarines with mast and animated torpedo tubes, propellers, masts and dive planes. I think can be added hability to submerge movement in tha future. Other remark has the two sub lanches club-S antiship and cruise missile adeed as ned 3D model some versions ago to DCS. If ED enable them to DCS (and future aircrafts to WW2 as Ju-88A4 has show a stub of torpedoe) expected see antiship and asw torpedoes soon .

 

Not bad a "sound" engine in the future and a S-3 and another ASW aircraft or helo can be feasible.

 

Enviado desde mi GT-S7580 mediante Tapatalk

[DaveRindner]

I served in US Army, but I did pick up a few things about surface warfare and ASW from my Navy colleagues.

ASW is tedious and boring. They use Theory of Proximal Search to ascertain possible submerged targets. Sonoboyous are dropped at appropriate locations to either drive the prey, with active pings, or dropped in passive mode only. Either case it takes a long time, and requires patience.

I am not certain it makes a good candidate for home enthusiast market.

S-3 was updated to carry Harpoons and GBU-31/38, CBU, and MK series of bombs. As was its larger cousin P-3. With exception of torpedoes, AG ordinance was carried on wing pylons. It would be used against smaller surface combatants and improvised combat watercraft. Gunboats, boghammers, smuggling powerboats.

S-3 performance was similar to A-10, as both share engine and are of somewhat similar weight, with S-3 having lower drag.

[Silver_Dragon]

I served in US Army, but I did pick up a few things about surface warfare and ASW from my Navy colleagues.

ASW is tedious and boring. They use Theory of Proximal Search to ascertain possible submerged targets. Sonoboyous are dropped at appropriate locations to either drive the prey, with active pings, or dropped in passive mode only. Either case it takes a long time, and requires patience.

I am not certain it makes a good candidate for home enthusiast market.

S-3 was updated to carry Harpoons and GBU-31/38, CBU, and MK series of bombs. As was its larger cousin P-3. With exception of torpedoes, AG ordinance was carried on wing pylons. It would be used against smaller surface combatants and improvised combat watercraft. Gunboats, boghammers, smuggling powerboats.

S-3 performance was similar to A-10, as both share engine and are of somewhat similar weight, with S-3 having lower drag.

Surely the subsim and old dangerous waters apreciate them.

 

Enviado desde mi GT-S7580 mediante Tapatalk

[Montes]

I would like a Viking

[The_Pharoah]

I welcome (almost) any new a/c addition to DCS, however I'd echo your original thoughts by saying why build an SB3 when you can build an A6? :) Perfect for strike missions AND can do A2A refueling as well.

[amalahama]

I also like the Viking. In fact any multi-crew complex aircraft like bombers or ASWs would be a very fine addition, unfortunately I don't see them happening any time soon.

 

Regards

[asla36]

An ASW aircraft would be awesome! That is if we were to have submarines... Looking at you, Normandy/Assets Pack. But for the Viking we would need something more modern. Bonus points if you can get it to be controlled by a human.

[Emmy]

ASW in "God View" was like playing chess in Harpoon.

 

I think it could be just as challenging in an S-3 in addition to its anti-surface and tanker roles.

 

+1 for an S-3

[OnlyforDCS]

Here is an idea for the mods: Put a wishlist sub-forum inside every third party's forum section.

[dimitrischal]

Why the viking when you can have the intruder?

ASW is tedious and boring to a lot of ppl especially if modeled accurately with poor meteorological conditions and low visibility carrier ops, something as pointed before not for the casual player.

DCS lacks in so many aspects that asking for ASW to be implemented before these issues are addressed is kinda selfish.

I can see ASW as being a DCS3+ addition if ever really implemented. I hope it does but i wouldnt hold my breath.

[DaveRindner]

I would prefer A-4, F-8, F-4, A-7, Tornado GR4, Etendard, Jaguar, or OV-10D, to S-3.

[Silver_Dragon]

I would prefer A-4, F-8, F-4, A-7, Tornado GR4, Etendard, Jaguar, or OV-10D, to S-3.

Please we have talking about a S-3 post, dont intent hijack the treat and derrail them. Have hundred or treats talking about that planes on the wishlist.

 

Enviado desde mi GT-S7580 mediante Tapatalk

[Montes]

Why only figthers?

[lunaticfringe]

Time and space.

 

ASW isn't simply tedious, it's incredibly time consuming. And frankly, there isn't a viable operating environment size wise on any current or future proposed map for the methods that would be used on either side.

[asla36]

And we would need subs, preferably human controlled.

[Montes]

But some plane that does more than fight. That would attract another type of public, the most emblematic aircraft must sell much but the rest?

[lunaticfringe]

Tactical and strategic aircraft perform one of three roles:

 

1. Direct combat

2. Detection/Denial

3. Delivery

 

If you're not shooting somebody, you're either finding targets, denying your people from being targeted, or delivering the material required for things to be shot- whether it's munitions, people, hardware, or gas.

 

DCS doesn't have enough blue water on any map for ASW to work, and nothing large enough for full scale COD/theatre-level transport, which means non-combat roles are AEW, EW, troop ferrying, or tanking.

 

AEW piloting is long hours in a single pattern. EW (which is so far beyond the current model of DCS it should be classified as a nonstarter) or playing Texaco has the possibility of following a package. Or you can do helo work, and that already exists.

 

I'm not certain what you want anyone to come up with for something else here.

[probad]

pipe dream fantasies of an s-3 defecating a torpedo as dozens of aim-54s streak overhead --

 

who would operate enemy units so obligingly is a mystery nobody knows!

[Vampyre]

To be fair, the S-3 was a lot more than just an anti-submarine plane. It was an excellent patrol plane/anti-ship platform and had the ability to employ Mk-82/84 iron bombs, Mk-20 Rockeyes, Mavericks, Harpoons, Rockets, and an array of mines in various sizes in addition to the Mk46 and Mk50 torpedoes it used for ASW. It also was a good shipborne recovery tanker. After about 1999 the ASW equipment was removed anyway.

[BSS_Vidar]

ASW boring? No it isn't! It's is an intense game of cat and mouse. My quickest kill in a trainex was within 10 min of gaining contact on an LA class. The S-3 could carry 10 Mk-82/83 bombs, 6 on the wings and 4 in the bays (2 each side). 4 Mk-46/50 Torpedoes could be carried in the bays as well.

 

 

ASW in DCS? That is a LOT to ask for. Most of it too classified to do it correctly. I know, I have over 2,000 hours in WarHoovers as a SENSO. Almost everything mission-wise started from my seat. You would have to model all four seats to coordinate a proper ASW mission. That ain't happenin'.

 

 

Furthermore, the science involved below the surface would have to be modeled in - some of which is classified. Knowing the tactics to employ sensors based on the water column involved... Most definitely classified.

 

 

Each sono-buoy dropped in the water becomes its own radio navigation source. ADF data from the buoy's allowed the pilot to mark-on-top to maintain the buoy's position in the real world. Meaning if you don't keep your buoy positions updated due to current drift, how do you know where the submarine is?

 

 

Anti-Surface missions are much more feasible with bombs, rockets, CBU's, Harpoon, Slam, and Maverick missiles. However, a single pilot can not do this. The pilot's PDF only displays "symbology" that can not be used as a targeting source. It is strictly a source for pilot situational awareness. No sensors can be used on it. You would need - at beast- the Co-Tacs MFD to display Radar, ESM, MAD, Flir, and Maverick seeker head imagery to display data for targeting, then transfer that to the pilot's PFD.

 

 

Seeing S-3's as AI tankers is fun for me. Love seeing my old squadron on the tail (VS-22 Checkmates) - radio callsign the "Vidars" brings back fond memories and immersion in the sim.

 

 

I'd have to sadly agree, the A-6 and/or A-7 would be a more acceptable add to the flight deck. S-3's sitting on the deck, and as AI tankers are a terrific addition.

 

 

However, As a member of the Black Sheep, when are we gonna get our F-4U's with Carriers?!!! ;-)

 

 

Vidar

Edited February 11, 2018 by BSS_Vidar

[Airj247]

The S-3 would be pretty cool.

Edited February 16, 2018 by Airj247

[Jester986]

Yes please, I think the multicrew in it would be great.

[Freeroamer]

+1