Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Flying is one thing, but the big question is how one would implement its function. Have a radar scope and a (hopefully a little upgraded) CA-like command interface to vector around AI flights?

Posted

Even if the radar is a MFD display that would do kind of a like a "fog of war" with a radar sweep on an F10 view. That would be good enough to make things more interesting.

Posted
Even if the radar is a MFD display that would do kind of a like a "fog of war" with a radar sweep on an F10 view. That would be good enough to make things more interesting.

 

Interesting idea and an E-2 module would fit great with the F-14 and A-6. Speaking about the radar and F10 view, I would like to be able to see a radar range circle at least added. As it stands now, I create a flight plan for an E-2 in the mission editor but I don't really know the extent of the radar coverage.

i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT"

Posted
Interesting idea and an E-2 module would fit great with the F-14 and A-6. Speaking about the radar and F10 view, I would like to be able to see a radar range circle at least added. As it stands now, I create a flight plan for an E-2 in the mission editor but I don't really know the extent of the radar coverage.

 

I agree with the fitting in part, i think the e2c would be a would be a great addition to help in multiplayer and even single missions to cover more aspects of real life scenarios

Posted (edited)

I'd love to see this happening and a recent post on reddit suggests many others would too.

 

While I fully understand ED unwillingness to do any guess work with their aircraft I think some exceptions should be made when the extended gameplay opportunities largely outweight the lower realism level.

Combined Arms is a prime example.

a F-22 or an AH-64D have some unique capabilities but ultimately they add very little in term of gameplay.

On the other hand, even a light AWACS simulation would open completely new doors.

kNruqbr.jpg

 

ED could develop an AWACS simulation and make it available to all AWACS aircraft,

the development would be funded by the E-2 module which, as an added incentive, would have a fully modeled "radar post" while the A-50 or the E-3 would just have a custom F10 view.

Hawkeye_DN-SD-02-03997.jpg

 

 

Also right now, if added to a mission, the ground commander slot is available no matter what.

It'd be nice if it was tied to some vehicles and aircraft. It would indirectly create high value targets. There are already a number of suitable units for this in the game

3tFDJoB.png

Edited by Eight Ball
Posted
Why can’t the A-50 have a radar post?

 

What do you mean? like also have the A-50 as a actionable aircraft so we can have say a hawkeye crew vs a A-50 Crew?

Posted
A Hawkeye would be an awesome addition to DCS. Especially multiplayer. First day buy for me.

 

Same here, I think Id put a deposit down for it to aid with development if the right people were to take it on :thumbup:

Posted (edited)

 

This video should inspire a developer, when I saw it for the first time I thought it was gonna be a release or something, kinda made me mad it wasnt:mad:

Edited by bullitt757
Posted
I would like to see this plane behind the stick, it looks like it already has a great amount of detail into it.

 

And do what exactly?

 

AWACS planes, just like tankers, have a mission profile which is basically just take off, fly massive circles for hours on end, land.

 

Pretty boring from the pilot seat imo.

 

A radar operator position would be neat for multiplayer to replace the existing CA/F10 slots that some people take up, but they'd probably not be enough usage or demand to warrant the cost of a full module for that.

Posted
And do what exactly?

 

AWACS planes, just like tankers, have a mission profile which is basically just take off, fly massive circles for hours on end, land.

 

Pretty boring from the pilot seat imo.

 

A radar operator position would be neat for multiplayer to replace the existing CA/F10 slots that some people take up, but they'd probably not be enough usage or demand to warrant the cost of a full module for that.

 

Just because you dont have an interest in the aircraft doesn't mean others do not. From a "barney" as in break it down barney style for the slow ones, yea they fly around for hours but I mean com'on I have yet to see a boring online session that was actually meant for something. Plus, you could say the same thing about a bunch of other aircraft that just fly around. Most active aircraft just "fly around" unless in a deployment. Others have expressed interest and so do I.

Posted (edited)
Just because you dont have an interest in the aircraft doesn't mean others do not.

Conversely, I actually think it's a very interesting aircraft. I just don't think it's really that useful as a pilotable one in DCS.

 

I'd rather ED leave the AI one as is, but make the radar operator an actual position that can be taken up by any client in MP. Same for the A-50 for the Redfor.

Edited by Buzzles
Spelling!
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

And if someone would do the E-2 Hawkeye they could even make the C-2 Greyhound which is very similar in some parts and we would get a carrier landing capable cargoplane. :)

vCVW-17 / VF-74

  • 9 months later...
Posted

Flying an e2 can be very interesting for who we are not interested in fighting but to be part of the missions.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

this is a damn sexy plane to watch. even c-2 grayhound is ok for me if hawkeye too complex or too confidential

FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15EF-4| Tornado

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60

 

Youtube

MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...