Flyable civilian aircraft like Cessna 172

[Charly_Owl]

A damage model isn't limited to wings ripping off. Plenty of engine-related malfunctions or system-specific ones (hydraulic system failure, generator failure, etc.) can be coded and emergency procedures are the bread and butter of civilian modules.

[Highwayman-Ed]

I’m keeping my fingers tightly crossed that OctopusG who just dropped the I-16 on us bring us their An-2.

 

[Gierasimov]

I wouldn't mind intercepting civilian aircraft with my trusty Hornet or Viper (later). Would add some degree of realism if there were civilian AI aircraft to put into the mission.

[SharpeXB]

I wouldn't mind intercepting civilian aircraft with my trusty Hornet or Viper (later). Would add some degree of realism if there were civilian AI aircraft to put into the mission.

There already are missions like this and some civilian AI

[Northstar98]

SharpeXB said:

Because every feature added to DCS comes at the expense of something else. So instead of a CEII that really doesn’t belong in the environment and concept of DCSW we could have had perhaps a WWII era biplane such as a Tiger Moth or Stearman. 3rd party devs aren’t an exception to this fact either.

Give me strength, on a time basis perhaps yes, but then prioritisation should be focused... Sure I agree combat aircraft should be higher up on the DCS priority food chain than a C172, but unlike you I don't think we should be blocking aircraft considering the benefits to actually simulating flight (of all freaking things :doh:) than most other sims...

Besides what about the C-101EB? or the Yak-52? or EDs TF-51D the latter being integrated into the base DCS World... Surely those fly straight in the face of the laws of the mighty acronym, that should never ever be questioned or transgressed?

BOW DOWN TO THE ACRONYM!!!

SharpeXB said:

In place of a C172 that doesn’t belong in Digital Combat Simulator

Well, ha ha, that was quick...

What! non-combat aircraft in DCS!? How DARE they! Think of the acronym! Won't ANYBODY think of the poor acronym? How dare aircraft that can't fight be in DCS, as a module. Don't you understand people? If that happens the sky will fall, everything combat will be taken away and ED will remove the F/A-18C and give up on the F-16C so they can do an A320!

Seriously your whole shtick with the acronym is bordering zealotry... Are we going to ram-raid PC World for selling vacuum cleaners? Are we going to TLAM Card Factory for selling balloons? How about Screwfix for selling clamps? Or Boots for not selling boots? Or Staples for selling door signage?

SharpeXB said:

Enticing the civ sim players into DCSW would require extensive features that are superfluous to a combat oriented sim.

Do I now Sharpe? Well thank-you for clarifying my opinion to me, I mean it's not like I was a civ player for a freaking decade, devoting actually a large amount of money that I regret doing, before finding DCS and immediately jumping ship.

Now sure, I'm not the only sim player around, of course not, but stop pretending that you're inside the heads of non-DCS sim players...

SharpeXB said:

Mainly a global map, worldwide airports and real weather.

What you just did is say global map twice and improve weather. Weather is being improved on, a world map is a hope to do (but probably not in the near future) and you are NOT inside the heads of sim players, I was willing to sacrifice a world map and weather for far better quality over quantity, or am I an anomaly?

SharpeXB said:

A single well done Cessna isn’t going to bring thousands of new players just because it’s FM might be good.

Might be good!? Your lack of faith is disturbing...

What will it be SFM? On the same level of some other sims whose FMs grovel in the face of DCS...

For the infinitieth time helicopters anyone?

SharpeXB said:

And DCS simply can’t match the volume of content those other sims have which is a big factor in their appeal. Going in that direction would be a big waste of resources that could be better used for other features.

Fine, probably the only thing where I agree with you. Big waste of resources? Come on... this is a priority issue.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[hazzer]

People here put down everything so quickly. There are some people out there that kick off as soon as something that isn't similar to f-16 / f-18 is being developed. Is pathetic really.

[Baco]

I would fly them. I enjoy both parts of Aviation. Specially short hops. Civil aviation sims have a shitty FM all of them, AND most important no damage model whatsoever, its either boom or nothing.

I truly enjoy the flat on my main gear after a rough landing, or scraping a wing if I hit something...

Hell even the random system failure feature in a combat sim makes No sense, you "sit" to fly combat, not to abort a mission because of a system failure... Now in a civie the flight gets interesting ;)

[Northstar98]

hazzer said:

People here put down everything so quickly. There are some people out there that kick off as soon as something that isn't similar to f-16 / f-18 is being developed. Is pathetic really.

Don't get me wrong I think there should be a priority, there should be a hierarchy, I think module wise that non-combat stuff should rank relatively low compared to some aircraft - but completely putting it down? No, DCS has a lot of potential and it's graphics and it's FDMs stock kicks much of the competition where it hurts.

I'm sick to death of people screeching the acronym as if it means anything, like that actually counts for anything.

I'm also sick to death of people getting their crystal balls out it's so irritating...

Baco said:

I would fly them. I enjoy both parts of Aviation. Specially short hops. Civil aviation sims have a <profanity>ty FM all of them, AND most important no damage model whatsoever, its either boom or nothing.

I truly enjoy the flat on my main gear after a rough landing, or scraping a wing if I hit something...

Hell even the random system failure feature in a combat sim makes No sense, you "sit" to fly combat, not to abort a mission because of a system failure... Now in a civie the flight gets interesting

Pretty much this, I mean at least 85% (though now more like 95% of the time) I'm not doing anything combat related (though I do need a new HOTAS), because the experience in DCS is just way better

Edited September 28, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[SonofEil]

I’m keeping my fingers tightly crossed that OctopusG who just dropped the I-16 on us bring us their An-2.

Whoa, that would be awesome! I can’t see any reason why they wouldn’t.

 

[Paraphrase]:cry::cry:STOP TALKING ABOUT CIVILIAN AIRPLANES IN DCS:cry::cry:[/Paraphrase]

I see you’re still trying to prevent even the discussion of expanding DCS beyond your narrow idea of just a few dogfighting airplanes. Got bad new for you, your gatekeeping isn’t working.

[SharpeXB]

Give me strength, on a time basis perhaps yes, but then prioritisation should be focused... Sure I agree combat aircraft should be higher up on the DCS priority food chain than a C172, but unlike you I don't think we should be blocking aircraft considering the benefits to actually simulating flight (of all freaking things :doh:) than most other sims...

 

Besides what about the C-101EB? or the Yak-52? or EDs TF-51D the latter being integrated into the base DCS World... Surely those fly straight in the face of the laws of the mighty acronym, that should never ever be questioned or transgressed?

 

BOW DOWN TO THE ACRONYM!!! :notworthy:

 

:megalol:

 

Well, ha ha, that was quick... :doh:

 

What! non-combat aircraft in DCS!? How DARE they! Think of the acronym! Won't ANYBODY think of the poor acronym? How dare aircraft that can't fight be in DCS, as a module. Don't you understand people? If that happens the sky will fall, everything combat will be taken away and ED will remove the F/A-18C and give up on the F-16C so they can do an A320! :doh:

 

Seriously your whole shtick with the acronym is bordering zealotry... Are we going to ram-raid PC World for selling vacuum cleaners? Are we going to TLAM Card Factory for selling balloons? How about Screwfix for selling clamps? Or Boots for not selling boots? Or Staples for selling door signage?

 

Do I now Sharpe? Well thank-you for clarifying my opinion to me, I mean it's not like I was a civ player for a freaking decade, devoting actually a large amount of money that I regret doing, before finding DCS and immediately jumping ship.

 

Now sure, I'm not the only sim player around, of course not, but stop pretending that you're inside the heads of non-DCS sim players...

 

 

 

What you just did is say global map twice and improve weather. Weather is being improved on, a world map is a hope to do (but probably not in the near future) and you are NOT inside the heads of sim players, I was willing to sacrifice a world map and weather for far better quality over quantity, or am I an anomaly?

 

Might be good!? Your lack of faith is disturbing...

 

What will it be SFM? On the same level of some other sims whose FMs grovel in the face of DCS...

 

For the infinitieth time helicopters anyone?

 

Fine, probably the only thing where I agree with you. Big waste of resources? Come on... this is a priority issue.

Rant much?

Nobody would pay for a C172 in this sim because it’s available for free in quite good quality in other sims.

 

Civil aviation sims have a shitty FM all of them, AND most important no damage model whatsoever

Why would players want a super advanced FM for such a simple easy to fly aircraft as a Cessna 172? Or an elaborate DM? Do you want a flight sim or a crash sim?

The better civ sims have quite adequate FM for these aircraft, a Cessna isn’t an aerobatic or combat aircraft.

Edited May 11, 2019 by SharpeXB

[streakeagle]

Pretty much every airplane in this sim is available for free in many other civil sims. What I pay for here is accurate systems modeling, especially combat equipment such as sensors and weapons.

 

From my perspective, there is an unofficial race:

For DCS World to become more and more like civil flight sims supporting a global map and every possible aircraft and civil sims to support combat systems like radar, weapons, and enemy AI.

 

I have all the major civil sims like FSX/FSX:SE/P3d, Aerofly FS2, XP11, Flight Gear etc. and nearly every major combat flight sim ever released. The two branches of flight simming have been slowly merging for nearly two decades. Until DCS World has a proper globe world or P3d/XP fully support combat simulation, I won't be completely satisfied. But if I could only have one, it would be DCS World.

 

I can fly the P-51D modeled to an extremely realistic degree in either DCS World or FSX/P3d. The Accusim P-51D favors more detailed systems modeling for general aircraft systems with provisions for fatigue and routine maintenance. The DCS World P-51D has guns, rockets, and bombs with a properly functioning gun sight and an environment that includes both friendly and enemy combatants. If DCS World never existed, the FSX/P3d P-51D still wouldn't be my preferred way to fly that plane. I would fly it in countless other combat flight sims that allow me to fly the P-51D in the environment is was built for: WW2 and Korean War air combat. The DCS World P-51D models the aircraft well enough that I have never bothered to buy the Accusim P-51D, which doesn't even support TacPack weapons modeling out of the box.

 

I have no problems with civil aircraft being released for DCS World as long as it doesn't cut into the rate at which combat aircraft are being produced. If civil aircraft attracted more developers, maybe the game would have more money to accelerate development of the core engine as well as new combat aircraft modules.

[SharpeXB]

The two branches of flight simming have been slowly merging for nearly two decades. Until DCS World has a proper globe world or P3d/XP fully support combat simulation, I won't be completely satisfied.

It’s not possible for every sim to be everything to everyone. DCS should stay focused on what it does well, combat simulation. It would really be impossible for DCS to have the amount of content these other sims have given it’s level of quality.

 

I have no problems with civil aircraft being released for DCS World as long as it doesn't cut into the rate at which combat aircraft are being produced.

That’s exactly what diluting the focus on combat aircraft would mean. Making civil aircraft in place of combat ones.

[Northstar98]

Ahh SharpeXB - The gatekeeper! The fortune teller! The acronym zealot...

SharpeXB said:

Rant much?

SharpeXB said:

Nobody would pay for a C172 in this sim because it’s available for free in quite good quality in other sims.

I guess I wouldn't pay for an F-18 either seeing as that's available for free in another sim... Guess I wouldn't pay for a Phantom either because there's a sim that includes that too and yes with weapons...

I mean for real Sharpe?

I love how you say nobody would pay for one... in a wishlist thread asking for civilian modules...

Do you see where you went wrong here?

SharpeXB said:

Why would players want a super advanced FM for such a simple easy to fly aircraft as a Cessna 172? Or an elaborate DM?

My. God.

I think I just pulled my freaking superior rectus rolling my eyes so hard...

I mean think about it,

Quote

why would players want a super advanced FM for such a simple, easy to fly aircraft such as a C-101EB or L-39? Or an elaborate DM?

There fixed that one for you...

SharpeXB said:

Do you want a flight sim or a crash sim?

Jesus wept...

In fact why do we have crash mechanics or tyre blowouts or landing gear failures in DCS? iT's nOt a CrAsH sIm!

SharpeXB said:

The better civ sims have quite adequate FM for these aircraft

Right.

Quite adequate? They're sub DCS SFM, with a better rudder, come on...

SharpeXB said:

a Cessna isn’t an aerobatic or combat aircraft.

Again with the acronym zealotry

Oh well... I guess you're right... oh hang on, what's this then?

Behold a Cessna, armed and used for combat... Look Hellfires! And look FLIR turret!

What about this one?

Another combat civvy Cessna? Look rockets! Mmmmm

Edited September 28, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[SharpeXB]

 

Behold a Cessna, armed and used for combat... Look Hellfires! And look FLIR turret!

 

What about this one?

 

 

Another combat civvy Cessna? Look rockets! Mmmmm

Those are ok since they’re combat aircraft. I can’t really see a dev making those for DCS though.

[SonofEil]

If DCS ever gets its ground game in order (they won’t), having U-27A / AC-208 and O-2 Skymasters would be excellent FAC/CAS assets. I’d buy both in a heartbeat.