DCS Transport Aircraft (Tactical)

[Focha]

I would really like to see a transport aircraft on DCS. It would be interesting for the logistics role.

 

For me, the most wanted would be:

- EADS CASA C-295 (M variant);

- Grumman C-2 Greyhound (A variant);

- The Mighty Lockheed C-130 (H variant);

- Alenia C-27J Spartan (J or A variant);

- Transall C-160 (D version);

- Fairchild C-123 Provider (K variant);

- Fairchild C-119 Flying Boxcar (G variant);

- Antonov An-12 Cub (A variant);

- Douglas C-47 Skytrain (B or D variant);

- Grumman C-1 Trader (TF-1 variant);

- Antonov An-26 Curl (A variant);

- Nord Noratlas (2502F variant).

 

Others that I would like to see by preference, but hard to achieve:

- Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey (A or MV-22B version);

- Lockheed C-141 Starlifter (C variant);

- Airbus A400M Atlas;

- Lockheed C-5 Galaxy (A variant);

- Boeing C-17 Globemaster III (A variant);

- Ilyushin Il-76 (M variant);

- Antonov An-178;

- Embraer KC-390.

 

It would be great to see at least some tactical lifter like:

C-130, C-160, C-123 or smaller like C-27, CASA 295, An-72...

 

Thank you. Kind regards.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Focha
Added Antonov An-12.

[Richard Dastardly]

Out of curiosity, what would you consider hard about a C-141? other than the apparent lack of support for more than two engines...

 

Out of all of them, the ones you'd either take to or across front lines would seem to be the ones to choose. Tactical insertion is still dodging enemy defences & dropping stores :p

 

You somehow missed the AN-12, btw.

[Evoman]

This has been coming up a lot lately in other forums in this same wishlist section. I think C-2 Greyhound and the C-130 would be the best bets. The C-130 would have the most appeal because of all the variants there have been. Even those not interested in the typical cargo planes would cave for a AC-130. The C-2 Greyhound would have a very particular uniqueness in that if it was developed for DCS it would be the only non-combat aircraft capable of operating off a carrier decks. This alone would draw the attention of civilian sim pilots that previously had no interest in DCS but would be curious of the trill of carrier traps.

 

Another good thing about developing non-combat aircraft is that the development time would be shorter because they have no weapons systems.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Evoman

[Steve Gee]

For me, the logical first choice would be the Greyhound.

 

DCS already is the leader in virtual naval air ops and with a new carrier on the horizon, OCD will be in need. I'd love to see variants of the C-130, but that's not the way DCS seems to work in plane models (more one model specific for the majority), so refine what you do best, carrier flight operations.

[SonofEil]

I'd also love to see flyable logistics/transport aircraft in DCS. The problem as I see it though is map size. These maps start looking very small once you're doing point-A-to-point-B airliner style flights. There are very few circumstances where you'd even reach the cruise portion of a flight. It only really works if you're running helicopters as transports. That being said, I absolutely wouldn't be opposed to a couple of heavy lift choppers. Mi-26, chinook, or ch-53 would be rad.

[Kang]

I sure agree a tactical transport plane would be a wonderful module, especially if it came with some proper functionality in DCS, from which transport helicopters including the utility helicopters already available would benefit as well.

 

The C-2 would definitely be a wonderful choice just for fleshing out our virtual carrier air wings and having that somewhat unique challenge to it.

 

While the C-130 has a lot of interesting variants, I would suggest maybe looking into something like a C-47 or C-119 for a similar idea, like the ability to go to a 'gunship' variant further down. Mostly a thought considering that '2 engines' limit. All three would also have the rather long service span going for them, so they can tie into a lot of the prospective DCS scenarios.

 

Also of course, always remember there are quite a few nice airframes from other countries. CASA 235? DHC-2 Caribou? ...

[Skyspin]

I like the idea of a C-130 and a C-2. They would add a whole new dimension to mission dynamics. Plus, each could have a shared cockpit where a copilot slot could be added for multiplayer. Carrier trapping in the C-2 with a buddy copilot would be beyond anything we are doing now other than riding backseat in the F-14B.

 

Skyspin

[SharpeXB]

I would really like to see a transport aircraft on DCS.

....

Great. You just made out a 40 year roadmap for ED

 

I love these aircraft wishlist threads :music_whistling:

[Richard Dastardly]

While the C-130 has a lot of interesting variants, I would suggest maybe looking into something like a C-47 or C-119 for a similar idea, like the ability to go to a 'gunship' variant further down. Mostly a thought considering that '2 engines' limit. All three would also have the rather long service span going for them, so they can tie into a lot of the prospective DCS scenarios.

 

Also of course, always remember there are quite a few nice airframes from other countries. CASA 235? DHC-2 Caribou? ...

 

The Transall ( C-160 ) was a long-serving twin engined western tactical lifter that looked very like a small Hercules, about half the payload of a 130H & was built to land on rough strips. An-26 is also twin-engined but it's not quite the same sort of lifter. No gunships afaik for either ( I don't think they'd be as much fun as people are thinking ), but worse nothing like the MC-130 which imo would be the thing to go for.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Richard Dastardly

[qcheck]

C-2 Greyhound is so cool! I'd buy that immediately! :)

[Northstar98]

Great. You just made out a 40 year roadmap for ED

 

I love these aircraft wishlist threads :music_whistling:

 

Oh Sharpe....

 

I would really like to see a transport aircraft on DCS.

 

:doh:

Edited April 12, 2020 by Northstar98

[wasizyayo]

The question is always how to do multi crew.

[john9001]

C123 of Vietnam/Air America fame. Two engine that looks like a small C130.

[QuiGon]

The Transall ( C-160 ) was a long-serving twin engined western tactical lifter

Was? It still is! It's still in very active service with the german, french and turkish air forces. ;)

I would absolutly love to see the Transall in DCS, as it is a true tactical transport aircraft, equipped with countermeassures and well known for its ability to perform deep diving combat approaches, or Sarajevo Approaches as they're called here, because of their frequent use during the Siege of Sarajevo.

I would also love to have a playable C-130 in DCS, but the Transall has the advantage of having only two engines, which makes it easier to develop for DCS.

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by QuiGon

[Richard Dastardly]

Was? It still is! It's still in very active service with the german, french and turkish air forces. ;)

 

True, I was thinking "hey they're being replaced by the a400" & got a bit premature :) it's not quite as old as the Hercules in absolute terms, but it's old enough that you can say it's "about that old" by now.

 

To add another point to it, RR Tyne engines sound great.

[FlankerKiller]

This has been coming up a lot lately in other forums in this same wishlist section. I think C-2 Greyhound and the C-130 would be the best bets. The C-130 would have the most appeal because of all the variants there have been. Even those not interested in the typical cargo planes would cave for a AC-130. The C-2 Greyhound would have a very particular uniqueness in that if it was developed for DCS it would be the only non-combat aircraft capable of operating off a carrier decks. This alone would draw the attention of civilian sim pilots that previously had no interest in DCS but would be curious of the trill of carrier traps.

 

Another good thing about developing non-combat aircraft is that the development time would be shorter because they have no weapons systems.

 

 

 

 

I never knew I wanted this until this moment. Really logistics support would be awesome. And launching form the deck to land up on the lines, delivering beers, beans, and bullets to a FOB, then returning to the boat would be pretty awesome. Could be exiting too, iff you have to doge SAM’s, or the other side try’s to intercept you.

[Ercoupe]

Seriously? You want to dodge SAMs and be intercepted by MiGs while flying a transport? Sounds like fun....all two minutes of it.

[FlankerKiller]

Back it the day, the C-23s were parked right behind my shop. Then when the Army tried to get the C-27 that fleet was also right behind my shop. I walked out and “talked shop” with both airframes maintainers several times. The 23 would be cool because it’s a cool ugly as hell plane. But the C-27 was a beast! Lots of glass in the pit, lots of CM, and a good sized box. It would be a blast to fly that thing in on NVG to Land on a road, or a field. You would still get to evade SAMs, and get shot at. I’d buy it for sure.

[QuiGon]

Seriously? You want to dodge SAMs and be intercepted by MiGs while flying a transport? Sounds like fun....all two minutes of it.

:lol:

[FlankerKiller]

Seriously? You want to dodge SAMs and be intercepted by MiGs while flying a transport? Sounds like fun....all two minutes of it.

 

It wouldn’t be too different then being in an A-10. Hopefully you would have some fighter cover, or as you say it would be a short encounter. But that’s the challenge. Try to loose him on the deck, stay low to evade the SAMs. Plus these things have some serious ECM, on par with the A-10. It’s a different form of flying, and a different kind of challenge, but it’s a big part of tactical aviation. But there would need to be a reason. ED needs to expand on the Logistics side of combat. The ground forces already have limited ammo, and trucks can resupply. But there needs to be limited amounts of said resupply, and those supplies need to have origin points, air bases, carriers, ships, Farps, Warehouses, that kind of thing. It would make both cargo, and strike missions have more of an impact, well at least in a scenario style game.

[Silver_Dragon]

Seriously? You want to dodge SAMs and be intercepted by MiGs while flying a transport? Sounds like fun....all two minutes of it.

 

We go to make a little change....

Seriously? You want to dodge SAMs and be intercepted by MiGs while flying a transport Helicopter? (UH-1/Mi-8) :music_whistling:

Edited April 20, 2020 by Silver_Dragon

[Richard Dastardly]

It wouldn’t be too different then being in an A-10. Hopefully you would have some fighter cover, or as you say it would be a short encounter. But that’s the challenge. Try to loose him on the deck, stay low to evade the SAMs. Plus these things have some serious ECM, on par with the A-10. It’s a different form of flying, and a different kind of challenge, but it’s a big part of tactical aviation. But there would need to be a reason. ED needs to expand on the Logistics side of combat. The ground forces already have limited ammo, and trucks can resupply. But there needs to be limited amounts of said resupply, and those supplies need to have origin points, air bases, carriers, ships, Farps, Warehouses, that kind of thing. It would make both cargo, and strike missions have more of an impact, well at least in a scenario style game.

 

Tac fixed wing transports have close to the same jobs as transport helis, and there's various built-in and 3rd-party support for those. What would actually be needed to do it properly is better support for rough strips.

 

The ultimate one is the MC-130, which does have a rather large suite of tools...

[FlankerKiller]

I couldn’t agree more about rough fields. Hell the F-5 could fly from pretty rough fields, and there’s a reason the MiG-29 has thous intake covers. There needs to be a point object we could place, and give a direction too that would denote an “emergency strip” maybe with scaleable length. Could be used on flat areas, or roads. What I meant about logistics support is they need to incorporate a whole lot of what third parties are doing.

[WHOGX5]

Tac fixed wing transports have close to the same jobs as transport helis, and there's various built-in and 3rd-party support for those. What would actually be needed to do it properly is better support for rough strips.

 

The ultimate one is the MC-130, which does have a rather large suite of tools...

An early MC-130 would be the perfect tactical aircraft to model for DCS. In addition to what the C-130 can do, the MC-130 can both give and receive fuel via aerial refueling, drop 15,000 lbs BLU-82 daisy cutters, extract ground personnel using the fulton recovery system, use FLIR and terrain following radar to perform low altitude penetration of enemy airspace in lo-vis and night time conditions, etc. The possibilities would be endless and it would be able to perform superbly even in combat roles.

 

Also, for the record, I would happily buy an E-2/C-2 if it was ever released. :D

[Focha]

Out of curiosity, what would you consider hard about a C-141? other than the apparent lack of support for more than two engines...

 

Out of all of them, the ones you'd either take to or across front lines would seem to be the ones to choose. Tactical insertion is still dodging enemy defences & dropping stores :p

 

You somehow missed the AN-12, btw.

 

Hard in that it would be difficult to get good arguments to have that kind of aircraft regarding the scale of the world maps in DCS or because the aircraft is still in service and could be difficult to extract data.

 

I missed An-12, I've added it. Thank you.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Focha