Most Realistic/Accurate Module?

[ratherbegliding]

Hi everyone,

 

Not trying to upset anyone here, this is just a bit of fun!

 

Which modules do you consider to most faithfully reproduce the subject airframe?

In other words, if you could, which modules are so complete and accurate that you could jump in the real thing and stand a reasonable chance of flying it without killing yourself?

 

I think we need different categories to be fair:

 

1) Jets

2) WWII aircraft

3) Helicopters

 

I try to gauge the answer by reading the real life flight manuals and trying to use the checklists in them with DCS. From that perspective the Huey and Mi-8 seem pretty damn good! ;)

 

RBG

[mvsgas]

In other words, if you could, which modules are so complete and accurate that you could jump in the real thing and stand a reasonable chance of flying it without killing yourself?

 

Non of them, from any sim, including this one.

[Ivan Joukov]

True.

 

But the more complete, deep and realistic module is still by far A10C.

[Fri13]

Non of them, from any sim, including this one.

 

I would say that all that is in DCS are capable teach all that.

 

There is already threads here even how some has gained excellent skills flying helicopter first time in reality, after only flying in DCS.

As well people knowing how to start-up real things just by learning DCS.

 

Flying is not difficult once you have learned the basics. There really ain't so big difference in normal conditions to fly in reality as in good simulator, but question is always about the special tasks like already a BFM where 20% of experienced fighter pilots drop down because they don't learn how to dog fight. Then next 20% drops on next phase when it comes to systems management etc.

 

But there are big differences when you are given 5-10 hours time to learn things, vs spending 50-1000 hours in simulator doing those exact same things.

and yet in real situation one can freeze as mind goes blank.....

 

There is again a arguments going back and worth is the dog fighting a past because F-35.

Is there reason for a TOP GUN exist if the dog fight doesn't anymore happen?

 

Here is a funny thing people to consider:

 

 

With enough training very difficult things becomes possible. And that is a skill mostly, but many things requires talent why so many drops out in each different phases as they lack talent.

Why one of the reasons that F-35 changes is that pilots might need in future more talents for systems management and situational thinking and they shouldn't be dropped because they are bad in dog fighting as they can be excellent in otherwise fly F-35.

[Shadow KT]

I tell you which are the most unrealistic :lol:

 

Anything from Razbam, the Gazelle, which is due to be reworked at some point and the MiG-21, which is more a victim of its own bugs than anything else.

[wizav]

Realistic one might be Yak-52

[msalama]

are capable teach all that

 

Not fully. Controller throws, sensitivities and displacement forces, and airframe responses to controller movements, are so different in a real aircraft that you just can't jump in and fly away.

[Jester986]

I fly Hueys for a living and our sim is pretty good, for a sim. It has a few flight model issues though that bug me but most people wouldn't notice. I actually had my girlfriend practice on it for hours with VR and a proper cyclic and collective control and took her up in a bell 206 to give her a flight lesson. She did no better or worse than an average students flying a helicopter for the first time although she did say she thought it helped her grasp how to use the pedals quicker. Also I can say my skill as a pilot does not directly translate to skill in flying the Huey in DCS.

 

As far as jets go though I'd put my money on the L-39 being most likely to let you go from no flight experience to being able to fly the real one and the Yak for props. As good as the sims may be on ww2 i don't see any of them teaching a first timer how to handle thst much power.

 

As to the best helicopter its probably between the Ka-50 and the Mi-8. The closest experience I have to either of those is a CH-46 (and not a whole lot of experience with it) but the ka-50 does feel like a multi rotor system with a lot of stability control systems and the Mi-8 just "feels right" but I don't have any experience with heavy single rotor helicopters.

[Jester986]

I would say that all that is in DCS are capable teach all that.

 

There is already threads here even how some has gained excellent skills flying helicopter first time in reality, after only flying in DCS.

As well people knowing how to start-up real things just by learning DCS./QUOTE]

 

I read that thread and don't want to be rude to that poster, but I find that difficult to believe. Maybe they just had a natural talent or maybe the flight instructor was overly kind and helpful trying to get them to spend more money on flight lessons. But flying real helicopters and flying DCS helicopters are not the same skill set.

[Shadow KT]

Not fully. Controller throws, sensitivities and displacement forces, and airframe responses to controller movements, are so different in a real aircraft that you just can't jump in and fly away.

 

That is something you can get used to quite quick.

 

If the flight model is close and accurate, as well as the systems... I would say you can transition pretty quickly

[Aviators]

A10C / L-39 / C-101 / UH-1H

[sLYFa]

 

I try to gauge the answer by reading the real life flight manuals and trying to use the checklists in them with DCS. From that perspective the Huey and Mi-8 seem pretty damn good! ;)

 

RBG

I only used the F-14 long enough to comment and I can tell that I never really read the DCS F-14 manual, only the real NATOPS and you can do 95% of what is described in the real docs in DCS (not talking about weapon systems, as the manuals on these are hard to find). The DCS tomcat also nicely matches the performance figures of the real AC.

[msalama]

you can transition pretty quickly

 

Training for an easy A/C such as the aforementioned L-39, yeah, you probably could. But level D sims exist for a good reason too ;)

[sirrah]

I wonder how many of the comments made in this thread, are based on actual relevant experience :renske:

 

Some seem very certain, without actually supporting their statement :smilewink:

[BuzzU]

I'm not sure anybody can answer this question unless they own all the DCS content and have flown the real planes/choppers.

[sirrah]

I'm not sure anybody can answer this question unless they own all the DCS content and have flown the real planes/choppers.

 

Exactly my point :P

[BuzzU]

You assume I read all the posts. ;)

[Bog9y]

For jets.

 

I listened to an interview with the F14 designers recently and I have to say I am amazed by the amount of work they put in to make it as realistic as possible. from what I've read the Mig21 module is the most realistic, I think it's made by the same guys that made the F14. I just wish they did the F16.

 

From what I've read most people seem to say it's

1) Mig 21

2) A10C

3) F14

[Fri13]

For jets.

 

I listened to an interview with the F14 designers recently and I have to say I am amazed by the amount of work they put in to make it as realistic as possible. from what I've read the Mig21 module is the most realistic, I think it's made by the same guys that made the F14. I just wish they did the F16.

 

From what I've read most people seem to say it's

1) Mig 21

2) A10C

3) F14

 

MiG-21Bis just received major change to its flight modeling, again. Now some say it reflects the performance charts better, but it is fairly radical change it received.

 

And it took looking time to get proper weapons system logic in, and SPO-10 to act even semi-correct.

 

If even ED would fix the SPO-15.....

[AeriaGloria]

They have said they won’t except for a full a full module

[Fri13]

They have said they won’t except for a full a full module

 

Yes I know.... Why I said "would fix"....

 

Why waiting Su-27 to arrive so it would get fixed in MiG-29's, Su-33, Su-27S, Su-25...

[Jonne]

Surprisingly the JF-17 was not mentioned yet. I'd say this is the most realistic module of all the combat jet ones. It is simulating stuff most other modules do not. It has a proper IFF integration, unfortunately limited due to DCS to other JF-17, has fatigue modelled, a ground radar and various forms of pilot caused faults like avionic overheat. It is feature complete by now and has a loadout available which reflects the actual used ones. It is though a very unpopular jet.

 

Talking about all modules I own, I would put the L-39 on the top spot, but that one has a lot less to simulate anyway.

 

The F-14, while great, is still missing quite some functions.

[Harker]

Surprisingly the JF-17 was not mentioned yet. I'd say this is the most realistic module of all the combat jet ones. It is simulating stuff most other modules do not. It has a proper IFF integration, unfortunately limited due to DCS to other JF-17, has fatigue modelled, a ground radar and various forms of pilot caused faults like avionic overheat. It is feature complete by now and has a loadout available which reflects the actual used ones. It is though a very unpopular jet.

I'd also consider the JF-17 pretty much feature complete. And then some, if you consider the fact that Deka added AAR capability post launch. A great module in my opinion and I enjoy taking it out once in a while.

I think it's not as popular as other jets due to the fact that it's relatively unknown compared to the F(/A)-XXX models, so probably fewer people bought it to begin with, it can't carry as much ordnance (although it can match the carrying capability of the F-16 for A2A missiles) and although more modern, its radar is worse than both the Viper's and the Hornet's radars. Although they're not nearly competed yet, both the Viper and the Hornet will be more capable once they're done and I think people are keeping that in mind.

[Harlikwin]

Surprisingly the JF-17 was not mentioned yet. I'd say this is the most realistic module of all the combat jet ones. It is simulating stuff most other modules do not. It has a proper IFF integration, unfortunately limited due to DCS to other JF-17, has fatigue modelled, a ground radar and various forms of pilot caused faults like avionic overheat. It is feature complete by now and has a loadout available which reflects the actual used ones. It is though a very unpopular jet.

 

Talking about all modules I own, I would put the L-39 on the top spot, but that one has a lot less to simulate anyway.

 

The F-14, while great, is still missing quite some functions.

 

I like the jeff, but the absolute lack of real world docs makes claims that its accurate pretty specious. Maybe some things are right, but how do we know? With other modules you generally have some clue with the natops or tac mans that are floating out there. Never seen anything remotely like that for the jeff.

 

That being said, the systems seem plausible at least. But we dont really know.

[Mikeck]

I agree. Not sure how anyone can say the JF is a realistic model considering there aren’t any unclassified and independent test/performance data. All the info we have on the JF is performance capabilities provided by the Chinese government, anecdotal comments from pilots and inferences about what things COULD do. China still isn’t able to design and build a modern jet engine and 80% of its airforce is reverse engineered Soviet aircraft. Yet we’re supposed to believe that China produced an aircraft that can outperform the F-16 and has avionics/radar superior to any western aircraft?

 

I’d also add that several “bugs” seem to ere on the side of increased performance. Most notably, the JF’s radar cannot he notched in the game even though it is a pulse Doppler. Also, the missile warning system is an IR system that detects the flash of a missile launch; yet the DCs JF can magically detect ANY missile within 6 miles regardless of how far away it was launched or even if the motor is still burning!

 

This is just MY OPINION and not based on anything other than my own biases and experiences....but it seems to me that the JF in DCS is the JF the Chinese want it to be; what they want people to believe it is. There is no data supporting a lot of its capabilities which is why DCS has no business introducing an aircraft that wasn’t deployed until 2009 in a game taking place in 2008. Too new.