The case for Cessnas

[Northstar98]

Not everything somebody asks for in this section is a good idea.

 

Sure, and not every objection is either...

 

Because an F-16 belongs in Digital Combat Simulator

 

But there's another one, done very well in another environment, I mean what gives?

 

I’m sure the CEII was a giant waste of $ to make.

 

Sure you do...

 

Not every aircraft belongs in DCSW. Because this is an air combat simulation.

 

You've lost nothing haven't you?

 

The Yak-52 was made with a commercial/military use.

 

Not a combat aircraft though isn't it? Or is this special pleading?

 

The TF-51 was an easy offshoot of the P-51D to provide a free aircraft.

 

It also isn't a combat aircraft...

 

Won't ED think of the poor acronym?

 

Hey any third party Dev is welcome to make boring unsuitable modules and fail at them.

 

Sure thing, because that's what happened :doh:

 

And fine, you think it's boring, that's absolutely fine, and the easy solution? Don't purchase it, simple really...

 

Or maybe ED requires a certain level of suitability for DSCW in fact I know they do.

 

So clearly the CEII is suitable, after all ED requires a certain level of suitability right? (When they said themselves that they're not closed to non-combat modules, which is evidently the case) And it came from an official 3rd party.

 

And you're so certain of this, so it must be true.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Northstar98

[SharpeXB]

But there's another one, done very well in another environment, I mean what gives?

I can’t fathom why anyone would buy an F-16 or other combat aircraft in these civil sims either instead of DCS. Makes no sense.

 

Hey if a 3rd party dev wants to make the flying tank buster crop duster thing. Go for it. :megalol:

[Northstar98]

I can’t fathom why anyone would buy an F-16 or other combat aircraft in these civil sims either instead of DCS. Makes no sense.

 

And yet...

[SkateZilla]

Please respect each other, Please do not use comparisons of DCS to Other Software,

 

 

That Being Said, There is NO Rule saying all aircraft modules Must be a Combat Aircraft.

 

DCS is a Combat Simulator Yes, and because it's in a combat environment, DCS is also a SandBox Simulation, meaning if a User wants to Free Fly an Aircraft outside of a Combat Mission Role they Can.

 

PS.

TF-51D, Trainer -> Ported from P-51D that was used as a P-51D Private Module by TFC

YA-52, Trainer -> Ported Again, from a Private Module by TFC

C-101, Trainer

 

The only Module not involved in Combat in any capacity (front lines or training) is the CEII, However it was developed as a Proof Of Concept for a Studio that wanted to start small and work up to more complex aircraft.

 

as for Cessna's.

 

There are Combat Role / Environment Cessna's that would be not out of place.

[Emmy]

Seriously, there should be nothing out of bounds if it is fully modeled and provides the joy of flight.

 

I’ve flown Cessnas and I’ve flown in warbirds and the only difference is the cost per hour to operate. The exhilaration is identical.

[Zimmerdylan]

Please respect each other, Please do not use comparisons of DCS to Other Software,

 

 

That Being Said, There is NO Rule saying all aircraft modules Must be a Combat Aircraft.

 

DCS is a Combat Simulator Yes, and because it's in a combat environment, DCS is also a SandBox Simulation, meaning if a User wants to Free Fly an Aircraft outside of a Combat Mission Role they Can.

 

PS.

TF-51D, Trainer -> Ported from P-51D that was used as a P-51D Private Module by TFC

YA-52, Trainer -> Ported Again, from a Private Module by TFC

C-101, Trainer

 

The only Module not involved in Combat in any capacity (front lines or training) is the CEII, However it was developed as a Proof Of Concept for a Studio that wanted to start small and work up to more complex aircraft.

 

as for Cessna's.

 

There are Combat Role / Environment Cessna's that would be not out of place.

 

 

Just to make a slight point and play devil's advocate on this. It may be just possible that it is unavoidable to discuss the competition due to the recent revelations in flight simming and the release of certain software. I'm certainly mot trying to advocate for anything or any company. That being said, I feel that it is inevitable that some of E.D.'s competitors could and probably would very readily expand into the combat sim market. Given the gravity and overwhelming resources of such competitors, I would think that E.D. was indeed paying close attention to how their client base is reacting to this. Again....not being a prick here but this is a very important time in simming as of a few weeks ago.

[Evoman]

Just to make a slight point and play devil's advocate on this. It may be just possible that it is unavoidable to discuss the competition due to the recent revelations in flight simming and the release of certain software. I'm certainly mot trying to advocate for anything or any company. That being said, I feel that it is inevitable that some of E.D.'s competitors could and probably would very readily expand into the combat sim market. Given the gravity and overwhelming resources of such competitors, I would think that E.D. was indeed paying close attention to how their client base is reacting to this. Again....not being a prick here but this is a very important time in simming as of a few weeks ago.

 

 

I have also been thinking of what this new era will bring to the flight sim world. There is a chance that we could see current and new 3rd parties try to bring their licensed aircraft for use in more than one simulator. That could be a way we could see more new aircraft come to DCS that are military variants of the civilian version sold on the other flight sim. And there could be DCS aircraft ported over for use in that new sim. I for one would love to fly my F-14B in that other new flight sim just so I can go exploring with more speed, style and with an aircraft I already know how to operate.

This could help bring in new people that became enamored flying a DCS port aircraft in a civilian sim that are now looking to take it to the next level to see what their favorite military aircraft can really do in combat.

Edited August 31, 2020 by Evoman

[barcharcraz]

I have also been thinking of what this new era will bring to the flight sim world. There is a chance that we could see current and new 3rd parties try to bring their licensed aircraft for use in more than one simulator. That could be a way we could see more new aircraft come to DCS that are military variants of the civilian version sold on the other flight sim. And there could be DCS aircraft ported over for use in that new sim. I for one would love to fly my F-14B in that other new flight sim just so I can go exploring with more speed, style and with an aircraft I already know how to operate.

This could help bring in new people that became enamored flying a DCS port aircraft in a civilian sim that are now looking to take it to the next level to see what their favorite military aircraft can really do in combat.

 

 

I'm not sure how many new people it would bring in, if I were new to DCS I wager my first module would be one of the complex modern combat platforms (Warthog II, Blackshark III, F18, that kind of stuff). In reality my first module was Blackshark 1 so I didn't really have much of a choice :D. At least for _me_ it would keep me on DCS and make it even harder to go back to GA sims. I'm also pretty interested in getting more of these once the dynamic campaign is more fleshed out, to simulate low intensity and asymmetric conflicts

[nessuno0505]

There's a lot of payware rubbish in x-plane so I can understand the topic's author. Nevertheless, if you want a wonderful GA I suggest you to try jrollon sf260 for x-plane and leave DCS developers to work on things (at least in part) military related (although the sf-260 IS military related and it would be awsome to have a DCS version, but that's another story).

[barcharcraz]

There's a lot of payware rubbish in x-plane so I can understand the topic's author. Nevertheless, if you want a wonderful GA I suggest you to try jrollon sf260 for x-plane and leave DCS developers to work on things (at least in part) military related (although the sf-260 IS military related and it would be awsome to have a DCS version, but that's another story).

 

 

hmm that looks like a good module. My personal fav x-plane module is the Hot Start! TBM

[nessuno0505]

I know TBM as the best x-plane module overall, but I have not bought it yet since I fly VR only and I've read it's not fully VR compatible. The sf-260 can be easily managed in VR. Another kind of plane though: sf-260 is mainly for VFR and aerobatics, TBM is more for IFR.

 

If I had to choose a Cessna for DCS I'd like to have this one:

[Ikaros]

If I had to choose a Cessna for DCS I'd like to have this one:

 

Agreed!

 

Actually, I'd really like this aircraft as a module in DCS tbh.

[Zimmerdylan]

Sorry Skatezilla........Didn't mean to open that door. This isn't what I meant exactly. The above mentioned Sim isn't really competition for DCS. Nor does it's main developer intend to go into combat simming. I was talking about another monster altogether.

 

I'll just stay out of these types of discussions.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Agreed!

 

Actually, I'd really like this aircraft as a module in DCS tbh.

 

I'm so down for a Dragonfly. These old combat Cessnas would be appreciated. I find it funny that a good chunk of the people clamoring for Vietnam-era conflicts are also quick to nix the idea of O-2A or other similar aircraft while neglecting the value of the FAC role.

 

[Kev2go]

what about MS 2020? This modern civil flight sim has just come out.

[-0303-]

I'm into DCS because I perceive it as the best flight modeling and the best aircraft systems modeling (and the best looking plane graphics cockpit and exteriors). Because of this I think DCS miss some clientele by not having large maps.

 

I wouldn't ask DCS to make any civilian planes but by having large maps their would be opportunity for 3rd parties to offer civilian planes. And of course DCS could do a few semi civilians / fully civilian themselves. C-47 and Hercules for example, these would fit I imagine in a more complex dynamic campaign.

Edited September 4, 2020 by -0303-

[Stratos]

I know TBM as the best x-plane module overall, but I have not bought it yet since I fly VR only and I've read it's not fully VR compatible. The sf-260 can be easily managed in VR. Another kind of plane though: sf-260 is mainly for VFR and aerobatics, TBM is more for IFR.

 

If I had to choose a Cessna for DCS I'd like to have this one:

 

Full module and I'm in!

 

Not used only in Vietnam, it saw real combat in several spots around the world.

[-0303-]

I'm into DCS because I perceive it as the best flight modeling and the best aircraft systems modeling (and the best looking plane graphics cockpit and exteriors). Because of this I think DCS miss some clientele by not having large maps.

 

To clarify: I mean, DCS may miss out the segment of the most hardcore flight simmers by not having large maps.

[Baco]

Full module and I'm in!

 

Not used only in Vietnam, it saw real combat in several spots around the world.

 

And It still operated in some countrries till late 2010´s

[SharpeXB]

To clarify: I mean, DCS may miss out the segment of the most hardcore flight simmers by not having large maps.

DCS already has maps which are plenty large enough for combat theater scenarios. And with a great amount of detail. A larger map would come at a cost in visual quality and/or performance penalty that wouldn’t be acceptable.