Buren Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 (edited) Hello. I was thinking about how cool it would be to actually fly a big bomber (I'm looking at specifically the B-52 and/or Tu-95) in a distant edition of DCS. I mean, look at the past 20 years of flight sims. There was about 1 or 2 dedicated modern bomber sims, and a handful of custom created bombers for MFS series... In my opinion the inclusion of such large aircraft would attract those who are looking to have a "trip", but do something different than delivering passengers... for example to blow a base to dust with 60,000 pounds of explosives! (like me :D) I mean, combat with minimal maneuvering, but still leave a permanent scar on the battlefield (or on the war effort of the other side) Besides of bringing a niche to life, it would also be very good for immersion. Imagine this; Multiplayer: You're fighting mud in the Ka-50 or in an Apache, above you there are fighters dogfighting, and above them are the bombers, heading for their faraway target, fearing interceptors, although they feel relatively safe thanks to the height and their escorts... And you'd know most of them could be real people doing their best... I don't want to force it, because I'm already more than happy with the Ka-50 and the officially proposed aircraft (I know they are more important). Although I don't know the availability of the information required to model the strategic bombers in the level of the Ka-50, it's just a suggestion that would certainly make DCS more diverse in my opinion. Thanks for reading this. :) Edited July 11, 2008 by Buren [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
stswrebel Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 I think it woudl be a good thing that if in the future DCS added other types of aircraft other than fighters and ground pounders. I would love to be able to fly the AC-130 Spector Gunship adn use the weapon systems it has. I think the best mission in Call of Duty 4 so far for me has been the one where you get to take command of the weapon systems on the AC-130. To have that in a simulation like DCS would ruin my personal life. :gun_rifle: The above has been based loosely upon my own opinions. :pilotfly:
Esac_mirmidon Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 I think that my personal choice that could fit perfect would be the Su-24 Fencer. A " strategic " bomber with a small ( relative ) size, plenty of different types of bombs, and the same " watch for enemy inbounds " all the flight in and out. 1 " You must think in russian.." [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´ Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4
GGTharos Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 The Su-24 is a tactical bomber. 'Strategic' bombers can fly across entire continents, drop bombs (typically of the kind that will make you glow in the dark) and come back. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Avimimus Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 It would be nice if there is eventually a counter part to the A-10 for East (Mig-27, Su-25 etc.) but I'm happy. If the Mi-24 cargo compartment is modelled we might get transport missions without a dedicated transport aircraft...
Boberro Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 Tu-160 is classified, Tu-95 hmmm maybe old good bear :D But it is so slow ;] Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ
GGTharos Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 It was said on the Russian forums that an A-10 counterpart is being looked into. However, for now, it is only speculation. It would be nice if there is eventually a counter part to the A-10 for East (Mig-27, Su-25 etc.) but I'm happy. If the Mi-24 cargo compartment is modelled we might get transport missions without a dedicated transport aircraft... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Chrjs Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 a bomber would be great, but why taking the "old" su-24. i guess russia will switch in the near future to the "modern" su-34. looks even better... i don't think a strategic bomber like the b-52 or tu-95 (or the B-2?!) would be realistic. like you said they normally fly over the whole continent. for example the b-2 in 1998 flew every night from the states to yugoslavia to bomb beograd.the terrain of dcs would just be to small... still a tactical bomber would be nice! chrjs i79900k @ 4,7 - Geforce RTX2080TI 11GB - 32Gbram - Win10 - TRackIr4 - Thrustmaster Warthog/Saitek Rudder
Chrjs Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 (edited) actually i just saw the b-1 on an air display at the ILA in Berlin, that would be an awesome plane to fly... i never heard a louder jet. just imagine four f-16 next to each other flying by close to mach-1! http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6292375&nseq=0 Edited July 11, 2008 by Chrjs i79900k @ 4,7 - Geforce RTX2080TI 11GB - 32Gbram - Win10 - TRackIr4 - Thrustmaster Warthog/Saitek Rudder
Boberro Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 .... Su-34 is new so it is classified in the most of cases. So there won't be Su-34 :( Su-24 Fencer is even fine, why not, lol we're talking about what will be future bomber in DCS (eventually of course) but even for now we have no Ka-50 :D Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ
ThunderChief Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 Think about a whole campain with no mission under 30+ hours flying from continental USA to Caucasus theatre and back. And the missionbuilder decided that the autopilot will always fail 5 minutes after takeoff... Seriously where is the fun dropping a load of JDAMs from 40k feet? You wouldn't even see them hitting their target. But it still sounds better than flying virtual passangers ;)
Buren Posted July 11, 2008 Author Posted July 11, 2008 I would be really glad to see a flyable F-111 (or su-24), if the big brothers couldn't be realized. ;) ps.: don't care that the aardvark is retired:pilotfly: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 It isn't, Australia still flies it! ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Chrjs Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 .... Su-34 is new so it is classified in the most of cases. So there won't be Su-34 :( i know it is classified now... but until dcs is released with the ka-50, then the f-16, then the mi-24....... by the time we get to tactical bombers the su-34 will be like a spitfire nowadays aplane from ww2! :lol: i79900k @ 4,7 - Geforce RTX2080TI 11GB - 32Gbram - Win10 - TRackIr4 - Thrustmaster Warthog/Saitek Rudder
Buren Posted July 11, 2008 Author Posted July 11, 2008 It isn't, Australia still flies it! ;) Yeah, that's true ('till 2010 I think) but I was thinking of the US inventory. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Esac_mirmidon Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 This is the reason to put quotes in " strategic ".... Better said, medium to long range tactic bomber. " You must think in russian.." [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´ Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4
Yellonet Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 B-52 coop mission... 24 hour flight plan, five guys sitting infront of their screens, drinking coffee, pilot and co-pilot taking turns to sleep... crew rehersing with simulated bomb drops, 11,5 hours into the flight, getting close to target, tension builds up as the drop draws near, RWR goes wild.. i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
Yellonet Posted July 11, 2008 Posted July 11, 2008 And then BSOD... *LMAO*There goes the weekend :doh: i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
Decerto Posted July 12, 2008 Posted July 12, 2008 I know the B-2 bomber with its JDAM'S only had to launch within 8 miles of target, the computers guide the bomb the rest of the way. Would it be the same with the B-52H? If it is then it wouldn't be that fun for me, I'd rather have a bomber that you have to do as much work as possible to target and launch.
hitman Posted July 12, 2008 Posted July 12, 2008 They retired the F-111's from Australia just recently as a year ago. If it is still flying, its because its being phased out. IIRC it is being replaced by superbugs. They may not have em yet, but officially they have been "retired". Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE | Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VPForce Rhino/VKB MCE Ultimate + STECS Mk2 MAX / Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM | Virpil TCS+/ AH64D grip/custom AH64D TEDAC | Samsung Odyssey G9 + Odyssey Ark | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro | WinWing F-18 MIPS | No more VR for this pilot.
Decerto Posted July 12, 2008 Posted July 12, 2008 (edited) Lol didn't we (I'm Aussie) spend a few million about ten years ago on upgrades for them? I live right near Avalon and we have a major airshow every two years at the airfield and the highlight is always the F-111 doing a low level fuel burn-off. Send a stealth fighter or bomber down for next years one for the love of all that is good! Look at the add for it, what a tease! http://www.airshow.net.au/ Edited July 12, 2008 by Decerto Add link
Recommended Posts