Would you purchase WW2 ETO Night Fighting Modules for DCS?

[DD_Fenrir]

If ED ventured into simulating the night fighting arena in DCS with, for example a NF variant mosquito, a Nachtjagdwaffe fighter, with perhaps one or two German and Allied night heavy bomber AI Assets and leveraged their GCI technology to provide the basics of a plausible WW2 night fighting environment for DCS: World, would you invest?

[Bremspropeller]

I would!

[JHAT]

I would too! 
 

With onboard radar and competent AI / multicrew operator though. Don’t know if I’d be interested in single seat NF.

Edited September 2, 2021 by JHAT
Typos

[xvii-Dietrich]

It's an interesting idea, but there are a few things that come to mind.

 

It is very easy with all "Would you like...?" surveys to click "Yes!". I mean, we all want more things, more features, more options. However, it always comes at a cost. Not just the price of the modules in question, but the cost to the development portfolio. So every "Yes!" needs to come with a "What would you give up?" supplementary question. Give up the Me 262? Give up the FW 190 F-8? Give up the Hellcat? Give up the Zero? Give up the AH64D? Sure, some of these might be different ED teams, but there is a cost nonetheless... perhaps to a module that we haven't even thought of yet.

 

The next thing is replay value. I mean, once people have done it once, would they do it again? I see a lot of people clamouring to do the Ramrod 564 (Amiens Prison) mission. But are they _really_ going to fly the whole sortie? And, even if so, would they do it a second time? Or every weekend? Or each night?

 

Going to the night fighting, it is a fantastic and interesting challenge, but does it have this replay value? Or, once complete, would it go into the virtual hanger, along with a handful of other bought-on-a-whim-to-try-it modules? Of course, the counter argument is then... does it matter? The module was already sold. Well... not if it was in the free trial programme. And then if not many fly it, then there are fewer screenshots, YT videos, etc. to continue to promote it. The old _"fighters make movies"_ saying... but what about night fighters?

 

It is a bit like those who want a flyable B-17G. Great idea, but how many people are going to fly those missions (other than just to try it). I sometimes suggest to the B-17G wannabe-pilots to set up a realistic B-17G AI-flight, and then go and fly formation with them in a TF-51D with drop-tanks for the whole mission. It's a long straight-line, a moment when you press a button, and then a long straight-line back again. With the DCS maps, I think this sort of thing is better served by the existing B-17 on a civil aviation simulator. Just roll a die to see if you were short down or not.

 

That said, I think the night-fighter scenario is a vastly more interesting one. [[[ Side note: I have been trying to think of a way to simulate the nightfighting with the aircraft we have. Perhaps a B17G flight, which you intercept using a combination of AWACS and a MiG-17 with its primitive radar. Sure... this is highly unrealistic, but it would help prove at least some of the concepts (callouts, weak radar, night-time intercept, etc.). I am open to suggestions if there are better ideas. ]]]

 

And there are other things that make night fighting a good idea. It would get night-ops generally fixed or working (Freya, Würzburg-Riese, AFN-2 homing, runway lighting, cockpit illumination in the D9, better searchlights, improved Flak AI, German-language callouts, etc.) - you can tell this is a LW perspective, but you get the idea. And the same applies for both sides.

 

In any case, for me, I'm really torn on this. It is a definite maybe. It really depends on how it is presented and how the assets could be used beyond that single nightfighting intercept scenario. If it is just that, and it comes at the cost of the Me 262 project, well, I guess I'd say no. If, however, it came with a flyable Ju 88, for which I could switch out the Schräger Musik and fly it as long-range recon or intruder as well as a night fighter, then probably yes.

 

PS: Sorry for the text wall.

[Mogster]

8 minutes ago, xvii-Dietrich said:

It's an interesting idea, but there are a few things that come to mind.

 

It is very easy with all "Would you like...?" surveys to click "Yes!". I mean, we all want more things, more features, more options. However, it always comes at a cost. Not just the price of the modules in question, but the cost to the development portfolio. So every "Yes!" needs to come with a "What would you give up?" supplementary question. Give up the Me 262? Give up the FW 190 F-8? Give up the Hellcat? Give up the Zero? Give up the AH64D? Sure, some of these might be different ED teams, but there is a cost nonetheless... perhaps to a module that we haven't even thought of yet.

 

The next thing is replay value. I mean, once people have done it once, would they do it again? I see a lot of people clamouring to do the Ramrod 564 (Amiens Prison) mission. But are they _really_ going to fly the whole sortie? And, even if so, would they do it a second time? Or every weekend? Or each night?

 

Going to the night fighting, it is a fantastic and interesting challenge, but does it have this replay value? Or, once complete, would it go into the virtual hanger, along with a handful of other bought-on-a-whim-to-try-it modules? Of course, the counter argument is then... does it matter? The module was already sold. Well... not if it was in the free trial programme. And then if not many fly it, then there are fewer screenshots, YT videos, etc. to continue to promote it. The old _"fighters make movies"_ saying... but what about night fighters?

 

It is a bit like those who want a flyable B-17G. Great idea, but how many people are going to fly those missions (other than just to try it). I sometimes suggest to the B-17G wannabe-pilots to set up a realistic B-17G AI-flight, and then go and fly formation with them in a TF-51D with drop-tanks for the whole mission. It's a long straight-line, a moment when you press a button, and then a long straight-line back again. With the DCS maps, I think this sort of thing is better served by the existing B-17 on a civil aviation simulator. Just roll a die to see if you were short down or not.

 

That said, I think the night-fighter scenario is a vastly more interesting one. [[[ Side note: I have been trying to think of a way to simulate the nightfighting with the aircraft we have. Perhaps a B17G flight, which you intercept using a combination of AWACS and a MiG-17 with its primitive radar. Sure... this is highly unrealistic, but it would help prove at least some of the concepts (callouts, weak radar, night-time intercept, etc.). I am open to suggestions if there are better ideas. ]]]

 

And there are other things that make night fighting a good idea. It would get night-ops generally fixed or working (Freya, Würzburg-Riese, AFN-2 homing, runway lighting, cockpit illumination in the D9, better searchlights, improved Flak AI, German-language callouts, etc.) - you can tell this is a LW perspective, but you get the idea. And the same applies for both sides.

 

In any case, for me, I'm really torn on this. It is a definite maybe. It really depends on how it is presented and how the assets could be used beyond that single nightfighting intercept scenario. If it is just that, and it comes at the cost of the Me 262 project, well, I guess I'd say no. If, however, it came with a flyable Ju 88, for which I could switch out the Schräger Musik and fly it as long-range recon or intruder as well as a night fighter, then probably yes.

 

PS: Sorry for the text wall.

Aye, it’s one of those “do you want” polls that everyone automatically clicks yes to.
 

As you say resources are limited it’s more a case of what would ED not be doing while they are producing night time content. Then is it one of those situations where people ask for a feature then try it once then never again? With race sims users repeatedly ask for night and rain driving, but dev’s suggest that once included most still drive in the day with good weather…

 

Maybe some day, but not now?

[DD_Fenrir]

@xvii-Dietrich All of what you say I agree with. Indeed I've been using similar arguments when discussing the viability of DCS: WW2 Night Fighting with others. However, one of my arguments was that I did not believe there was sufficient demand for such a module in the community to make this viable commercially; but this was based on the generally cool customer reception to similar additions to Il-2: 1946 many years ago. Had things changed? Ergo, I created this straw poll just to see if my prediction was still relevant, and if there was a market for such a thing.

[peachmonkey]

not with the current LCD based VR hmd's.  Looking at the gray haze at night in VR isn't super inviting.

[rkk01]

This is something I’ve been trying in the ME…. and I think it’s well within the capabilities of the sim.  
 

Realism alert though - I do use F10 map and labels… in the absence of radar or GCI, and to develop my mission building and night flying skills.  Even with these cheats / aids, T/O, landing and gauging distance to target are difficult 

 

From a “can it be done” or “would people use it”… it’s just BVR for warbirds

 

The mission I’ve gradually been working up is a B-17 raid on Caen docks.  The bombers spaced several km apart to simulate RAF bomber stream tactics and at circa 5000m altitude.

 

You need an online lunar calendar and careful choice of cloud formation.

 

BUT, with some broken cloud, a moon skitting in and out of cloud cover, searchlights, flak and aircraft glimpsed from below against the lighter sky… it’s one of the most engrossing things I’ve done in a flight sim. Very, very intense

[Pikey]

I'd have to wait until there was some ambient lighting at night first. The only real light sources in DCS world come from your cockpit, landing lights, the sun and the moon and a couple of other things. Without the moon its very black. Without airport lighting, its really uncomfortable. Without that luminesence from the environment and light reflecting all around, you can have nights that are too dark to be useful. And we still wait for homing becons, DF, the 1155 to be fully modelled and so on. Flying at low light is OK, but the night fighting environment in DCS in undercooked. Any DCS is good, but there's some missing parts that need sorted.

[peachmonkey]

Flying at night over a snow covered winter landscape with a full moon above looks very nice in VR.

 

With any lower lighting it becomes just a grey mess.

Edited September 3, 2021 by peachmonkey

[Mogster]

In reality Bomber Command avoided flying on moonlit nights didn’t they? Almost like flying in daylight.

 

 

[rkk01]

2 hours ago, Mogster said:

In reality Bomber Command avoided flying on moonlit nights didn’t they? Almost like flying in daylight.

 

 

I think that varied at different stages of the war and for different targets…???

 

ie, before the advent of Oboe and Gee moon and stars were necessary for navigation and target ID.  With the advent of PFF, TIs and radio nav aids then less moonlight would be better.  IIRC from some reading, the dark of a new moon and bright light of a full moon might have been avoided

 

ETA - either way,  moonlight definitely desirable (essential) for night flying in DCS…!

Edited September 3, 2021 by rkk01

[Mogster]

10 minutes ago, rkk01 said:

I think that varied at different stages of the war and for different targets…???

 

ie, before the advent of Oboe and Gee moon and stars were necessary for navigation and target ID.  With the advent of PFF, TIs and radio nav aids then less moonlight would be better.  IIRC from some reading, the dark of a new moon and bright light of a full moon might have been avoided

 

ETA - either way,  moonlight definitely desirable (essential) for night flying in DCS…!

 

Full moon basically is close to daylight though. I’d imagine you’d be easy prey for night fighters.
 

I’ve read that during Chastise 617 were the only Bomber Command assets over Germany and they needed the full moon.

[mahuja]

Quite frankly, I'd like to see it preceded by more night content for existing night-capable modules.

 

[Lynchsl62]

To date there are no real viable opponents, just the Ju-88 and maybe the FW-190. Most nightfigters in WW2 were designed to oppose bombers and due to the weight and complexity of equipment were invariably twin engined, some single engine F6F were used by USN in the pacific.

 

The Luftwaffe were quite successful with Wilde Sau Bf-109 and FW-190 against the RAF, surely as these already exist (without gun pods) then having an AI opposition such as the Halifax, Lancaster or Stirling (very manoeuvrable) would be better - the RAF also performed daylight missions in support of Normandy landings - so why not add these to the asset pack  

 

my thinking is, if there is a need for a twin engine aircraft then there are better more multi role alternatives that would be more balanced, not least the P-38, Me-410 (very poor aircraft when challenged by single engine fighters) and the pre ordered Mosquito. So rather than go for an aircraft with no real opposition such at the Lancaster or the Me-410 for the 44 Blitz then the widest interest would be to develop the P-38 - but again that really needs the Pacific or the Mediterranean theatre. 
 

Anecdotally the highest scoring Me-262 was alleged to be a nightfigter fighting primarily against the Mosquito- is this another case for the Me-262

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Welter#Aerial_victory_claims

 

Edited September 3, 2021 by Lynchsl62

[grafspee]

I will make it simpler, i would buy any ww2 plane

[Lynchsl62]

Grafspee
+1

Edited September 3, 2021 by Lynchsl62

[Bozon]

On 9/3/2021 at 10:14 AM, Mogster said:

In reality Bomber Command avoided flying on moonlit nights didn’t they? Almost like flying in daylight.

 

 

Over Northern Europe during June/July it is not entirely dark anyway. I posted the story of a Mosquito pilots that shot down a FW-190A8 and damaged another over Normandy at 23:00 at night, after visually spotting and identifying 5 of them from 1.5 miles against what he described as “bright sunset” (at 23:00…).

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/260567-less-famous-mosquito-stories/?do=findComment&comment=4646069

[Gunfreak]

26 minutes ago, Bozon said:

Over Northern Europe during June/July it is not entirely dark anyway. I posted the story of a Mosquito pilots that shot down a FW-190A8 and damaged another over Normandy at 23:00 at night, after visually spotting and identifying 5 of them from 1.5 miles against what he described as “bright sunset” (at 23:00…).

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/260567-less-famous-mosquito-stories/?do=findComment&comment=4646069

Even further north but still far away from the artic circle, even on the ground its only "dark" for like 30minutes in June (around 1 at night)A km up in the air it wouldn't be dark at all unless you had heavy cloud cover. 

[Richard Dastardly]

I'd buy a NF Mossie, or Beaufighter or something German if it's not a lemon ( 50/50 chance given late-war German development! ) - but like people said, really not sure how much I'd use it. 90% of the difficulty in a WW2 night aircraft is just finding where you're meant to be at the right time... it can be bad enough in the daytime.

 

Playing with WW2 EW gear would be pretty fascinating, though. All that primitive radio nav/radar/jamming/detection gear. Caveat: as I mentioned somewhere else i have a direct connection with ww2 EW, so I'm a bit biased.

 

Even where I am which is almost as far S as you can get in the UK, it's only really dark at sea level for about 3 hours in late June.