Some fictional, but still plausible designs

[Tank50us]

So, I'm sure many in here are fans of Nassault, especially his 'realistic Ace Combat' videos (which are always well made imho). Well, in the one for "Invincible Fleet", it has a Bismarck-class Battleship playing the role of the Erusian Battleship "Tanager" (in universe an Iowa-class Battleship), and during the fight, it unloads several SAMs at Mobious Ones Hornet. Now, we all know that this would be impossible in the real world as the KMS Bismarck is about 35,000ft below the surface of the Atlantic and KMS Tirpitz had an interesting conversation with a Tallboy bomb. But... what if either ship survived the war, was kept by the Germans, and modernized over the course of the Cold War in the same way Iowa and her sisters were.

The video:

Realistic? Heck no. Interesting to ponder? Yes.

So, would any of you guys want to see some of these toys in DCS? They don't have to be that extreme, but there were some proposals that were real, like the proposed Iowa 'battle carrier' upgrade:

Now, I'm not talking about anything stupid, like mounting SM2s to CSS Virginia, but it would be kind of interesting to see what certain ships could've looked and fought like had the designs and modernizations been approved.

[F-2]

I’ve actually wanted to make a “Sink the Ulyanovsk” campaign with Su-27km for fleet defense. It would be cool if campaign makers were allowed to make them as AI assets and add them.

[upyr1]

These what ifs IMHO are good fodder for community mods 

[upyr1]

15 minutes ago, F-2 said:

I’ve actually wanted to make a “Sink the Ulyanovsk” campaign with Su-27km for fleet defense. It would be cool if campaign makers were allowed to make them as AI assets and add them.

That would be cool, though there a lot of assets DCS is missing that got built. I'd love to see what the community could do

[SharpeXB]

No. It’s the very nature of DCS that it only features modules which are real and for which real data is available. That philosophy precludes having fantasy modules. 

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

No. It’s the very nature of DCS that it only features modules which are real and for which real data is available. That philosophy precludes having fantasy modules. 

While I agree no official what-ifs how about some community what if mods? Those I would like

[Lace]

Only once they have exhausted all the real-world units we are currently missing.  So, never.

[Nomatic]

Granted, I know it would be a mod, but an SA-2 Samson would be fun and different. 

[SharpeXB]

15 hours ago, upyr1 said:

While I agree no official what-ifs how about some community what if mods? Those I would like

Well there are already Star Wars mods so…

[Exorcet]

As I've often said about simulation; it's not limited to historical events. Hypotheticals are completely within reason for a realistic simulator. They just need to be labeled as such and sim users need to be given the option to separate different labels from one another.

Strict historical Desert Storm is as good as Desert Storm with hypothetical AMRAAM kills, which is as good as Desert Storm with F-15 S/MTD's and AIM-97's. Just label what is historical and what isn't and everyone is good to go.

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

While i can easily understand the idea, and why we aren't limited in realms of possibilities because it's a videogame after all.. somehow it just still seems wrong when talking about DCS. On the fence, kinda. Minimum requirement should be at least the ability to limit servers to purely historical gear. Let's add, there's so much historical stuff missing and needed too, so i guess i'd rather see the effort and resorces used towards those instead.

[Mr_sukebe]

If it’s an add on module or mod, we’ll why not?  
It’s probably not something I’d use, but it’s not that I’d be obliged to pay for it, and if there’s enough people who do want it, then sure.  After all, it’s their money and it’s not upto me to dictate the way they should play the game.

[Boosterdog]

No, its bad enough having to wade though all the ludicrous fantasy skins in the user dowloads as it is. The less fictitious nonsense the better. The only fantasy scenario in DCS I would like to see at present is the one where a moderately heavy helo mission runs well on a mid range PC. 

[Northstar98]

I can see the appeal of some hypothetical stuff, but in terms of priority, I'm much more interested in operational stuff , and I'll take operational stuff over hypothetical/prototype stuff over anything else.

And for me, it has to at least been seriously proposed, ideally with prototypes or under construction. For me the only one I'm seriously interested in is the 9-15 MiG-29M. For my more-or-less exhaustive list, see the spoiler below.

Spoiler

• MiG-29M
• Yak-141
• Ulyanovsk
• Yak-44
• MiG 1.44/1.42
• An-71
• AH-56
• RAH-66
• MBT/KPz-70
• HSTV-L
• Chieftain Sabre
• Object 279
• Object 120

However, you did mention fictional ships, and to that I say: the state of the naval environment as is, including the sheer lack of them for any particular timeframe, means that I'm opposed to fictional ships (at least the Ulyanovsk was under construction and we have a good idea of what its capabilities would've been) for time being.

For the most part, it's not recreating actual real-world missions that I'm super interested in (there's plenty missing for that to happen anyway, though I would be interested in recreating Operation El Dorado Canyon, maybe some ODS missions, Falklands etc), I'm more interested in alternate history missions, but using historically appropriate assets on historically appropriate maps, with my preference being Cold War gone-hot over Europe and the North Atlantic.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[F-2]

Oh you know what. Their is a guy I know with a real Mig 1.42 cad model. Very detailed has fuel fraction and stuff. I’d love to hire someone to do a CFD study and make an AI opponent for the Eurofighter when it comes out.

[upyr1]

On 11/11/2021 at 9:45 AM, Northstar98 said:

I can see the appeal of some hypothetical stuff, but in terms of priority, I'm much more interested in operational stuff , and I'll take operational stuff over hypothetical/prototype stuff over anything else.

And for me, it has to at least been seriously proposed, ideally with prototypes or under construction. For me the only one I'm seriously interested in is the 9-15 MiG-29M. For my more-or-less exhaustive list, see the spoiler below.

  Hide contents

• MiG-29M
• Yak-141
• Ulyanovsk
• Yak-44
• MiG 1.44/1.42
• An-71
• AH-56
• RAH-66
• MBT/KPz-70
• HSTV-L
• Chieftain Sabre
• Object 279
• Object 120

However, you did mention fictional ships, and to that I say: the state of the naval environment as is, including the sheer lack of them for any particular timeframe, means that I'm opposed to fictional ships (at least the Ulyanovsk was under construction and we have a good idea of what its capabilities would've been) for time being.

For the most part, it's not recreating actual real-world missions that I'm super interested in (there's plenty missing for that to happen anyway, though I would be interested in recreating Operation El Dorado Canyon, maybe some ODS missions, Falklands etc), I'm more interested in alternate history missions, but using historically appropriate assets on historically appropriate maps, with my preference being Cold War gone-hot over Europe and the North Atlantic.

 

Right now I for RedFor carriers I want the Kiev-class carriers and if Deka has enough information to do the Chinese carrier fleet that would be nice. I know the PLA is working on a CATOBAR carrier I'm not sure if there is enough known to meet Eagle's standards. I'm more interested in the cold-war what ifs as well. Especially building amphibious operation missions.

Edited November 13, 2021 by upyr1

[Northstar98]

55 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

Right now I for RedFor carriers I want the Kiev-class carriers and if Deka has enough information to do the Chinese carrier fleet that would be nice. I know the PLA is working on a CATOBAR carrier I'm not sure if there is enough known to meet Eagle's standards. I'm more interested in the cold-war what ifs as well. Especially building amphibious operation missions.

Yeah, Kiev would be good, but missing the Yak-38, we're also missing things like the Sovremenny, Udaloy and Kresta II/Kara.

And ships are super basic in DCS, so I'm not sure what wouldn't meet the standards.

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Yeah, Kiev would be good, but missing the Yak-38, we're also missing things like the Sovremenny, Udaloy and Kresta II/Kara.

And ships are super basic in DCS, so I'm not sure what wouldn't meet the standards.

The type 3 carrier is supposed to launch next year. We do need the Russian destroyers