DCS World Map Suggestion -- Island Chain Map

[Mike Force Team]

Island Chain Strategy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

 

Jump to navigationJump to search

It has been suggested that First island chain be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since December 2021.

 

First and Second Island Chains at East Asia island arcs.

The Island Chain Strategy is a strategic maritime containment plan first conceived by American foreign policy statesman John Foster Dulles in 1951, during the Korean War.^[1] It proposed surrounding the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China with naval bases in the West Pacific to project power and restrict sea access.^[2]

The "island chain" concept did not become a major theme in American foreign policy during the Cold War, but after the dissolution of the Soviet Union has remained a major focus of both American and Chinese geopolitical and military analysts to this day. For the United States, the island chain strategy is a significant part of the force projection of the U.S. military in the Far East. For China, the concept is integral to its maritime security and fears of strategic encirclement by U.S. armed forces. For both sides, the island chain strategy emphasizes the geographical and strategic importance of Taiwan.^[3]

Contents

• 1First Island Chain
• 2Second Island Chain
• 3Third Island Chain
• 4Proposed Fourth and Fifth Island Chains
• 5Target and events
• 6References

First Island Chain[edit]

Main article: First island chain

The First Island Chain is defined as the chain of islands that begins at the Kuril Islands, runs through the Japanese Archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands and the island of Taiwan, the northwestern portion of the Philippines (particularly Luzon, Mindoro and Palawan) and finishes towards Borneo, and used to extend to the Spratly Island and the southern Vietnamese coast prior to the Vietnam War. The chain also serves as the maritime boundaries between the East China Sea and the Philippine Sea, and the South China Sea and the Sulu Sea.

The First Island Chain was conceptualized during the Cold War as the first line of defense to contain the spread of influence of the Soviet Union and its allied socialist countries in East and Southeast Asia. The midpoint and key part of the first chain was – and still is — Taiwan. Because the island chain is composed of a series of landmasses, it is also called the "unsinkable aircraft carrier", especially in reference to Taiwan.

Second Island Chain[edit]

The Second Island Chain can refer to two different interpretations, but the version most commonly used refers to the island chain which is formed by Japan's Bonin Islands and Volcano Islands, in addition to the Mariana Islands (most notably Guam, an unincorporated American overseas territory with a heavily fortified military base), western Caroline Islands (Yap and Palau), and extends to Western New Guinea.^[1] The chain serves as the eastern maritime boundary of the Philippine Sea.

As it is located within the middle portion of the West Pacific, it acts as a second strategic defense line for the United States.^[1]

Third Island Chain[edit]

The Third Island Chain is the final part of the strategy. This island chain begins at the Aleutian Islands and runs south across the center of the Pacific Ocean towards Oceania, through the Hawaiian Islands, American Samoa and Fiji, to reach New Zealand.^[1] Australia serves as the staple between the second and third chains.

Proposed Fourth and Fifth Island Chains[edit]

The Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI), a group under the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), argues that a fourth and a fifth island chain should be added to an overall understanding of Chinese maritime strategy in the Indo-Pacific. Whereas the first three island chains are located in the Pacific Ocean, these two newly proposed ones are in the Indian Ocean, which would reflect the growing Chinese interest in the region.

The proposed fourth chain would include places like Lakshadweep, the Maldives and Diego Garcia to disrupt the String of Pearls waypoints towards the Persian Gulf such as the Gwadar Port and Hambantota; while the proposed fifth chain would originate from Camp Lemonnier in the Gulf of Aden, around the Horn of Africa and along the entire East African coastline through the Mozambique Channel (between Mozambique and Madagascar, including the Comoro Islands) towards South Africa, to encircle the Chinese naval base at Doraleh, Djibouti and sabotage China's trade with Africa.^[1]

Target and events[edit]

The primary target of the doctrine was originally the Soviet Union; however, additional targets also included the People's Republic of China, Vietnam, and North Korea. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and China's economic prominence in the early 21st century, China became the major target of the doctrine.

References[edit]

1. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} "CHINA'S REACH HAS GROWN; SO SHOULD THE ISLAND CHAINS". ASIA MARITIME TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE. Center for Strategic and International Studies. 22 October 2018. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
2. ^ Umetsu, Hiroyuki (1 June 1996). "Communist China's entry into the Korean hostilities and a U.S. proposal for a collective security arrangement in the Pacific offshore island chain". Journal of Northeast Asian Studies. 15 (2): 98–118. doi:10.1007/BF03028144. ISSN 1874-6284. S2CID 150794431.
3. ^ Yoshihara, Toshi (July 2012). "China's Vision of Its Seascape: The First Island Chain and Chinese Seapower: China's Vision of Its Seascape". Asian Politics & Policy. 4 (3): 293–314. doi:10.1111/j.1943-0787.2012.01349.x.

Categories: 

• Geopolitics
• Military strategy
• Geopolitical rivalry

[Mike_Romeo]

We are getting a world map soon or later. There is no point in requesting maps

[Mike Force Team]

@Mike_Romeo I did not know a global map was in the works. Thanks for the clarification. 

MFT

[Boosterdog]

I think its an aspiration rather then something "in the works".  

[Mike Force Team]

@Mike_Romeo I did not know a global map was in the works. Thanks for the clarification. 

MFT

 

@BIGNEWY Here is a question for you. Is there a global map being made? The screenshot showed an announcement is dated in 2020.

MFT

[BIGNEWY]

11 hours ago, Mike_Romeo said:

We are getting a world map soon or later. There is no point in requesting maps

We will always have DLC terrains with high detail. 

[Stoikiy]

9 минут назад, BIGNEWY сказал:

We will always have DLC terrains with high detail. 

You will develop network texture steaming tech as was made for MFS2020?

[BIGNEWY]

I have no news to share other than what we have said in interviews in the past. We are planning a whole world but I do not have any details to share, and we are not likely to have any news for a while. 

thanks

[Beirut]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

We will always have DLC terrains with high detail. 

 

Good!

 

Lovin' them new maps. 

[upyr1]

Only if we get some ship modules first. 

[Northstar98]

On 4/14/2022 at 8:17 AM, Boosterdog said:

I think its an aspiration rather then something "in the works".

It has supposedly been in the works for about 2 years now.

Here's an inteview with Matt Wagner on the topic:

Quote

Modelling the whole world

“Oh, and the other big aspect of course is rather than having just simple maps to play on, we’re having an entire global world map for DCS World,” he revealed.

So yes, if you wanted to, you could take off from an airbase in the States, refuel several times and take part in a war on the other side of the world - if you had the time and energy of course. Yes, the entire world will be modelled as ‘one global map’ effectively.

Matt continued: “Right now our current maps, which are actually individual discrete maps, can be up to about 1,500km by 1,500km but again once you go to the new map technology, there is no limit. It's not maps, it’s just a single world and how it folds is that map technology. We've been working on that technology for about a year and a half now and it's coming along quite well.”

“So, in three to four years perhaps?” I asked. “I certainly think within then,” he said. “But again, it kind of comes back to what I was talking about earlier, Vulkan and multi-threading. Until it actually goes into testing, there's really no way to give any kind of good estimate, as you just never know. You know how extensive the new work is going to be to get to the point for release. It's only when you get actually pretty close, then you are really comfortable with giving an actual release date.”

As Matt explained the new technology, my mind wandered towards the complexity of delivering such a mammoth world. Remember, each structure has to effectively have a damage model and, once part of a campaign system, some kind of ‘usefulness’ functionality values attached to each - unlike what you see in the current flight simulator.

“Again, it was kind of like with a cloud system,” Matt continued. “It's something we've been researching and putting the technology together for literally years. So, we're developing a clever system which we think is going to look absolutely fantastic but be a world system that's going to be applicable to an actual combat simulator.” What’s not clear yet is how existing maps would be integrated into this new world system. ED points out too they still have to account for World War II maps that cannot be based on GIS (Geographic Information System) data. Different options are currently being evaluated by the developer.

So, it looks like Vulkan with multi-threading won’t just be a nice feature in the years ahead but an essential component to the simulator, especially when you have so many units operating in this new virtual globe.

Matt explained one of their biggest challenges. “One of the big things we're looking at now is creative ways to have almost unlimited numbers of units without having a huge performance impact, so as you would imagine, we cannot do it the way we're doing right now, where really every unit is tracked in detail, anywhere in the map. It’s going to have to be a much smarter system based on where the player is in the world.”

This close-up of Razbam's AV-8B Harrier illustrates DCS’s subtle but realistic damage modelling.

This close-up of Razbam's AV-8B Harrier illustrates DCS’s subtle but realistic damage modelling.

MicroProse’s Falcon, all those years ago, had a ‘bubble’ system for its dynamic campaign. Any entity in the virtual world only had its ‘full-fat’ feature and behavioural set fully operational once it was within a certain distance of the player. Beyond that distance, ie outside of the ‘bubble’, a hugely simplified level of functionality was applied to the unit to stop the whole sim from computationally grinding to a halt. Remember, all this in the days of single-core CPUs running at just 700MHz plus. It was a genius but complicated feature, from MicroProse.

Would a similar system be implemented for DCS’s dynamic campaign engine and virtual globe I asked? “Not so much of a bubble, it will be more of a dynamic calling system,” Matt said.

[source]

 

As for the OP, there is the Mariana islands map.

[LooseSeal]

Unpopular opinion to follow: I'm not really sure why we need more maps at this stage, if I'm honest. In terms of single-player stuff we barely have much content as it is for Syria/Marianas. We also know absolutely nothing as yet about Afghanistan, which I assume is still coming later this year.

[Northstar98]

10 minutes ago, LooseSeal said:

Unpopular opinion to follow: I'm not really sure why we need more maps at this stage, if I'm honest. In terms of single-player stuff we barely have much content as it is for Syria/Marianas. We also know absolutely nothing as yet about Afghanistan, which I assume is still coming later this year.

I mean, I agree.

Especially when you consider that its only really the Caucaus map which is anything like fleshed out with assets.

[Dragon1-1]

What I really want to see it properly modeled Earth's curvature. From the altitudes we can reach in DCS aircraft, it should be visible, but the current maps, even Marianas (certainly large enough for horizon to come into play), don't account for that. 

[Boosterdog]

2 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

It has supposedly been in the works for about 2 years now.

Here's an inteview with Matt Wagner on the topic:

[source]

 

Well aware of that. 

That are many, many things that need to happen. To the core, to the manner in which DCS manages its performance, so many things. MC and Vulkan are still to reach even a closed beta at this time with not the whiff of an update in 7 months, Syria runs like a pig even with its hobbled draw distances and recent improvements in performance seem to have come with a reduction in graphical quality for some indicating its root was the result of a hack. 

The practiical implementation of a whole word environment remains an aspiration. They may be working on it, dont dispute that, but I dont expect to see it before a few more maps are rolled out and a good many more years have passed. I see no point to hyping things like this. Hard lessons from years of awaiting progress DTC, The Dynamic campaign, MC, The supercarrier, fuzing, etc etc .

[LooseSeal]

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

Especially when you consider that its only really the Caucaus map which is anything like fleshed out with assets.

Not even that map-based assets. I'd much rather their 3D artists were put to work creating more and better assets for us to place in the ME. We need so many more buildings, etc. All of this core stuff should come before any new 'shiny' maps - that's my opinion anyway.

[Beirut]

3 hours ago, LooseSeal said:

Unpopular opinion to follow: I'm not really sure why we need more maps at this stage, if I'm honest.

 

 

 Scandalous, sir! Scandalous! 

 

Maps are the eye candy. Maps are the atmosphere. Maps are the geographical goodness we visit, admire, and destroy. I find that each new map makes all the planes feel new. And each new map gives impetus to new mission building. The South Atlantic map, assuming it arrives within my lifetime - I have less than 30 years left as per life expectancy -  is going to provide all kinds of new flying fun. Those mountains are going to be a blast to fly over, around, and into. 

 

More maps. Always more maps. 

[Northstar98]

3 hours ago, Boosterdog said:

Well aware of that. 

That are many, many things that need to happen. To the core, to the manner in which DCS manages its performance, so many things. MC and Vulkan are still to reach even a closed beta at this time with not the whiff of an update in 7 months, Syria runs like a pig even with its hobbled draw distances and recent improvements in performance seem to have come with a reduction in graphical quality for some indicating its root was the result of a hack. 

Yes, and all of this was covered more-or-less.

3 hours ago, Boosterdog said:

The practiical implementation of a whole word environment remains an aspiration. They may be working on it, dont dispute that, but I dont expect to see it before a few more maps are rolled out and a good many more years have passed. I see no point to hyping things like this. Hard lessons from years of awaiting progress DTC, The Dynamic campaign, MC, The supercarrier, fuzing, etc etc .

Well, tbf, you did describe it as an aspiration rather than something 'in the works', when in fact it is in the works but yes, it's going to be a long while yet.

[Exorcet]

7 hours ago, LooseSeal said:

Unpopular opinion to follow: I'm not really sure why we need more maps at this stage, if I'm honest. In terms of single-player stuff we barely have much content as it is for Syria/Marianas. We also know absolutely nothing as yet about Afghanistan, which I assume is still coming later this year.

 

6 hours ago, LooseSeal said:

Not even that map-based assets. I'd much rather their 3D artists were put to work creating more and better assets for us to place in the ME. We need so many more buildings, etc. All of this core stuff should come before any new 'shiny' maps - that's my opinion anyway.

I would agree that map selection is good now, but while we nice choice and variety, still every map is limited or missing something. It's because of this that I think basic global map to slot under the detailed maps should be a priority.

New statics are also a priority, though Syria at least got the details right and places a lot of important buildings on the map directly. In the end I can make use out of the existing static buildings even if they're not ideal. I can't fill in missing airbases into existing maps, or be bothered fiddling with the ME border just to put aircraft carriers at realistic distances from the front lines.

[LooseSeal]

9 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

 

I would agree that map selection is good now, but while we nice choice and variety, still every map is limited or missing something. It's because of this that I think basic global map to slot under the detailed maps should be a priority.

As far as map diversity goes, I think I'm personally most missing a Western-style map. I do think a Baltic map would be the best thing ED could possibly do right now. It satisfies those looking a naval experience; it satisfies those looking a modern urban, Western environment; and from a financial point of view I think it would be a big seller and an attraction to DCS - without getting political at all - due to the current political instability in the region.

Aghh... see? Here I am getting sucked into thinking about a shiny, new map to play around with  Must. Resist. Maps - Need. New. Buildings.

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, LooseSeal said:

As far as map diversity goes, I think I'm personally most missing a Western-style map. I do think a Baltic map would be the best thing ED could possibly do right now. It satisfies those looking a naval experience; it satisfies those looking a modern urban, Western environment; and from a financial point of view I think it would be a big seller and an attraction to DCS - without getting political at all - due to the current political instability in the region.

Definitely need a European or alternatively, Scandinavian theatre of sorts - Germany, Baltic, Balkans, NATO Northern Flank, GIUK gap.

Edited April 15, 2022 by Northstar98

[Mars Exulte]

10 hours ago, LooseSeal said:

Unpopular opinion

  Not really. I think we all pretty much agree assets are a major shortcoming around here.

[WHOGX5]

Honestly, the thing I'm lacking the most in DCS is radar guided, medium to high altitude AAA. We already got the S-60 which is great, but it's still unguided so you have to be at extremely low altitudes for it to start shooting or even have a chance of hitting you. Also, we really need the KS-19. Both of these guns have been involved in pretty much every major conflict since WWII and flying combat missions without a medium to high altitude AAA threat just feels out of place.

As far as maps go though, if I had to choose one, I'd choose a Korean theatre. Preferably it'd cover North and South Korea including low detail areas on the Liaodong and Shaodong peninsulas, around Vladivostok and Some slivers of the northern coast of Japan. Maybe even Okinawa including Kadena AFB. It'd allow for the creation of so many different scenarios between various factions and alliances. The only DCS map that comes close  at the moment is Syria with the amount of ways you can twist and turn that map for new scenarios, but I believe a Korean theatre would be a notch above even that. Korea just has such an amazing geography and with both the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan and presence of Chinese, Russian, Japanese, Korean and American military bases.... I can think of so many scenarios that I can barely contain myself.

[Silver_Dragon]

1 minute ago, WHOGX5 said:

Honestly, the thing I'm lacking the most in DCS is radar guided, medium to high altitude AAA. We already got the S-60 which is great, but it's still unguided so you have to be at extremely low altitudes for it to start shooting or even have a chance of hitting you. Also, we really need the KS-19. Both of these guns have been involved in pretty much every major conflict since WWII and flying combat missions without a medium to high altitude AAA threat just feels out of place.

KS-19 has on progress by ED, but actually, has none release dates.

Quote

 

AI Units

New and Updated assets

Because DCS World is built on a project spanning almost two decades, some units now show their age and will be updated throughout the year. It is also important that we add new units to better fill the battlefields. Here are some of the items that we intend to create or update in 2021:

Large Aircraft: B-52H, Tu-95MS, Tu-142, B-1B, IL-38, and Tu-160

Carrier Aircraft: S-3B and SH-60B

Ground Units: M1A2, AMX-56 Leclerc, Wespe Sd.Kfz.124, KS-19 100mm ADA, Son-4 “Flap Wheel” radar, C1 Ariete, Pantsir SA-22 “Greyhound”, and S-300/SA-10 “Grumble”.

 

 

[WHOGX5]

1 minute ago, Silver_Dragon said:

KS-19 has on progress by ED, but actually, has none release dates.

 

Oh, I've completely missed that! Let's hope we get the fire control radars as well. Thanks for the links!