What kind of aircraft do you wan't to see next?

[vrv]

F-14D SuperTomcat

 

Even though he flew the A without Maverick flight sims wouldn't exist. It is only right to pay homage to the first flight simmer and the legendary Tomcat. Plus it would give me a reason to wear my aviators indoors at night while flying.

[joey45]

If ED asked me of what aircraft to model I would say "The least modeled ones which are still in service!". Now I don't mean B-52 or KC-135, I mean all the aircraft that are out that made a name that haven't been used again and again in Flight Sims. We 've seen many F-16/15/18/22 and A-10 is coming shortly.

 

Still there are aircraft like (fighters) Mirage-2000, Mig-29, Su-27/30 (attack)Tornado IDS, AV-8B, SU-25. In general all these aircraft are modern enough to be interesting and added in DCS series with the Russian ones being more interesting (to many of western customers such as myself) cause there is still a "mystery" floating around their name!

 

along those lines maybe a sepcat jaguar could be good.

 

The Jag would be epic, but only the GR3a version... Shame it was taken out of service right after it was upgraded. Probaly one of the greatest Ground Attack aircrafts we had.

[element1108]

Why WAS it taken out of service Joey? The prince loose another bet? <-- that was bad I apologize.

 

Seriously though.

[Eddie]

Why WAS it taken out of service Joey? The prince loose another bet? <-- that was bad I apologize.

 

Seriously though.

 

The Jag? Because quite simply they were a total waste of time and AVTUR. Maybe back in the 1970's they were ok, but by the time we finally got rid of them they were totally useless for anything other than flying around for spotters to look at.

 

Most of them couldn't actually carry ordnance because the airframes were simply knackered and those that could, couldn't actually carry anything useful.

 

Basically, we were glad to see the back of them (ignoring the nostalgia value at least). Just like it'll be nice to finally get rid of the Tornado F3.

[Motorpsyhco]

You know what would be good as well. Flying SAR missions. Using the UH60 Blackhawks (both USAF, Army, Navy and US Coast Guard), UH1 Huey, CH 53, CH 47 Chinook and the Coast Guard Dalphin. All during peace time or war and different weather and envoirmental conditions.

[digital_steve]

Plus it would give me a reason to wear my aviators indoors at night while flying.

 

I think i speak for everyone in saying that if you wore your aviators indoors at night, i'd fly to wherever you are and punch you

:megalol:

;)

[norm]

i like Motorpsyhco's idea.

[kingneptune117]

I think the flight sim community is in need of an awesome F-22 or F-35 simulator. There arent any good simulators out for either of those and they deserve it. Open falcon 4.7 fills my fuel for the F-16, I dont care about the F/A 18 since im joining the USAF not the navy.

 

I must say though the F-15E is so bad ass. Take the F-15C one of the biggest (tennis court size), baddest fighters out there and slap a few JDAMS on it and you have one hell of a strike fighter that brings some serious firepower to the battlefield.

[kingneptune117]

Oh, and also, please make it an American aircraft. Ive got nothing against the russians, but i get the impression their aircraft are more for looking pretty than anything...

 

Can the SU-27 say that its had 106 A-A kills and hasnt once been shot down? No, but the F-15C can.

 

Also, Russian symbology and avionics would take forever to learn.

[pernils]

Liebherr R914

 

http://images.autoline.info/s/special-machinery-tracked-excavator-LIEBHERR-R-914-B-HDSL--1--08101015261506368400.jpg

 

So I can drive to the enemy's airport and demolish it so they can't take off. Will not affect rotoheads but will be another way to cripple the enemy...

 

cheers

[element1108]

I think the flight sim community is in need of an awesome F-22 or F-35 simulator. There arent any good simulators out for either of those and they deserve it. Open falcon 4.7 fills my fuel for the F-16, I dont care about the F/A 18 since im joining the USAF not the navy.

 

I must say though the F-15E is so bad ass. Take the F-15C one of the biggest (tennis court size), baddest fighters out there and slap a few JDAMS on it and you have one hell of a strike fighter that brings some serious firepower to the battlefield.

 

F-22 or F-35 sim isn't going to happen from DCS anytime soon or if at all. It's been discussed numerous times on the forum and the reasons why have been given. You're new so you've probably missed it, but it boils down to there being too much classified information to make a high fidelity sim.

 

The only way you'll get to fly one of those birds soon is to knock the socks off the USAF so they feel you are worthy to let you train to fly one.

 

We're talking the best of the best of the best.

[Endoplasmic Reticulum]

 

Can the SU-27 say that its had 106 A-A kills and hasnt once been shot down? No, but the F-15C can.

 

Also, Russian symbology and avionics would take forever to learn.

 

I have to clarify one thing. You compare apples with pears. The F-15 may have such a high kill rate. I'm not gonna deny this fact. But you have to make a few more calculations before you declare the F-15 as the best fighter ever.

 

Please name the conflicts and the duration of each Russia and USA have taken part in. USA has taken part in much more worldwide conflicts than Russia has. The only major conflict, Russia has taken part in is Afghanistan (1980-1980). There were also other 1-2 'minor' conflicts as well. Now we come to USA. Gulf War 1 and 2, Afghanistan (and some others as well) and not to forget Israel and Japan that use F-15s as well, although Japan has a strictly defensive airforce, Israel uses them regularly in the conflicts in Palestine. So you get higher kill-rates for the F-15s. Another thing you have to keep in mind is, that numbers about wars that Russia has taken part in, are more classified, so that few numbers leak out to the public.

 

The only comparison you can make between the Russian and US top fighters (and also some Europeans) are the the excercises with the Indian Airforce during Cope India (2004-2006) and the exercise in Garuda (SU-30K and 30MKI). I remember a French pilot saying in an interview: 'Those planes are damn agile and have a mindblowing firepower. If you can't shoot it down at first try, you have no second chance. The indian pilots are well trained and have a more fluid command structure, that overwhelmed us and made us rethink our strategies. I see these exercises as an eyeopener'.

 

I would'nt want Russia to start one more war, just to feed us with numbers of their firepower. So these exercises are a good chance to show the world what those planes are capable of without killing people. You have to put some of these facts into your statistics as well and the numbers would be a bit different than '106-None'.

 

And the Russian alphabet is not difficult. Since I began playing Lock-On, I quickly learned the symbology and each time I'm in Russia (MAKS), I have no problem reading the signs. It's not difficult. Give it a try. And the Russians like it when foreigners are interested in their culture and language. Especially their women LOVE you for that :D. Ochin horosho ;).

Edited February 4, 2010 by Endoplasmic Reticulum

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Not only the US and Israel took part in way more conflicts, but they also actually faced airborne threats.

 

I don't recall hearing from a single engagement between a Su-27 in Afghanistan, Georgia and Chechnya.

 

Now, all these F-15 kills can't be counted to tell it's the best because they were usually against poorly trained pilots, in aircraft in bad conditions and most of the time F-15 pilots had tactical advantage.

 

Still a marvelous plane, for sure. But you can't bash the Su-27 just because the F-15 did this or that.

 

About learning "Russian symbology and avionics", this is the worst excuse I've ever heard. First of all, it's very very easy (if you stay away from grammar, some complex rules and etc. initially, that can be tricky).

 

It helps if you know a language other than English. An American guy without any basis will have a hard time to speak, but to read signs in a cockpit, Russian is almost dumb-proof. Sure, not as simple as English (which, IMHO, is way too simple, even more than necessary), but not nearly close to impossible.

 

And for the lazy-asses that don't want to learn, you have the option to have the cockpit fully in English, plus other Western options.

 

Plus, just check DCS: Black Shark. You have a Russian helicopter and no one ever complained about the language and systems, anyway (some got problems with the A/P, but that's not a matter of language). You get it very quickly (and even quicker if you RTFM).

 

You'll get Russian planes when you understand the heart and soul of them. Until then, you're unable to give an opinion about them :music_whistling:

 

Follow Endoplasmic Reticulum's advice, and you'll see what we're talking about. Maybe try reading some classic literature, to get in the mood, then you'll slowly start to understand the planes.

 

By the way, a lovely demonstration of the Su-27, really amazing what it can do in such a tiny box (Le Bourget):

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Check this to get an idea of what we're talking about, check this link:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_alphabet#The_alphabet

 

Ignore the "Handwriting", "Old Name", "Numerical Value" and "Unicode" columns, they aren't really important when flying in a fighter jet (:music_whistling:).

 

Not anything close to hard.

[element1108]

In America you love women, in mother Russia, women love you! ;).

[Krippz]

I have to clarify one thing. You compare apples with pears. The F-15 may have such a high kill rate. I'm not gonna deny this fact. But you have to make a few more calculations before you declare the F-15 as the best fighter ever.

 

Please name the conflicts and the duration of each Russia and USA have taken part in. USA has taken part in much more worldwide conflicts than Russia has. The only major conflict, Russia has taken part in is Afghanistan (1980-1980). There were also other 1-2 'minor' conflicts as well. Now we come to USA. Gulf War 1 and 2, Afghanistan (and some others as well) and not to forget Israel and Japan that use F-15s as well, although Japan has a strictly defensive airforce, Israel uses them regularly in the conflicts in Palestine. So you get higher kill-rates for the F-15s. Another thing you have to keep in mind is, that numbers about wars that Russia has taken part in, are more classified, so that few numbers leak out to the public.

 

The only comparison you can make between the Russian and US top fighters (and also some Europeans) are the the excercises with the Indian Airforce during Cope India (2004-2006) and the exercise in Garuda (SU-30K and 30MKI). I remember a French pilot saying in an interview: 'Those planes are damn agile and have a mindblowing firepower. If you can't shoot it down at first try, you have no second chance. The indian pilots are well trained and have a more fluid command structure, that overwhelmed us and made us rethink our strategies. I see these exercises as an eyeopener'.

 

I would'nt want Russia to start one more war, just to feed us with numbers of their firepower. So these exercises are a good chance to show the world what those planes are capable of without killing people. You have to put some of these facts into your statistics as well and the numbers would be a bit different than '106-None'.

 

And the Russian alphabet is not difficult. Since I began playing Lock-On, I quickly learned the symbology and each time I'm in Russia (MAKS), I have no problem reading the signs. It's not difficult. Give it a try. And the Russians like it when foreigners are interested in their culture and language. Especially their women LOVE you for that :D. Ochin horosho ;).

 

 

Guys a kill is a kill; I mean would you dispute A2A kills in WWII when fighter's shot down blimps? US pilots get a lot more flying time than Russian pilots and the US Airforce flying and fighting in so many conflicts is actually an ADVANTAGE; it gives the pilots real world fighting experience. Mig-29's we're shot down in Iraq and Kosovo guys...we're they on equal parity with Russian Migs; no but how many export models are. You guys a focusing too much on the aircraft and not the pilots, the pilot is quintessential not the plane.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Yep, mentioned it before.

 

It's quite obvious that an Israeli pilot (one of the, if not THE pilot with better training in the whole world) will have the edge over a, let's say, Syrian pilot lacking proper training (and most of the time flying inferior aircraft).

[Endoplasmic Reticulum]

Guys a kill is a kill; I mean would you dispute A2A kills in WWII when fighter's shot down blimps? US pilots get a lot more flying time than Russian pilots and the US Airforce flying and fighting in so many conflicts is actually an ADVANTAGE; it gives the pilots real world fighting experience. Mig-29's we're shot down in Iraq and Kosovo guys...we're they on equal parity with Russian Migs; no but how many export models are. You guys a focusing too much on the aircraft and not the pilots, the pilot is quintessential not the plane.

 

No. I'm not concentrating on the planes. It's a fact, that a good plane is only good in the hands of a skilled pilot and you can't say that Russian pilots are'nt good, just because they have'nt participated in a real combat. You misunderstood me in this case. And those Indian pilots that took part in Cope India were excellent pilots and they showed this. They achieved good kills, even with maneuvers like the 'cobra', which many people say are useless in combat.

 

I don't understand where all the people get the idea that russian pilots are bad. I think this still is a prejudice against the former East-Block. They had and partially still have a hard time, because of financial problems, but this says nothing about the skills of a pilot.

 

If I would have sprinted 100 meters in 8 seconds, although not having participated in the olympic games doesn't make me a slower sprinter, just because I did'nt earn a medal. Or do I see this wrong?

[Endoplasmic Reticulum]

In America you love women, in mother Russia, women love you! ;).

 

You got it ;).

[Krippz]

No. I'm not concentrating on the planes. It's a fact, that a good plane is only good in the hands of a skilled pilot and you can't say that Russian pilots are'nt good, just because they have'nt participated in a real combat. You misunderstood me in this case. And those Indian pilots that took part in Cope India were excellent pilots and they showed this. They achieved good kills, even with maneuvers like the 'cobra', which many people say are useless in combat.

 

I don't understand where all the people get the idea that russian pilots are bad. I think this still is a prejudice against the former East-Block. They had and partially still have a hard time, because of financial problems, but this says nothing about the skills of a pilot.

 

If I would have sprinted 100 meters in 8 seconds, although not having participated in the olympic games doesn't make me a slower sprinter, just because I did'nt earn a medal. Or do I see this wrong?

 

 

Where did I say Russian pilots we're bad? I only stated a fact that US pilots get more flight hours.

[Endoplasmic Reticulum]

Where did I say Russian pilots we're bad? I only stated a fact that US pilots get more flight hours.

 

OK. Then I got you wrong. Sorry.

 

I want to throw something in the round and it's called 'talent'. It's not always the amount of hours you take. A talented pilot maybe achieves the same or even better results in a shorter period of time. There are many other factors that make someone good in a shorter time in a certain thing than others. This is now pure speculation, but I doubt that the indian pilots have as many flight-hours as american pilots have, but they proved their talent to the world.

 

I think we're getting a bit off-topic. I hope Uncle ED won't get mad on us ;).

Edited February 4, 2010 by Endoplasmic Reticulum

[GGTharos]

And those Indian pilots that took part in Cope India were excellent pilots and they showed this. They achieved good kills, even with maneuvers like the 'cobra', which many people say are useless in combat.

 

They didn't use Cobra. It equals death pretty much, and IIRC they aren't even permitted to fly that maneuver. But as long as you're talking about not taking the F-15's record seriously, then why are you taking results from a forced-scenario based exercise seriously?

 

I don't understand where all the people get the idea that russian pilots are bad. I think this still is a prejudice against the former East-Block. They had and partially still have a hard time, because of financial problems, but this says nothing about the skills of a pilot.

 

I don't understand why you haven't had a look at recent history: Russian pilots lack hours, and by comparison this pretty much makes them some shade of bad. Lack of hours = lack of skills. You don't have to like it, it's only reality.

 

Make all the excuses you like, the fact is that if a bunch of Su-27SMs and a bunch of upgraded eagles met right now, those SMs would be dropping like flies with little to show on their own part - that's both due to pilot AND plane.

 

If I would have sprinted 100 meters in 8 seconds, although not having participated in the olympic games doesn't make me a slower sprinter, just because I did'nt earn a medal. Or do I see this wrong?

 

You pretty much see it wrong. To give you an analogy, if you don't train to sprint like that, you can forget about having chances of winning in the olympic games.

And if they shoot you for not coming in first, you might in fact not want to participate, and I'd imagine that to be a wise decision. ;)

[GGTharos]

Yes, it is pure speculation. Real life USAF study shows training and practice hours = performance in A2A (specifically, recent training/practice time).

 

'Talent' doesn't factor into it - there is a very, very small number of people who are 'naturals' at A2A, but they don't make a huge difference overall.

 

And I'll say once more - if you're going to diss the eagle's kill record with all the excuses you made, I'll tell you again, COPE INDIA is a worthless point of comparison since it was a forced, overwhelming scenario for the defenders who weren't even allowed to use their full capabilities - later on those Su-30MKI's got whooped up on in dogfights by - guess - pilots in technically worse planes, but with more experience ;)

 

A talented pilot maybe achieves the same or even better results in a shorter period of time. There are many other factors that make someone good in a shorter time in a certain thing than others. This is now pure speculation, but I doubt that the indian pilots have as many flight-hours as american pilots have, but they proved their talent to the world.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

GG, any source on the lack of flight hours by Russian pilots?

 

Just curiosity :)

[isoul]

Actually US pilots have flown more hours of combat sorties against :

 

1) North Korea

2) North Vietnam

3) Iraq (Operation Desert Storm - Gulf War I)

4) Serbo-bosnians (in Bosnia War)

5) Serbia (in Kossovo War)

6) Afghanistan

7) Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom - Gulf War II)

 

Still, only in No1 and No5 airforces considered modern at the time(actually Serbia had good air defensse and only and 14 Mig 29s, the rest aircrafts were old).

 

Its interesting that in No5 (NATO bombing of Yugoslavia) 1000 NATO aircraft were pitted against 140 Yugoslavian aircraft with combat losses counting 5(2 F-117, 3 F-16) and 12(11 Mig-29) for each side respectively!!!

Edited February 4, 2010 by isoul