Canvassing

[Tonker]

Issue: On the back of another "...and Beyond" which left me unmoved, I've come to conclusion that the things I enjoy in DCS are now fully in the hands of the third-party and community developers. So, if I care then I should do what little I can to support those devs, even if it's just to throw some grass in the air to see which way it blows.

Why should you care? Well, maybe you feel the same. Only one way to find out!

What to do about it? Trying to think practically, I wondered if a route to improvement (YMMV, of course) might lie in 'small' updates to existing paid modules. Perhaps replacement cockpits, followed by updated externals, followed by updated flight models, stores etc. Discreet projects of defined scope, but which impact on how we experience DCS.

Examples? Prime examples to my mind are the CH-47 and C-130. Iconic aircraft both. Sadly, for me, the wrong models were chosen - the best fits for DCS to my mind being the CH-47D*

and the C-130H**.

*Introduced in the '80s, it's widely applicable to currently available maps and scenarios in DCS; not immersion-breaking for future Vietnam (or current 'Viet-Guam') settings, with some good quality of life improvements over earlier versions. I'm not a masochist!

** The standout model of the Herc, from the early '60s to today, hugely successful in the export market, and darling of a diverse mission set.

As things stand, I won't be buying either. If they offered an experience I enjoy, I'd buy both. I have no right to this experience, but modding an existing aircraft seems much more within reach than trying to create something of A-4E or OH-6A (etc) standard from scratch.

My view is that life is too short to look at screens on screen, so give me steam gauges! Whilst I don't have a VR set, I've heard across the social media spectrum that gauges look and work better than MFDs for VR users. With DCS' dynamic foveated rendering, and given MS2024's troubled launch, it seems silly not to double down on making DCS the VR sim par excellence. Also, I think pits of the pre-screen era suit the sim environment better, by giving me information I can then act on via my cheap'n'cheerful HOTAS/keyboard. I'm sure full-simpit guys are down with MFD functionality, but I find it tedious to have to reach for a mouse every time I want access to even basic flight and nav information etc etc etc. Last but not least, the undoubted power of the these modern systems actively detract from my immersion - and satisfaction - in a DCS session.

I thought this was a flight sim?!

I understand there is a huge amount of programming and other work under the hood to bring even apparently minor updates to us lucky end-users, and even the smallest of such projects are significant undertakings...

...but...

...surely a more positive approach than just screaming (headphones on) "I wanna VC-10" into the void, no?

Questions:

• Is it just me?
• Is there a better way forward than this incremental approach?
• What are the implications of basing (freeware, obviously) community developments on ED/Third Party modules?
  • I'm thinking of lots of early mods using FC base aircraft through to @Massun92 gorgeous period-correct Huey pit.
• This seems more productive than just wishing for others to make my dream fleet of aircraft; but what gaps do you see in the DCS ecosystem that we could fill? My thoughts on this are more about filling the ranks for certain eras/settings than 'I wanna *insert your fave plane here*' but feel free to state your case for XYZ!

Thanks for reading, I'm looking forward to your feedback

 

Tonker

Edited January 20 by Tonker
Sp!

[KrazyPilot]

Couldnt agree more! I was let down that they chose basically the latest models and are going the FS2024 glass cockpit route.. I was hoping for the similar to exact same models as you. Honestly, I would even take a different cockpit at this point for both models even if the Engines and what not wouldnt match... 

[G.J.S]

Agree also. The CH-47D would have been the preferred model were it up to me.

I’m firmly set in the steam gauge era, I have enough troubles with my laptop to prove it! My PC fares only slightly better, my son is my “tech guy” and can vouch for that. 

And don’t get me started on his bloody Tesla! I remember when cars were cars, not laptops with wheels. 

[Tengah]

Hear, hear.

[crazyeddie]

80% of the stuff I play with most is 3rd party, some Core Game stuff is really good, some of it is crap, but ED's bug control lags way behind their ambition. 

That said developing a game like this must be extremely difficult and there is no way they could ever hope to meet all of our demands, outragious and otherwise that some of them are !!

I like ships, I like 1950-70's stuff, and I'm a Brit so my preferences lie there so ED is never likely to meet even half of my 'wants list', I haven to accept that, and I do. 

On balance its pretty damn good really, I still dont see anything better out there.

 

[Tonker]

Agreed with all that Eddie, especially...

2 hours ago, crazyeddie said:

I like ships, I like 1950-70's stuff, and I'm a Brit so my preferences lie there so ED is never likely to meet even half of my 'wants list', I haven to accept that, and I do. 

...which might as well have described me!

That said, the F-35A announcement was an Emperor's New Clothes moment. No need for me to go over it all, we'll know how we feel about it by now, but suffice to say it's now clear that the development in DCS' strengths (flight dynamics, systems depth) lies in our hands, not ED's.

Looking at those strengths and weaknesses, it's a simple job of cost/benefit to see a focus on aircraft '50s-'70s (and so enabling scenarios up to c.'90s) makes the most of the platform. Linking back to the quote, one could look at the Fury (piston), Venom (strike), Canberra (bomber), Hunter (fighter/multirole), Lightening (interceptor), Lynx (rotary) as all offering significant value to DCS in terms of unique experiences, wide export customers, decades-long service histories, significant combat use, and leaning into DCS' strength at evoking the feeling of real flght. Half have equally, if not more, distinguished naval variants. I digress.

This thread is to sanity-check my thinking and, if correct, identify 'intermediate' mods that are less demanding than going for full standalone aircraft mods. The Wokka and the Herc both tick a lot of boxes; personally an FRS.1 or GR.1 would get me to buy the Harrier 2 module, commercial shenanigans notwithstanding, but I appreciate these would have a much smaller market than US-built and operated aircraft. If these also increase revenue for ED and 3rd Party devs by generating sales that otherwise would not have been made, so much the better. I don't begrudge the cost, just can't justify spending money on modules I won't fly any more than on food I wouldn't eat!

I'm an absolute neophyte, so it'd also be good to hear from those in the know about the practicalities of creating, say, a CH-47D cockpit. 

3 hours ago, crazyeddie said:

On balance its pretty damn good really, I still dont see anything better out there.

Also agreed! We'll see what Combat Pilot, Il2: Korea, CAP2 etc bring, but the next few years will see a lot more direct competition for ED than they've had to deal with to date. I predict a lot more easy-sell modules, and a lot less focus on sorting out the core engine. So what can we do with what we've got? 1950s-70s stuff!

[Massun92]

I would LOVE an older C-130 and an older Chinook. Unfortunately, its looks like a tone of work to modify or make them from scratch. 

[KrazyPilot]

On 1/22/2025 at 7:11 AM, Massun92 said:

I would LOVE an older C-130 and an older Chinook. Unfortunately, its looks like a tone of work to modify or make them from scratch. 

Yeaaa, I kind of figured that was the Case.. Hopefully, someone or one of the 3rd party's will take up the challenge down the road and make a module of one or better, both! At the moment I am concerned with what is going on at Polychop and hope everything is ok on their end... They are amazing group!

[KrazyPilot]

On 1/21/2025 at 3:58 PM, Tonker said:

Agreed with all that Eddie, especially...

...which might as well have described me!

That said, the F-35A announcement was an Emperor's New Clothes moment. No need for me to go over it all, we'll know how we feel about it by now, but suffice to say it's now clear that the development in DCS' strengths (flight dynamics, systems depth) lies in our hands, not ED's.

Looking at those strengths and weaknesses, it's a simple job of cost/benefit to see a focus on aircraft '50s-'70s (and so enabling scenarios up to c.'90s) makes the most of the platform. Linking back to the quote, one could look at the Fury (piston), Venom (strike), Canberra (bomber), Hunter (fighter/multirole), Lightening (interceptor), Lynx (rotary) as all offering significant value to DCS in terms of unique experiences, wide export customers, decades-long service histories, significant combat use, and leaning into DCS' strength at evoking the feeling of real flght. Half have equally, if not more, distinguished naval variants. I digress.

This thread is to sanity-check my thinking and, if correct, identify 'intermediate' mods that are less demanding than going for full standalone aircraft mods. The Wokka and the Herc both tick a lot of boxes; personally an FRS.1 or GR.1 would get me to buy the Harrier 2 module, commercial shenanigans notwithstanding, but I appreciate these would have a much smaller market than US-built and operated aircraft. If these also increase revenue for ED and 3rd Party devs by generating sales that otherwise would not have been made, so much the better. I don't begrudge the cost, just can't justify spending money on modules I won't fly any more than on food I wouldn't eat!

I'm an absolute neophyte, so it'd also be good to hear from those in the know about the practicalities of creating, say, a CH-47D cockpit. 

Also agreed! We'll see what Combat Pilot, Il2: Korea, CAP2 etc bring, but the next few years will see a lot more direct competition for ED than they've had to deal with to date. I predict a lot more easy-sell modules, and a lot less focus on sorting out the core engine. So what can we do with what we've got? 1950s-70s stuff!

I would LOVE to have seen more British developed aircraft and helo's in DCS!! I am excited for both the EE Lightning and the Scimitar both being developed by modders. Its great to see and hear from like minded people in our community!