C-172 or PA-28 for DCS

[cfrag]

First of all, this is not a joke request - I really think that we should have a C-172 or PA-28 in DCS. And it should be one of the free planes, available for everyone.

But why? First and foremost for contrast. So many people know the other flight sim, and when they come to DCS they want to first experience the unknown in the known, e.g. take off from Batumi in a 172. If it has a good flight model (unlike most of the dinky 172s in the other sim) and realistic stall behaviour, they'll immediately see that they "aren't in Kansas any more, Dory" - even without making things go boom. I think it makes DCS much more approachable, as a simple 172 or Cherokee is also simple to set up, experience, and immediately makes the neophyte user want more - after they know how the basics work in DCS (I've watched by godson getting frustrated with DCS trying to set it up himself, he quit half way through - not because it was difficult, but because DCS is s#|7 to set up, a horrendously bad UX). Make them hunger for more, allow them to cross into DCS more smoothly.

It also makes such a great difference when you've 172'd Senaki-Kolkhi's 09, and then try the same in a jet (e.g. Su-25T). That way the difference between other flight sims and DCS becomes much more palpable, and DCS can show off, put it's best foot forward. Being able to compare something known with something new helps players to be convinced that DCS really is better than that other sim.

For other players, I also assert that a slow, easy to fly modern prop plane - especially for those who are licensed - is something that they'd appreciate and use to get to know new airfields/maps.

Perhaps use the YAK-52 (nobody believes anymore that it will ever leave EA, so we might as well use it for something useful) as a Cherokee spring board and make it available to all for free after stripping the more complex parts (retractable gear, constant speed prop etc). A low complexity SEPL for all could be what people want to see in DCS - if just to compare that plane's performance to the Hornet that they stap on a minute later. 

Heck, I'd even pay for those, but I also paid for the YAK - simply to have some low complexity plane in DCS.

Edited July 5 by cfrag

[MAXsenna]

Excellent idea!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[twistking]

Wouldn't the YAK-52 fulfill that role? Shouldn't we demand the Yak to be finished before wishing for more GA or non-tactical AC.
I absolutely understand the appeal of offering these types of AC in DCS, but i think the YAK could deliver that well enough, if it would get finished... 

[Livers]

1 hour ago, twistking said:

Wouldn't the YAK-52 fulfill that role? 

Not. Even. Close.

Seating arrangement.

Flight controls.

Gauges/units of measurement.

[SharpeXB]

Sorry but the Cessna 172 is the most boring aircraft you can have in a flight sim. And DCS doesn’t have any of the features that make civilian flying interesting like real weather, air mass modeling or turbulence, realistic nav aids, beautiful graphics and so on. Some Third Party could try to make one of these but it would be a fail here in DCS for certain. As a DCS module it would just take years to create and languish in Early Access as a mediocre product. 
It’s better done in other games and out of place in a combat sim. 

[Dragon1-1]

Make it an O-1E and nobody will oppose.  It's basically a Cessna 170 (172's taildragger predecessor) modified for the FAC role. It could carry a handful of rockets for marking targets (or light attack, if you loaded HE), but the most notable use was flying around spotting targets. Good for a free module, and will be all over the place as AI (or player!) FAC in Vietnam era missions. It'd also have an added bonus of allowing people to learn taildraggers in something that doesn't immediately try to kill you with prop torque on takeoff and landing, as the TF-51 is wont to do.

Maybe you could have a usable M-16 using the same tech Kiowa does, too. FACs carried rifles and occasionally fired them out of the window. There were some crazy stories about them out of Vietnam.

BTW, I don't know what settings and maps you're playing on, but "beautiful graphics" is definitely a thing in DCS.  We have realistic navaids, too, though as most maps are strictly modern, there's a paucity of VOR and NDB stations, their numbers are dwindling these days.

Edited July 5 by Dragon1-1

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

“beautiful graphics" is definitely a thing in DCS

Not really… I dig DCS but sometimes it looks like a 20 year old game just with highly detailed models and clouds. It appears to have this limited color palette and poor shadows or shading or whatever. I’m not a computer graphics expert so I can’t analyze exactly what’s so dated. It also lacks HDR support. It’s not nearly at the level of that other civy flight sim with a Cessna. Point is if your goal is just to fly and admire the graphics and scenery this isn’t the best game for that. 

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I don't know what settings and maps you're playing on

PS I’m on the max settings in 4K. Go figure what that looks like in big civy game

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

We have realistic navaids, too, though as most maps are strictly modern, there's a paucity of VOR and NDB stations

A few. But you couldn’t really simulate real life civilian flying here. There’s no ATC here that’s even close to RL either. 

Edited July 5 by SharpeXB

[Dragon1-1]

Shadows could be better, hopefully after Vulkan they'll be looked at, as well as HDR support. There are improvements to be made regarding the lighting, for sure, but model and landscape fidelity is up there in modern maps, though. Maybe in an OLED headset (I have a ReverbG2) the differences would be more visible, but I found the vistas pretty stunning in Syria or Marianas, even Nevada from high up. The biggest problem, IMO (and what drags down Nevada and especially Caucasus down low), are numerous outdated assets, unfortunately the replacement process for those is slow.

Edited July 5 by Dragon1-1

[Petard]

The end is relevant

[Lace]

I love the Yak, but for western pilots it makes no sense.  Metric units, differential braking only for ground steering, 'inverted' artificial horizon, all very confusing for someone used to GA aircraft in the civvy sim.  A western ab-initio trainer would be a nice addition, but I doubt it would be a big seller.  Ideally something which can do light attack/CSAR and act as a GA aircraft would be a better idea.  A combat Caravan (U-27 or A/C-208) or PC-9/T-6A are a little more relevant to our current maps.  A Cessna O-1 Bird Dog (modified civilian C170) is another good shout for a SE Asia map. 

I honestly couldn't see any pure-GA type being a popular module.  That experience is already well catered for elsewhere.

[Grievo]

Maybe a similar concept but with something like the L-4 Grasshopper (Military J-3 Cub used for artillery spotting) or a Cessna Birddog. At least these aircraft would add something to the sim in terms of fleshing out the world, which I still think is DCS' weakest point.

 

we could also do the same in the rotary world with a Westland Scout, Bell-47 or OH-58A... but now I'm just dreaming!

[spacefox]

On 7/6/2025 at 8:18 PM, Petard said:

The end is relevant

Can't wait to check this out and this is a hilarious video...it would be cool to see C172 on this sim.  VR rocks in DCS

Edited July 12 by spacefox