AI E-2C Hawkeye

[Rotor_Vibes]

Any chance we can get an AI E-2C Hawkeye? The E-2D didn't enter service until 2010 which is the wrong time frame for our F/A-18C and F-14A/B.

[Tank50us]

4 hours ago, Rotor_Vibes said:

Any chance we can get an AI E-2C Hawkeye? The E-2D didn't enter service until 2010 which is the wrong time frame for our F/A-18C and F-14A/B.

honestly, the way the sim is, we really can't see it like 99% of the time. On the RWR it still shows up as "E2", and the only time we actually get a good look at one is if it's on the deck or we're flying in close formation.

That being said, having more AWACS aircraft wouldn't be a bad thing, like the E-1 Tracer, KA-31, or that modified Sea King with a radar.

[Silver_Dragon]

7 hours ago, Rotor_Vibes said:

Any chance we can get an AI E-2C Hawkeye? The E-2D didn't enter service until 2010 which is the wrong time frame for our F/A-18C and F-14A/B.

DCS Was a E-2C many years ago, but was "update" to the E-2D some time ago.

[Lace]

With DCS you need to accept 'close enough'.  If you tried for 100% accuracy in theatre, targets, ground units, weapons and aircraft versions you'd never get any flying is done.  The nature of DCS is that substitutions and stand-ins are as good as we can hope for.  There is no single coherent plan, except maybe WWII (though purists might argue that too is compromised).

[Exorcet]

5 hours ago, Lace said:

With DCS you need to accept 'close enough'.  If you tried for 100% accuracy in theatre, targets, ground units, weapons and aircraft versions you'd never get any flying is done.  The nature of DCS is that substitutions and stand-ins are as good as we can hope for.  There is no single coherent plan, except maybe WWII (though purists might argue that too is compromised).

For player modules, variety can be difficult to achieve. In the case of AI units it's less complicated because AI units are simpler. With that simplicity we also don't need 100% accuracy, more like 80%, to throw out a number. There is probably a lot that can be done with Lua edits. 3D models are more work but for me that is less important than capabilities. I don't think AI variants are out of scope for DCS.

[Silver_Dragon]

9 hours ago, Lace said:

With DCS you need to accept 'close enough'.  If you tried for 100% accuracy in theatre, targets, ground units, weapons and aircraft versions you'd never get any flying is done.  The nature of DCS is that substitutions and stand-ins are as good as we can hope for.  There is no single coherent plan, except maybe WWII (though purists might argue that too is compromised).

Let's be clear that for "greater variety," we need more and more third parties to start having their own "assist teams." Otherwise, you won't see any progress, because ED doesn't have the resources to add that many AI units. We see that it's becoming increasingly difficult to create credible assists because the quality bar is rising higher and higher, and we all want these units to be at the same quality level as a module.

Let's not even talk about whether ED implements a new technology or feature that changes the production of these units, requiring them to be rebuilt.

As for weapons, this is subject to ED, as they will create the functionality. The days of "coffee for everyone," when anyone could make a "proton torpedo," are long gone.

[Tholozor]

If we look at some of the data from this thread, you'll find the existing E-2 in DCS is basically still an E-2C under the hood: