Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[Frostiken]

the A-10? Really? Don't get me wrong, i like the Hawg, and i'm still not all that cozy with the Legacy Bug, but i'll take a fighter with a T/W of 0.8, a top speed of Mach 1.7, and a fuel fraction of minuscule any day over a t/w of non existent, a top speed thrice that of a good baseball pitch, and Air/Mud until my eyes bleed.

I said 'sex appeal' which roughly translates into general interest and thus, sales. The A-10 has a huge amount of sex appeal. Everyone knows it, people get nerd-ons for the GAU-8, it's been in tons and tons of movies, it's unique, it's special, trust me, it's pretty much the second most identifiable aircraft next to the F-14.

 

I'm defining "sex appeal" as a general sense of how well-known an aircraft is, how 'publicized' it is, how much your general person will recognize it... I could even add in there 'how useful it is' and the F/A-18 would still come in last.

 

PS: UNDENIABLE PROOF

 

Compare it to the other three airframes and the result is the same - the F/A-18 is not an interesting aircraft for most people, it's not well-known, it's never done anything spectacular or particularly noteworthy, the most people know about them is when they crash into San Diego neighborhoods. F-14s are famous pretty much only because of Top Gun, A-10s are famous because of their giant cannon of own, F-15s are famous because of their completely unbeaten combat record and some Israeli flew one with one wing, and F-16s are famous because... well I don't really know why, maybe the Wild Weasel missions and that you just hear about them a lot in the news (well, you used to back when OIF / OEF made for headlines).

 

SEXY? YOU WANT...........SEXY????????? TAILHOOKS ARE SEXY

 

Good thing F-15s and F-16s have tailhooks too.

Edited November 22, 2011 by Frostiken

[Squid]

hehe :D

 

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=A-10&word2=Ka-50

 

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=F-18&word2=F-16

[Frogisis]

Probably a mix of reasons; one that hasn't been mentioned yet is that it's probably a bad idea to announce it before the feature set is confirmed. I mean, the moment they say "the next DCS module will be <x>" there will be a flood of questions: "will function <a> and weapon <b> will be modeled?" and "will we be able to do <c>?" and "what version of <d> will be included?" and so on and on and on.

 

Until they've actually "finished" it answering those questions will be very dangerous because of the backlash if it turns out they can't implement everything they initially planned to. Plus, people's imaginations tend to run riot and some people may start believing they're going to get all sorts of things that aren't/never were intended to be included, and be disappointed when it's not available in the finished product.

 

So for that reason, keeping the time between announcement of the aircraft and the announcement of the features of the module should probably be kept to a minumum; ideally they'd be done at the same time. IMHO.

 

Well that was a very satisfying and thorough explanation. Why you gotta go taking the challenge out of everything??

[Dondy]

 

:)

[Dimebag]

I said 'sex appeal' which roughly translates into general interest and thus, sales. The A-10 has a huge amount of sex appeal. Everyone knows it, people get nerd-ons for the GAU-8, it's been in tons and tons of movies, it's unique, it's special, trust me, it's pretty much the second most identifiable aircraft next to the F-14.

 

I'm defining "sex appeal" as a general sense of how well-known an aircraft is, how 'publicized' it is, how much your general person will recognize it... I could even add in there 'how useful it is' and the F/A-18 would still come in last.

 

PS: UNDENIABLE PROOF

 

Compare it to the other three airframes and the result is the same - the F/A-18 is not an interesting aircraft for most people, it's not well-known, it's never done anything spectacular or particularly noteworthy, the most people know about them is when they crash into San Diego neighborhoods. F-14s are famous pretty much only because of Top Gun, A-10s are famous because of their giant cannon of own, F-15s are famous because of their completely unbeaten combat record and some Israeli flew one with one wing, and F-16s are famous because... well I don't really know why, maybe the Wild Weasel missions and that you just hear about them a lot in the news (well, you used to back when OIF / OEF made for headlines).

 

 

 

Good thing F-15s and F-16s have tailhooks too.

 

Does this mean that you think that any DCS series which was carrier based would be pointless?

[Frogisis]

Ultimately as long as it fires AMRAAMs I'll be happy.

I have a strong supposition it'll be the F/A-18, and while I always thought that plane was too noncommittal yet at the same time trying to be slick to be especially lovable, I guess there are a lot of different things it can do and it'd be fun to fly and fight in, and might be more challenging than doing it in a plane dedicated to just that mission.

Someone mentioned SEAD, which was a good point, and yeah, with an F/A-18 I guess you could cover the rest of the easily-overlooked missions a modern pilot is most likely to face (as much as it'd be fun to have a dedicated chariot to plow through epic furballs over the desert, or intercept extreme-altitude strategic bombers as TIME IS RUNNING OUT MR PRESIDENT).

[plumber]

F-16 thoughts

 

I know the f-16 has been done before, but it would be one of the most exciting jets to fly if it was produced by ED in the kind of fidelity we've seen so far! Love the Bubble canopy!

[Squid]

I know the f-16 has been done before, but it would be one of the most exciting jets to fly if it was produced by ED in the kind of fidelity we've seen so far! Love the Bubble canopy!

 

:D

[goldfinger35]

I prefer F-16 but if we get a new map where carriers would make sense, I'm all for F-18. F-15c does not sound too exciting without air to ground capabilities.

Edited November 23, 2011 by goldfinger35

[Dudikoff]

I prefer F-16 but if we get a new map where carriers would make sense, I'm all for F-18.

 

Don't they make more sense on the current map than the F-16 already considering the very small distances?

[Phantom88]

I prefer F-16 but if we get a new map where carriers would make sense, I'm all for F-18. F-15c does not sound too exciting without air to ground capabilities.

 

I Agree,It would make sense for the next module to have Ground radar.:thumbup:

[Squid]

F-15c does not sound too exciting without air to ground capabilities.

 

you could set it to AI midflight and jump on an A-10C :D

[LostOblivion]

Many nations use the F-16 as their flagship military aircraft, like in Norway, until the F-35 comes along anyway. They are in the news all the time, which is probably why they are well known.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

I am just a bit confused. Is legends supposed to be old school jets, popular jets (as in the F-14 is legendary), or old prop planes. Legend is not a very discriptive word. Also I have to be honest. This scares me a bit. I am VERY concerned that ED will either get overloaded or change thier focus.

I would like to see DCS: SR-71 some day. That plane is looks COOL. Some may even say its ahem.... Legendary.

[Squid]

I am just a bit confused. Is legends supposed to be old school jets, popular jets (as in the F-14 is legendary), or old prop planes. Legend is not a very discriptive word. Also I have to be honest. This scares me a bit. I am VERY concerned that ED will either get overloaded or change thier focus.

I would like to see DCS: SR-71 some day. That plane is looks COOL. Some may even say its ahem.... Legendary.

 

Have you tried to see if you can get your SR71 thirst quenched in FSX ?

[ZQuickSilverZ]

If were going down this WW2 route (though I felt IL2 covered it nicely enouph and I think WW2 has been done to death) I would like to wish for DCS: P-38 Lightning. I have always loved the look of that plane.

[Phantom88]

If were going down this WW2 route (though I felt IL2 covered it nicely enouph and I think WW2 has been done to death) I would like to wish for DCS: P-38 Lightning. I have always loved the look of that plane.

 

I see you have a common thread in your favorite aircraft,both made by Lockheed Martins Great Engineer and Head Honcho of ,"Skunk Works" Kelly Johnson.

[Laud]

I would like to see DCS: SR-71 some day.

 

Why??? Even a train-simulator must be more interesting than flying straight and level for hours with that thing.

 

Why the hell are so many asking for aircraft that could easily be done in the FSX environment?

 

Guys, we're here to blow stuff up and shoot things down! Not to take photos at 3 times the speed of sound... :music_whistling:

[Squid]

Why??? Even a train-simulator must be more interesting than flying straight and level for hours with that thing.

 

Why the hell are so many asking for aircraft that could easily be done in the FSX environment?

 

Guys, we're here to blow stuff up and shoot things down! Not to take photos at 3 times the speed of sound... :music_whistling:

 

:D

[Pyroflash]

Why??? Even a train-simulator must be more interesting than flying straight and level for hours with that thing.

 

Why the hell are so many asking for aircraft that could easily be done in the FSX environment?

 

Guys, we're here to blow stuff up and shoot things down! Not to take photos at 3 times the speed of sound... :music_whistling:

 

You obviously have never seen the show SpeedGrapher :P

[goldfinger35]

Don't they make more sense on the current map than the F-16 already considering the very small distances?

Carriers in the Black sea? IMO it would be weird.

 

 

you could set it to AI midflight and jump on an A-10C :D

Shift-F1 Jump to F-15c

Shift-F2 Jump to A-10c

Shift-F3 Jump to Ka-50

[Phantom88]

F/A-18E or F/A-18C,F-15E or F-16,Truth is,I'd be Very Happy with any of these fast movers with a ground radar,Imagine setting up Red Flag training missions with any of the above at Nellis AFB in the New Nevada Terrain:thumbup:

 

[EtherealN]

Carriers in the Black sea? IMO it would be weird.

 

Yeah, it's not like the Kuznetsov was built there and has conducted exercises with the Black Sea fleet... ... ;)

[Dudikoff]

Carriers in the Black sea? IMO it would be weird.

 

It's a bit on the small size and enclosed, granted, but still rather less weird than taking off a Georgian airbase with an F-16 on a patrol mission and then having to turn around before even reaching the cruising altitude :)

[EtherealN]

It's a bit on the small size and enclosed, granted, but still rather less weird than taking off a Georgian airbase with an F-16 on a patrol mission and then having to turn around before even reaching the cruising altitude :)

 

That sounds like you are executing a very slow climb schedule there... :P

And besides - there are quite a few countries with territories the size of Georgia or even smaller that operate fastmovers - Israeli jets have fairly cramped airspace for example. :)