Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[Mr_Burns]

Yeah but where is the thread on its progress?

[cs_280zx]

yes i would like to know its progress if so.

 

look, my fav aircraft is the F-14 , but i refer to the F-18 because of its general success and overall appeal at this time, plus well i like it, the view i expressed regarding the f-35 etc are my own, if no one agrees that's ok

 

if i had to be specific id say F14, but since it was retired a number of years ago, i wanted to refer a plane that is still current.

 

thanks

[shagrat]

Eagle Dynamics facebook page, sometimes a little hint in the newsletter.

Pictures of EDGE Nevada showing F-15C and F/A-18C e.g.

As everytime an information or work in progress screenshot on "whatever" topic (EDGE, NTTR, Strait of Hormuz, F-18C etc ) is posted, it takes a couple of hours for the forum threads to fill with complaints, like "clouds look bad", "lighting is not god enough", "colours are not real" and the mods have to post hundreds of "calm down! It is WIP!", Wags explains for the umpteenth time "picture was taken in terrain viewer, not EDGE" and so on, we are lucky to get any(!) update on progress, by now.

 

My guess is, some day we get an announcement, that "DCS: F/A-18C" by Eagle Dynamics is now available for pre-purchase Beta" and that will be it...

 

I would like to have a progress thread, or regular updates on what goes on, like back in A-10C Beta times, but seeing how certain people (not you!) react on this Forums in such a negative manner, I doubt it will ever happen again.

 

So we need to sift through all the news we get and monitor FB to get an occasional glance at the F-18... or hope for Coretek being more informative on their DCS F/A-18E Super Hornet work in progress, they do in parallel.

Edited December 27, 2014 by shagrat
Correcting touch keyboard "corrections"

[KennethBF]

Big Birds

 

DCS realy needs some flyable full DCS quality big birds. Any one up for the tasks?

 

KC-97 Stratofreighter:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_...tratofreighter

C-130 Hercules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-130_Hercules

AC-130 Gunship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AC-130

Boeing C-17 Globemaster III: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_...lobemaster_III

 

KC 135 Stratotanker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-135_Stratotanker

Boeing E-3 Sentry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-3_Sentry

EC 121 Warning Star: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockhee...1_Warning_Star

Edited January 12, 2015 by KennethBF

[Nooch]

I'm pretty sure there will be big planes in the future, but not the near future I guess...

[KennethBF]

I'm pretty sure there will be big planes in the future, but not the near future I guess...

 

Maybe, we will see. But I think that DCS needs some Big Planes to attract FSX, Prepare 3d and X-plane "pilots". And because it is fun to fly the big ones :)

[Scoggs]

Maybe, we will see. But I think that DCS needs some Big Planes to attract FSX, Prepare 3d and X-plane "pilots". And because it is fun to fly the big ones :)

 

My sentiments exactly. While I would love to fly a big girl like the A330 MRTT, I think expanding the broad range of possibilities within DCS with aircraft like that ,on the level they are now would bring a lot more people into our community. And I for one don't see that as a bad thing.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Scoggs
iPhone...

[KennethBF]

My sentiments exactly. While I would love to fly a big girl like the A330 MRTT, I think expanding the broad range of possibilities within DCS with aircraft like that ,on the level they are now would bring a lot more people into our community. And I for one don't see that as a bad thing.

 

A330 MRTT would have been a nice one, though I'm not an Airbus fan, rather want to fly a Boeing ;)

 

And to be honest, I'm a bit tired of flyeing all these smal aircrafts now. Think I'd go back to FSX again. I really miss the big planes. Even though the DCS is the best simulator, I'd go back to FSX just to fly the heavies.

Edited January 12, 2015 by KennethBF

[Mr Sandman]

I would love a C130 Hercules with a mission campaign that focuses on troop transport and pickup.Be a nice little change :)

[SDsc0rch]

i don't know so i'll ask - do any of the 3rd party developers that are building fighter/attack a/c for DCS also build heavies?

[Exorcet]

Isn't VEAO making the Airbus tanker because Typhoon? Or did that change?

[shagrat]

Only I know as if today is VEAO is planning the Tanker for the Eurofighter Typhoon. First as AI with the Typhoon and later as flyable Module. At least it is on the roadmap...

EDIT: sniped... and yes, it is on the roadmap. Though Tiffy is currently scheduled in 2015, so before we see the Airbus, may take a while...

Edited January 13, 2015 by shagrat

[RoflSeal]

After seeing this

 

I kinda have a desire to have this in game

 

I mean, Cessna is an US company right?

[Baxter]

F16?? None on the Horizon??? Seriously???

 

This gets brought up all the time in other threads, but I actually want an answer to why there is no F16 even on the horizon! It's the most widely dispersed western aircraft in the world with the flight manuals and charts strewn all over the internet! People are making accurate advanced flight models for it as a hobby for goodness sake!

 

BMS is a terrific sim, if you can get past the horrendous graphics of yesteryear and the systems of a amalgamation of a block 40 and block 50 jet. Imagine the financial windfall the first 3rd party to do it would have if they did DCS: F-16-50CM.....

 

Just blows my mind that not one of the third party developers is doing one. My fingers are obviously crossed that some hero developer is working on one undisclosed in the background until they have a product worthy enough to show on the forums. They have a whole customer base sitting at BMS right now!

 

I'd just like to hear some decent reasoning and logic. Is it because BMS did it and is actively doing it? Is it because it's been done before? Do people think it's a tired subject? Is it because it doesn't land on a boat? Is it too cool for this sim? Will there be too many dos gringos posts accompanying its release? Seriously what's amiss?

[KennethBF]

I agree.

[MTFDarkEagle]

If you know this is brought up all the time in other threads you would know why there is no F-16 on the horizon (at least from ED).

 

I think the risk is just too great - there already is an established market for the F-16.

 

Having said that - I'd like a DCS: Falcon module .. but, not gonna happen from ED. Risk is too great I think.

[Baxter]

None of those threads give a good reason. And no I don't think the risk is too great. The reward might be too great but the risk is questionable.

[cichlidfan]

VEAO has also publicly stated their reasons, more than once, as well.

[cichlidfan]

None of those threads give a good reason. And no I don't think the risk is too great.

 

Since it is not your time and money being invested, your assessment of the risk is not relevant.

[NineLine]

None of those threads give a good reason. And no I don't think the risk is too great. The reward might be too great but the risk is questionable.

 

None of these threads give a real reason (so nothing should be taken as an official reason for anything until Wags or someone comments), until ED or anyone else comes out and says they are not doing this aircraft for this reason then nobody knows 1) If the are doing it, 2) If they are not, why they are not.

 

Neither of those have been answered, and we really dont know what is coming beyond the Hornet and into the future.

 

Personally, if I was working on the F-16, I wouldnt say anything till I was a year or so out, the madness on the forums it would create wouldnt be worth it...

[Baxter]

What is the supposed risk? I don't recall VEAO mentioning the Viper

 

Thanks Sith

Edited January 16, 2015 by Baxter

[NineLine]

... why drop half a million dollars US into a simulation that's already been completely covered and well-built by another developer, and is still wildly popular in the sim community, and... enjoyed by the same people who also enjoy DCS?

 

As a retail product developer, you gotta ask yourself: Why drop a ton of money and time into developing a mouse trap that someone else has been making for nigh on two decades now, well, that continues to be updated and improved upon? You (the developer) gets zero return on investment when you produce and publish a duplicate product for a niche someone else already owns lock stock and barrel.

 

An F-16 module for DCS would be fun for the customer, but as a dev decision, would be incredibly stupid and a massive waste of money.

 

I disagree, for all the good other sims having going for them, a DCS World F-16 module would bring so much to the table, I highly doubt any other sim would impede sales of a DCS F-16 module that much... IMHO

[rrohde]

How come that some people tippy-toe around BSM? As far as I am concerned, there's no monopoly on what aircraft appears in which flight simulation.

 

If that were the case, then there wouldn't be any X-Plane, because of FSX; there wouldn't be any Mechwarrior Online, because of Mechwarrior Living Legends, there wouldn't be any DCS: WWII planes being made, because of the IL-2 series. The list goes on.

 

DCS modules would bring a higher fidelity and much, much better graphics to the table, in a completely different environment as BSM currently does. And if people would like that, they would vote with their wallet anyway. Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of the Falcon series, but DCS is where it's at for military air combat and with EDGE close to being released, that becomes even more obvious.

 

So yes, I would gladly pay for a DCS-level F-16.

[NineLine]

How come that some people tippy-toe around BSM? As far as I am concerned, there's no monopoly on what aircraft appears in which flight simulation.

 

It's purely an assumption made by people that somehow BMS or any other simulation has any bearing on ED's or any Partner/3rd Parties roadmap...

[cichlidfan]

Hmmm, it seems that VEAO has indeed discussed the F-16 and mentioned BMS as a reason.

 

Lack of access to aircraft, airframes, data, personal, licence. Then there is the bms issue.

 

On top of that it would take 2-3 years with a new team as i dont have spare capacity for a team to spend 2-3 years on a project

 

So no chance of an f16 from us

 

Pman

 

EDIT: I could find a similar quote from Ells as well.

Edited January 16, 2015 by cichlidfan