Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[Weasel]

 

The F-15E's undergone, in the last five years, two major revisions and upgrades - Suite 5 and Suite 6. Suite 6 notably had the larger impact as it introduced JHMCS to the front cockpit (Suite 7 will introduce it to the back) and allowed capability of Small Diameter Bombs (wheee!) and the AN/ASQ-236 radar mapping pod. There's oodles of other features that both suites introduced, such as the replacement of the 8mm VTRS for a DVR (the 8mm player itself is being deprecated in Suite 7 IIRC), as well as the obligatory secret squirrel kind of stuff.

 

Regardless, the point is the pilots need to learn this stuff. I've used the simulator that Boeing offered as a 'trainer' and it's really not the most impressive thing I've seen.

 

Now the argument could be that Boeing's offering is good enough, but given how lackluster that thing was (it basically focused only on the core features of the new upgrade, with zero integration with older avionics) I definitely see a fat juicy contract for the F-15E in the future, especially if AETC was pleased with ED's offering for the A-10C. I've thought about this before and while I don't know what's going on in the F/A-18 world, I do know that the F-35 is supposed to replace them, so I'm skeptical that the F/A-18Cs (the legacy Hornet, not even the Superhornet) would have any interest for the US military, which would tell me that if a 'military' trainer for the F/A-18C is in the works, it would be for a country such as Canada, Finland, or maybe even Kuwait.

 

That said, the F-15E is getting a batrilljion dollars invested into it to make it even better and, well, someone has to learn this stuff at some point.

 

So on the 'which has more contract potential' we have:

 

A) Clunky old useless pile of crap that's already been rendered obsolete by two different airframes...

or

B) A state-of-the-art fighter getting new upgrades on a regular basis that has zero replacement and is forecast to be in use for the next 15 years.

 

It seems that I passed some parts of the discussion, so please allow me one short question: What are the terms and conditions for DCS regarding modelling a fighter (for example the F-15E)? As far as I know, the A-10C was only possible because DCS made a training programm for the USAF and for the game version they had to change or back off the defense countermeasure systems, some aspects of the data link, the IFF/SIF system and they tuned the sensors a bit.

[milky82]

I'd quite like an A-6 :)

[EtherealN]

What are the terms and conditions for DCS regarding modelling a fighter (for example the F-15E)?

 

Frostiken wouldn't know, and neither would you. (Respectfully.)

Essentially, what gets blocked in the establishment of such a deal gets blocked because the subject matter is classified. This often means that it's not even possible to say anything more than that "X isn't modeled", and for some things it would require insider knowledge to even be in a position to ask about it.

[hog_driver111th]

I'd quite like an A-6 :)

 

Being in the process of reading all of the Jake Grafton series books by Stepen Coonts, I too would love an A-6E...KA-6B tanker, with an EA-6B electronic warfare bird.

 

Alas, the days of the Intruders, Tomcats, Vikings, and Corsairs have all gone to the SuperBug and Growler.

[Weasel]

Frostiken wouldn't know, and neither would you. (Respectfully.)

Essentially, what gets blocked in the establishment of such a deal gets blocked because the subject matter is classified. This often means that it's not even possible to say anything more than that "X isn't modeled", and for some things it would require insider knowledge to even be in a position to ask about it.

 

@EtherealN

 

It's absolutely clear that the detailed terms and conditions will never published and I'm also not interested in knowing that. This was just a general question (sorry when I asked my question in a vague way). I suppose there will be a detailed agreement between DCS and the producer of the plan or USAF/USN etc. what is allowed to be modelled and what is not allowed.

[thaisocom]

and over time: More products -> More Sales -> -> more development. -> more products -> ...

 

At least as long as new people still think the old product is worth buying, which is the idea behind the compatibility update I think.

 

Also Wags mentioned eventually doing some possible lower fidelity modules, which would take less time to develop I'm sure.

I'd rather wait and have high fidelity modules they provided to us now.

[jp203000]

I'd rather wait and have high fidelity modules they provided to us now.

FC2 can be available long time ago. hoho!:megalol:

[MegOhm_SD]

F/A 18 with Carrier Ops added on to A10C. The Carl Vinson must be there for a reason. Why would they worry about making the ext tanks on the F18 better... Hints?

 

I hope so. I wish they would go ahead and lift the curtain on this.

[EtherealN]

But MegOhm, there's tonnes of things that were made better! So ED must be working on all of them, right? ;)

 

"Why they worry" is simple: EVERYTHING is being continually worked on. :)

 

And seriously, you guys have to stop trying to find hints in DCS:A-10C, it's pointless. :P

[sobek]

And seriously, you guys have to stop trying to find hints in DCS:A-10C, it's pointless. :P

 

I wouldn't say pointless. Some of the explanations why it has to be pet plane x or y are actually quite amusing. :)

[Frostiken]

I'm 99% sure the reason IFF isn't modeled is because of AI limitations. Mode 4's functionality is hardly a secret anymore, and Mode 1 through 3/C aren't classified at all. The only real secret about IFF systems are the Mode 4 keys themselves.

 

The reason for the problem is that your AI has to make some serious decisions without breaking the game when you introduce IFF. You could end up with situations where the AI starts shooting down his own planes, you have to add hooks for visual confirmation, etc.

 

That said, they could get away with just some simple switches to flip on the A-10 and the KA-50, but assuming our next aircraft has a radar (which it probably will), they're going to have to figure out some solution for IFF, at which point they'll have to go back and make these things functional in the previous aircraft as well.

[EtherealN]

Well Frostiken, some of the decisions for what didn't make it weren't made by ED - they were made by USAF brass. (Basically, there was a negotiation where ED secured the right to make a commercial product based on the DTS.) There doesn't have to be logic behind the decision. :P

(I don't know 100% sure though, the design document revision by the USAF isn't exactly something that's on the list of "need to knows" for me :P )

 

Sobek - that is true. :)

[Cali]

F/A 18 with Carrier Ops added on to A10C. The Carl Vinson must be there for a reason. Why would they worry about making the ext tanks on the F18 better... Hints?

 

I hope so. I wish they would go ahead and lift the curtain on this.

 

The F-18 looked better then some jets in lock on and lock on 1.02, and it never was made into a flyable jet by them. I wouldn't think just because it looks good that it's going to be the next flyable. All that stuff really doesn't matter, we have to wait and see what ed says is coming out next.

[GhostDog]

1) Matt explicitly said "US fixed wing fighter"

2) The last two major contracts that ED/TFC announced have been for the USAF (the A-10C and the AC-130 sensor station). In addition, ED has developed a JTAC/Joint Fires trainer for the ANG. That leads me to believe that another USAF contract is more likely than a USN contract.

3) ED developers and testers have repeatedly said that they will not release a simulation for an airframe whose systems remain largely classified (e.g. F-22)

4) The USAF is instituting service life extension programs and avionics upgrades for the F-16 Block 40-52, and the F-15C/E. Therefore, those are the aircraft that would most likely require a new procedural trainer.

 

Given the inherent difficulty of simulating a two-seat airframe (F-15E), the limited capability and service life of the F-15C, and the expected service life and availability of documentation for the F-16, my money is on the F-16.

[dumberdog]

The plane i would like to see in the next DCS release is the F-15E Strike-Eagle, altough i voted the F/A-22 Raptor in the poll( I have to agree with GhostDog when he says that ED developers wouldn´t release a simulation based on an aircraft whose systems are classified or top secret).

 

Because it has been present in Lock-On and FC2 since the beginning, and i think it deserves the same treatment A-10 did with DCS:A10C; the other reason is related to the importance this aircraft has in the USAF inventory and it's superb performance as a multi-role fighter-bomber. But the main reason is because i love this jetfighter, it's a beast of a plane!!

[thaisocom]

But MegOhm, there's tonnes of things that were made better! So ED must be working on all of them, right? ;)

 

"Why they worry" is simple: EVERYTHING is being continually worked on. :)

 

And seriously, you guys have to stop trying to find hints in DCS:A-10C, it's pointless. :P

:thumbup:

[71st_Mastiff]

My monies on , we won't no for sure until

Afte DCS Black Shark, FC3 upgrade compatibility release

And then a few weeks after that around Chrstmas

time

[GhostDog]

My monies on , we won't no for sure until

Afte DCS Black Shark, FC3 upgrade compatibility release

And then a few weeks after that around Chrstmas

time

 

Of course. That doesn't mean we can't engage in some informed speculation. It's like sizing up NFL draft prospects. It's informative, and good fun in its own right. :joystick:

[power5]

FC3? When did this get put on the list?

[jp203000]

BMS4 available , Seven-g is around the corner ,come on ED ,you have the support of us!

[Pilotasso]

Even BMS doesnt compare to what DCS series will bring. Imagine DCS falcon. The only going in favor of BMS would be the dynamic campaign like myself do not have enough time to play.

[Flying Bull]

DCS: F-16C VIPER

 

Dear DCS Developers.

 

Please create DCS: F-16C VIPER.

 

As much as I would enjoy DCS: F/A-18C HORNET, I think there is greater scope in a Viper Project. There is enough documentation available to support highly realistic Blk. 50/52, 52+, CCIP and MLU variants.

 

MLU production Tape M3 documentation is available as are Operational Flight Program Pilot's guides for all versions at least until OFP 4.2+. Block 52+ F.M including PERF appendix for GE and PW and PW + CFT is available.

 

 

We could see a realistic FM combined with accurate representation of almost the latest avionics tape, including, but not limited to JHMCS, SADL, PGMs, TGPs etc etc...

 

Multi-role single seater. No AI issues with 2 seater. No carrier ops to implement. (this would be uber cool, but I want this sim sooner, rather than later.)

 

May I suggest "out of the box" options to select various modern variants from different nations, with appropriate avionics, munitions and stores, skins etc.

 

I would settle with just a "Nevada" theatre of training to start with!!

 

 

With over 4000 F-16s sold, all over the world, this aircraft would have a very wide fan base.

 

Also legacy F4.0 BMS/FF-5 drivers (a corps of hard-core simmers) waiting for something new. These people WANT their F-16. (despite many loud, outspoken simmers - not all of us are demanding a dynamic campaign)

 

YES, I know the devs will produce a sim, ultimately decided by what military contracts they have and the ability to make $$$, HOWEVER if their is any discretion....

,

Please give us a modern, western, single seat after-burning fast jet with MAX realism. My mind says this needs to be a viper -

 

And soon

 

And Thrustmaster can update their HOTAS Cougar for us too - give us HOTAS Viper.

 

Am I asking for too much?

 

I'm just expressing my deepest desires. I bought DCS-A10C, and admire the simulation, but my heart just isn't in the aircraft. DCS-10C teases me with "what DCS: F-16C VIPER would be."

 

Thank you

 

Flying Bull

Edited September 8, 2011 by Flying Bull

[jp203000]

F16 F15 F18 each will do , Since there already has BMS4 for F16 fans and Seven-g for f18 fans ，I prefer next DCS to be F15C . Anyway , whatever we say , the decision has been made .

[josh-109]

F/A-18A,B,C,D,E,F,G Then me and my friends we be Happy xD got to love DCS xD

 

Hi im Josh and me and my friends would like DCS to bring out a F/A-18A,B,C,D,E,F or G

 

can not wait to see what the next one is

[thaisocom]

I'd rather prefer carrier-based aircraft than Viper.