Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[Madbrood]

Know what I'd love? An A-6A Intruder. A -B model as well!

 

Speeding along at 200 feet, 500-lb bombs under the wings (or Shrikes, if you fly the B!), yes please!

 

I voted for the F-16, though. As much as BMS has done a good job of making Falcon 4 a modern(ish) sim, it's nowhere near DCS, and I have loved the Viper ever since I watched Iron Eagle as a kid!

[SkateZilla]

Still it got the 2nd highest count of votes. I agree the Tomcat would make a very interesting aircraft in DCS. But I think it would be a shame if I was done with no bombing capability. With the ability to drop lgbs and jdams it would really be a brilliant all round package. Throw in carrier landings and it would be a really challenging DCS module.

 

The D Tomcat was my favorite, but any 'cat at this point is welcomed./

[CheckGear]

Still it got the 2nd highest count of votes. I agree the Tomcat would make a very interesting aircraft in DCS. But I think it would be a shame if I was done with no bombing capability. With the ability to drop lgbs and jdams it would really be a brilliant all round package. Throw in carrier landings and it would be a really challenging DCS module.

 

I think any potential F-14 Tomcat module ought to be a "period piece," like the P-51 mod. The F-14's heyday was the late-1970s into the early-1990s, the height of the Cold War. During this period of time, it was exclusively a fighter-interceptor. After this period, there was already talk of replacing the Tomcat. It definitely lost its luster. Also, the fact that the Tomcat is retired limits where you can "place" the aircraft anyway, unless you want historical campaigns set in Afghanistan, the Balkans, or the Persian Gulf.

 

Besides, the Tomcat's claim to fame will always be that of being a fighter-interceptor, just like the F-15 Eagle. I think Eagle Dynamics realize it, which is why they chose to model the C-variant of the Eagle ever since LOMAC.

[Swordmaster]

Grumman F14D Super Tomcat

 

Seeing that the F14 is a truly iconic (albeit largely underrated and underexposed) example of supersonic aviation history but that the existing flight-sims, to date, featuring this jet are less or more appalling in the execution of their graphics and functionality and do no justice to the majesty of this airplane, is a most unfortunate state of affairs. In that light, I am convinced that DCS will make many flight-simmers very happy if/when they decide to add the Grumman F14D Super Tomcat module to DCS World :music_whistling:

[sgtmike74]

I would love to see the SR71 modeled. That plane is my all time favorite. I got to touch one at the Boeing Museum of Flight, in Seattle.

[FlyNate]

Seeing that the F14 is a truly iconic (albeit largely underrated and underexposed) example of supersonic aviation history but that the existing flight-sims, to date, featuring this jet are less or more appalling in the execution of their graphics and functionality and do no justice to the majesty of this airplane, is a most unfortunate state of affairs. In that light, I am convinced that DCS will make many flight-simmers very happy if/when they decide to add the Grumman F14D Super Tomcat module to DCS World :music_whistling:

 

Top Gun is sooooo over with, but still a great flick tho... Kidding brother. I tend to agree with you, but an F-4 with different versions could please a larger crowd (USN and USAF flyers). It would be fun to pair with the Huey as well. No matter what the next bird is, I think its time DCS modeled a two-seat airplane with front and back pits fully functional.

[Revan]

Phantom and the Tomact (and maybe an SR-71 if they make the maps bigger)

[Exorcet]

As fart as 'easy-mode' goes, it cuts both ways.

 

F-15 pilot: "There are 5 S-300 sites under my flight path and no friendly SEAD, can I go home?"

 

Commander: "Sure"

 

 

F-22 pilot: "There are 5 S-300 sites under my flight path, no friendly SEAD, and no other friendly aircraft of any kind, can I go home?"

 

Commander: "No, that's your job."

[Vampyre]

I voted Tomcat... Here's one of my pics from the 2005-2006 cruise on TR.

[CheckGear]

This is a crazy thought - how about a "Carrier Air Wing" module? LOMAC, FC, and DCS pay particular attention to the modern-day U.S. Air Force; why not a module that focuses on U.S. naval aviation?

 

Seeing as how many people want to see the A-6, A-7, and F-4, have it focus specifically on the Carrier Air Wings (CVWs) of the late-1970s and 1980s. That way, it can also feature the F-14 (although not the F-14D all of you want so religiously) and maybe even the early-model F/A-18A/B Hornet.

 

This module could also feature a North Atlantic theater, or maybe even somewhere in WESTPAC or Persian Gulf.

 

I would not expect it to reach the level of detail that the individual DCS modules get into, but at least to the level of LOMAC and the FC simulations.

[joey45]

DCS: Merica.........

[Cali]

DCS F-16, so many countries fly it......I'm not blue in the face yet.

[Mike Busutil]

DCS: Merica.........

 

 

Yes!!

[The_Pharoah]

DCS F-16, so many countries fly it......I'm not blue in the face yet.

 

+1000000 :thumbup:

[CheckGear]

DCS F-16, so many countries fly it......I'm not blue in the face yet.

 

We've already had too many Fighting Falcon simulations. Besides, nobody will ever top Falcon 4.0 and all the reincarnations of it.

[kazereal]

We've already had too many Fighting Falcon simulations. Besides, nobody will ever top Falcon 4.0 and all the reincarnations of it.

 

Considering Falcon 4.0 was released in 1998 and simulated only one aircraft.. Yes, it can be topped. Even with the impressive BMS version of Falcon it does show it's age.

And the prime benefit of DCS is the ability to integrate multiple modules together, something that was only a pipe-dream at the time Falcon was released.

 

Yes, Falcon 4.0 was impressive simulation _at the time_ but it does have it's limitations and it is not even sold anymore anywhere.

[CheckGear]

Considering Falcon 4.0 was released in 1998 and simulated only one aircraft.. Yes, it can be topped. Even with the impressive BMS version of Falcon it does show it's age.

And the prime benefit of DCS is the ability to integrate multiple modules together, something that was only a pipe-dream at the time Falcon was released.

 

Yes, Falcon 4.0 was impressive simulation _at the time_ but it does have it's limitations and it is not even sold anymore anywhere.

 

One thing I will give ground on is that it is odd to simulate the A-10A/C and F-15C, but not the F-15E and F-16C.

 

I still think there is a lot more territory DCS could cover before they decide to re-invent the wheel by simulating the F-16C. In fact, if they were to go to the F-16 now, I would like to see them simulate earlier variants, like the F-16A, to give us a sense of what the Fighting Falcon was like when it first came out. One of my dream modules would be a "U.S. Air Forces Europe" mod, where they cover the USAF in the Central Europe theater in the immediete post-Vietnam era (1975 - 1991). Such a mod would enable us to enjoy the F-4, F-15, F-16, and F-111 in the most fascinating what-if scenario of all time. It would also be a fun trip back in time to the era of disco, New Wave, and Madonna. :thumbup:

 

I will concede, however, that a DCS simulation of the F-16 would be far more stable than anything MicroProse or BMS ever attempted. As awesome as those sims were, they never quite fixed the bugs...

[WRAITH]

Well after looking at this...............

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=551

 

F/A-18E Super Hornet wins by a mile so where is the download link.

 

No more need to ask what community wants stats speak all by its self.

 

So now I want Carrier Ops and DCS Theaters of War with Advanced A.i Campaigns, yes please!

 

Do this and win the crowds!

But we wait.......................................

[CheckGear]

Well after looking at this...............

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=551

 

F/A-18E Super Hornet wins by a mile so where is the download link.

 

No more need to ask what community wants stats speak all by its self.

 

So now I want Carrier Ops and DCS Theaters of War with Advanced A.i Campaigns, yes please!

 

Do this and win the crowds!

But we wait.......................................

 

We have a lot of Hornet and Super Hornet simulations as well. Looks like people enjoy having the wheel re-invented... :noexpression:

 

That being said, I believe that popular opinion ought to prevail. If another Hornet simulation is what people want, then that is exactly what we should get!

[Revan]

We need a DCS: F-4E to go along with the MiG-21

[Cali]

We've already had too many Fighting Falcon simulations. Besides, nobody will ever top Falcon 4.0 and all the reincarnations of it.

 

That doesn't mean anything. Look at all the first person shooters that come out every year. The F-16 is flown by a bunch of different countries. Just like the Mig-21 or F-18....a lot of people will but it and love it! I agree with not topping F4 or BMS, unless someone is able to make a campaign engine like that.

[The_Pharoah]

I've said this a few times before...there is no proper 'roadmap' when it comes to addons ie. is DCS meant to replicate just the Georgian/Russian war or more than that? can't be just the Georgian campaign because the A10C didn't take part. Then, when does the P-51 come in?

 

I just wish there was a proper roadmap that said: 'We are replicating modern day aircraft only or WW2 a/c only or Vietnam era a/c only or Korean War era a/c only'...not a bit of this and a bit of that.

 

If ED are indeed replicating modern day a/c (the released modules support this), then stick to the modern day a/c ie.

 

- FA/18

- F16

- Harrier, etc

 

Leave out the P51 as it has no place in the modern day battlefield and takes away valuable dev resources from producing the next modern day fighter, or from finishing Edge and the Nevada map, etc.

[Exorcet]

There is a road map. It's DCS is aiming to be a total battlefield simulation. Of course it's more than the Georgian campaign, we have Nevada and Europe coming, and room for more after that. The P-51 fits into all three maps.

 

What ED is leaving out is an unnecessary narrow focus on the modern battlefield. They did it in a smart way too by bringing in outside contributors to build content. To be honest the fastest way to get the modern battlefield you want probably involves making WWII-Vietnam modules.

[Jimbolya]

third party modules is the way to go. then mission designers simply put in era specific stuff and let it ride. there's nothing stopping that now.

[blkspade]

We have a lot of Hornet and Super Hornet simulations as well. Looks like people enjoy having the wheel re-invented... :noexpression:

 

That being said, I believe that popular opinion ought to prevail. If another Hornet simulation is what people want, then that is exactly what we should get!

 

That statement shows where you fail to see how DCS differs as whole from anything created before it. All simulators fail to bring a truly fulfilling experience when they are just a sim of this or that plane. Its not about it being 'another hornet simulation', but introducing the hornet as another human flyable aircraft to expand the whole DCS world experience. Major things that DCS world is missing are multi-role aircraft and carrier capable US aircraft. This is added to the multi-player component, where you have human opposition that will adapt, evolve, and learn from mistakes and actually challenge you to do the same. All other sims are ancient and very narrow in scope compared to what we have (could have) in DCS world. Falcon is pretty much the only other one that still exists with any kind of multiplayer presence, with a focus on modern combat aircraft that is.