Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[MemphisBelle]

How can anybody still think that the F-35 is possible? I mean, i get those 'wouldn't it be nice' posts, but seriously speaking: No way, José!

 

The JSF Techniques are still to secret to become puplished through a videogame. I also dont really like that ugly bird.

[Georgio]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

The JSF Techniques are still to secret to become puplished through a videogame. I also dont really like that ugly bird.

[beaupower32]

DCS: Stratofortress

 

I think a good bomber would be good sometime in the future. I know fighters and attack aircraft are all the rave these days, but to some people would like to fly the heavy iron some too. Just imagine person A is flying a Warthog around, and they need some air support. Well only other asset in the area is a B-52 loaded with JDAM's. B-52 takes out majority of Anti-air threats with JDAM's, and A-10 comes in to clean up the tanks. Everyone goes home happy.

 

I know that we will probably not see a B-52 any time soon, if at all, but I think it would be a great addition to the series sometime in the future.

[Sticky]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

They need ALOT more than that for a DCS level sim :doh:

[Sticky]

DCS: Stratofortress

 

I think a good bomber would be good sometime in the future. I know fighters and attack aircraft are all the rave these days, but to some people would like to fly the heavy iron some too. Just imagine person A is flying a Warthog around, and they need some air support. Well only other asset in the area is a B-52 loaded with JDAM's. B-52 takes out majority of Anti-air threats with JDAM's, and A-10 comes in to clean up the tanks. Everyone goes home happy.

 

I know that we will probably not see a B-52 any time soon, if at all, but I think it would be a great addition to the series sometime in the future.

 

Doesnt sound very appealing to me :P

[MemphisBelle]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

OK...so It might no more be concealed pretty much, but it´s neverteheless an ugly one with an ugly Cockpit...It might be a way advanced aircraft with Voice input and so on...but in my taste really nothings to become realized in the DCS world...thats my mind.

[gekoiq]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

Yeah I'm not sure you realize what kind of access to the aircraft/systems they require to do a DCS level sim....

 

If they did an F35 sim it would be 5% realistic and 95% educated guessing. Now that would be ok with me, I'd still fly it and enjoy it in it's own way, but it wouldn't be in the same league as the other DCS aircraft. After flying the A10c I don't ever want to go back to "educated guessing"....it's way more enjoyable knowing you are doing things the way the real pilots do. Which is why we are hoping for an F16c/F18c *in theory* they are doable to DCS standards.

 

And don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Raptor or Lightning II in a sim. They are the baddest birds in the sky right now, but it's just not going to happen with any amount of fidelity for the foreseeable future.

[power5]

OK...so It might no more be concealed pretty much, but it´s neverteheless an ugly one with an ugly Cockpit...It might be a way advanced aircraft with Voice input and so on...but in my taste really nothings to become realized in the DCS world...thats my mind.

 

Be glad it beat the x32 though. Not sure what boeing was thinking.

 

I disagree completely about the cockpit though. F35 pit is amazing 21st century design. And, just think how easy a sim pit would be. :D

[sobek]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

:megalol:YMMD. Seriously, i can't stop laughing.

 

I don't want to sound condescending (honestly), but do you have any knowledge of what is needed to build a simulation? Say, like exact (yes, exact, empirically measured, not what some australian dude thinks) charts depicting flight characteristics and performance data of this airframe. Good luck on finding those. When you have, we can talk. Until then, dream on.

 

There is no hard data out. It's all PR blah.

 

Would you ask the guy who designed the car advertisment when to perform an oil change? If yes, you need a reality check.

 

[/rant]

Edited November 14, 2010 by sobek

[gekoiq]

Agreed, the X32 was hideous. The F35 has a certain charm to it, its beautiful in it's functionality. Kind of like the Warthog really.

[GGTharos]

Show me where wikipedia tells you how to start up an F-35.

 

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

[Boberro]

I disagree. :music_whistling:

 

A simple Wiki search gives more than enough data to base a simulation on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

:cry:

 

...

[Georgio]

Details, mere details. :thumbup:+

 

If these puppies are slated to go operational in 2010 and the US are/have ordered 2500+ of them then these are going to feature big-time in anyone's future.

 

I must admit though that I don't understand the investment in manned aircraft when it's so obvious that un-manned is going to dominate in the next 5-10 years.

Trust me, our children will find the concept of say the F-16 about as relevant as cavalry to a WW1 infantryman.

 

Show me where wikipedia tells you how to start up an F-35.

[GGTharos]

Trust you after you claimed wikipedia has enough information to simulate an F-35? ;)

[MemphisBelle]

Trust me, our children will find the concept of say the F-16 about as relevant as cavalry to a WW1 infantryman.

 

I will pretty much hope that you are loosing this bet...but unfortunately I think that you´re right...too bad about all the missing Flair...

 

Only if the "old" F- Fighters are beeing presented within a heritage flight...:pilotfly:

[badaboom]

I took it for granted it was always going to be The Apache AH64A,I really hope DCS decide to go this route.

[Geskes]

Trust me, our children will find the concept of say the F-16 about as relevant as cavalry to a WW1 infantryman.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mons

 

Nothing to worry about then, would be plenty of f16s left :P

[Dimebag1]

Might I suggest a nickname for the failed x32 design, I feel it is fairly flattering considering it's design....... Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the x32.....'pidgeon'.

 

Actually that name is probably already taken. Oh and the chances of the f-35's groundbreaking radar being released to the public when it hasn't even passed testing phase are about the same as me getting a ride in it, flying solo.

[swift]

After the inescapable pointy nose aircraft (and it should be a Russian Fighter), what about the original project - DCS: Digital Combat Simulator, bring it on the ground and naval war. After all the ultimate goal is selling software, expand DCS to a broad audience than just flight sim enthusiasts:tomato:

[kylania]

DCS: Montague aww yeah!

[Geskes]

Check this movie for f-35:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbnWg4v6iHk

 

explains hover mode and bomb deployment interface (kind of), its point and click, really sick.

 

 

also good one, about DAS, apparently it can shoot backwards... WTF

 

 

about radar.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Geskes

[joey45]

PR stunts..

[GGTharos]

Which part?

[sobek]

Do you think the F-35 is going to be able to employ ARMs?

[GGTharos]

JDRADM.