Would you want/ allow flyable civilian aircraft in DCS

[starsky396]

I see no reason why ED cannot release a civi plane if they ever had any spare time. I am not talking about getting a AFM or anything, but maybe when they release DCS:FA-18 they could also release a little piper or Cessna with a SFM.

[Exorcet]

SFM would defeat the point I think. In fact, I don't think I'll ever buy SFM ever again.

[CypherGrunyev]

I'd be for Civilian Aircraft. I can see some pretty cool missions taking place actually with them. Stuff like the Ruskies guarding their border from NATO, while at the same time civilian aircraft fly over.

 

And for those saying the map is too small, ARMA 2 [With its full non-existant flight models] even had modelers make Civilian aircraft. Yes, you could fly from one side to another in five seconds... But it still helped the simulation aspect a bunch.

 

I suppose before implementing a full Civilian aircraft, ED should try with a Transport bird first. C-17 would fit fantastically IMO.

[silverofx441]

Of course, DCS is a flight sim. And it's not like civilian and military have never mixed.

 

Agreed! We could, for example, shoot a civvy down saying they were carrying spies or something, or cargo for terrorists:D

 

God i'm bad:megalol:

[Eihort]

I can think of some rather entertaining scenarios inolving civilian aircraft in a military setting.

[Brisse]

I imagine a multiplayer scenario where a pilot of a civillian aicraft type (or unarmed military transport) is transporting VIP or important cargo and is escorted by fighters. Then the other team has to find it and engage.

 

Transport shot down: Attacker wins

Transport reach destination: Defender wins

[159th_Falcon]

First civvie aircraft is already here more or less.

UH-1H Huey. Just have to wait for the slick version and give it a new paint job.

The next is coming, MI-8MTV2. Same applies really.

 

Then, i am quite certain that there are some privately owned and flown MIG-21's as well.

 

One of the third parties is making an L-39 i believe, used a lot in civil aviation.

 

So why is the step to Cessna's and smaller passenger jets so problematic?

Its money in the bank for ED, which can then focus on making an awesome F-18 for us. Followed by whatever is next.

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

I can see Lockheed Martin showing interest in DCS if ED keeps up the good work, just like they bought some of the FSX rights from Microsoft and repackaged it as Prepar3d/P3D (with some code changes).

There seems to be a void in the civil flight simulator market that even X-Plane 10 cannot fill at this moment. There are military planes in FSX/P3D (notably A2A, IRIS, Razbam, Milviz), so why not have some civilian aircraft in DCS?

There can be a fine line between military and civilian aircraft ... think Learjet 35/36 and Cessna O-2 (Bat*21 anyone?).

It's all about the fun of flying and blowing stuff up when you like to, something FSX/P3D is not very good at (even with the VRS TacPack add-on).

Edited August 17, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

How about a Grumman HU-16 Albatross or Consalidated PBY Catalina? It would be nice to have a plane that can land on water.

Enough daydreaming ...

Edited August 17, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[LostOblivion]

Keep the personal attacks off of the forums, or you will likely end up being banned.

 

I would not mind seeing civilian aircraft in DCS. I think it would only add to the diversity in mission making, and it is ultimately the mission maker's choice whether or not to include certain aircraft into her mission.

 

Lost

[johnv2pt0]

I didn't read all through this thread, so apologies if someone has already said this. I think military transport/civilian (ie C-17, 747 Evergreen, etc) could be very interesting if it was integrated into the resource management system. A mission designer could say based on the geopolitical situation the only bombs bullets and food brought in has to be done through the air.

 

I do agree that right now, there isn't much use per say for some civilian aircraft because of the ATC limitations, lack of instrument approaches, and the inability to fly long distances. But I don't see any reason these factors should preclude them from being created and flown if people want to buy them.

 

The combat environment can get messy...I say the make it as messy as possible.

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

The best combat pilots are those who adapt to change quickest ...

Edited August 17, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[Exorcet]

I get the diverse part I embrace it TO an extent. Look I honestly think If people just want to learn to fly they should start with a game like fsx. Look on the real Fsx has the tacpack right? I cannot tell you how many users ive had fly for like 9 hrs or something only to get shot down by some jerk. I just want to keep them separated bc it causes a whole lot of drama. server side.

 

It's not about learning to fly. I know how to fly, a lot of the people asking for civil planes do to. I own FSX, but I haven't installed it since I got my new computer. DCS is just better. I'd rather fly a DCS 777 than a FSX 777. I'd also rather have to ID targets on my radar than just know that that over there isn't civil, that one over there is a hostile MiG, etc.

 

Granted in the current map, there isn't a lot of space, but that doesn't mean civil aircraft shouldn't be implemented. Hopefully in the future we get bigger maps and ingress means something. You may start out in very friendly territory, with airliners moving about. At some point, those airliners will transition to enemy aircraft. When will this happen? You don't necessarily know, so you must keep alert.

 

As for as civil aircraft alone goes, I'm fine with just taking them off and landing. It's pretty fun. There's also always demo flights:

 

[pctoptech]

I don't think civilian planes would be good, but the OV-10 Bronco might be a nice addition.

[dburne]

I personally would not want to see civilian aircraft, in DCS.

I have FSX and have flown it for years, and for my civilian flying when I take a notion, that is my go to sim.

 

DCS and it's modules, I have for combat - and it is my go to sim for combat. DCS =Digital Combat Series.

 

I also have Cliffs of Dover, IL2 1946, and Rise of Flight - all for combat flight simming along with DCS.

[neoshi]

It would be nice to have civilian traffic no doubt.. but yeah perhaps just military transports. I know some guys who want to fly tankers and others who want the AC-130 after the COD craze.

 

Would be nice one day to be able to drive a Bradley into a player flown C-5 to get to the front lines.

[SkateZilla]

Thread Cleaned:

Deleted All the Posts and replies that are off topic arguments/Violations of 1.1/1.2.

Deleted All the posts that were off topic discussions of How Well FSX Runs vs DCS, As well as other Random Off topic comments.

 

 

Keep it Clean, Civil and On Topic,

If a member posts messages that break the rules(offensive/attack/profanity/severely Off topic),

Report it,

 

Don't go quoting it and breaking the same rules yourselves.

[Mogster]

As others have said a full switch flying school plane like the Cessna 172 would be a good start, and useful in the real world.

 

Carenado are you listening?

 

Then of course there are the Korea and Vietnam obsy versions of the 170 and 337 :)

Edited August 20, 2013 by Mogster

[CombatTaffy]

A2A's new Cessna 172 Trainer is superb

In the real Aviation world Military and civilian aircraft co-exist.

Would'nt this benefit the sim community if DCS went full on real world??

[WildBillKelsoe]

I would like an Airbus A320/321 or a BAe 146-200 to fly in DCS. This will be beneficial specially that troop loading is being worked on. It must be DCS standard like A-10C. But I'll settle with any civilian cargo plane as well, so long that its DCS fidelity.

[W1ndy]

Didn't read the full thread, but if resources are zero sum then civilian takes away from blow things up modules. ( voted no )

[Aginor]

When a third party does a Cessna Skymaster for my Vietnam FACs they may also release the civilian version, I don't care. If someone creates the iomax Archangel they may also release the crop duster version of that plane, I don't care.

Otherwise I'd stick for military planes. And no, I don't mean the Beech King Air, although there are some air forces that use it.

 

That has two reasons. IMO:

- civilian sim pilots would have no fun just flying around in Georgia, they want the full world like FSX, international airports and stuff.

- combat sim pilots want to do combat.

 

So allow them? Yeah, why not. Encourage anybody to create them? No.

If a third party arrived in this forum tomorrow, with a DCS quality Cessna 152 already implemented and ready to fly and buy I wouldn't say "OMG this is not allowed!!" but probably buy it and ask them to use their skills and money to do a military plane next.

[Darkwolf]

20% against it.

 

And the vote has only be done in the DCS forum, only populated by virtual military pilots. You would do the same poll on a forum hosting either civilian and military (virtual) pilots, you would surely end up with even higher result FOR civilian aircrafts. :music_whistling:

[Cedaway]

For the principle, why not.

But I think DCS World, as in its current state, would not fit with liners.

Liners in DCS World would be much frustrating for those who want to make real-time long-courrier flight. (Lack of ATC, Metar, Weather onboard radar,...)

[Tengah]

As I posted else where on the forum:

 

If a Dev wants to concentrate on Civ aircraft for DCS then I do not have a prob. As long as that Dev doesn't start advertising the next release which may be a much sort after Military aircraft and takes his or her time releasing it on behalf of updates to the Civ product.

 

I had issues, up until recently, with people clamouring for Trainer Aircraft, the T-38 for example which has zero weps capability. Before anyone flames me, NO the T-38 currently does NOT have a weapons capability, the AT-38B however does but they are few in number and quite limited as to what they can carry. The BAe Hawk (semi impressive array of weps but limited hard points) , T-6 (no weps in the T-6B guise fella's, AT-6B only) <--- Not afraid to hold my hands up and be proved wrong btw.

 

The point was made clear to me by Ells of VEAO that the Dev's need to learn how to get add ons into DCS world for us, a trainer or Civilian aircraft with its lesser systems, capabilities etc (not always the case I know) are proving to be a good exercise in cutting ones teeth, pleasing a good section of the DCS player base so that by the time we get the Heavy metal in game they will be able to give a fantastic product with all the bells and whistles with few or even no bugs. I had my blast to my ego, I was made to realise there is more to DCS and I felt ashamed that I had mouthed off my opinions regarding what I thought to be pointless exercises. I was really pleased to be put in my place, very gently I might add which I thank Ells for.

 

I say bring on the Civs, the Trainers, Hang Gliders, Kite flyers et al, Welcome one and all because I imagine that the more content from 3rd party Devs, the more folk become interested and move on over from the likes of MSFS (such as myself) then the the better and longer DCS World will survive as a viable simulator.

A prime example of all this is the MSFS series, by design from the out set a strictly civilian simulator, and lets not forget the fierce rows brought about the "MSFS is for Civvy only Brigade" (talk about short sighted bigots!) yet some of the best add ons for that sim were military. Cloud9's F-104 for FS2004 was an absolute revelation, anyone who flew it, died (virtually speaking of course) in it repeatedly and knows it well must surely agree with me.

 

The 3rd Party Dev's kept FS alive with Civ and Mil addons... That is until MS made a right mess and gave up, shame on them.

 

Just my thoughts.