Future of DCS/LOMAC/FC

[+streakeagle 867]

Got link from SimHQ to this news from Eagle Dynamics: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1327908

 

Overall, I like the plan even if I don't yet have a PC that can run their stuff. Now if they can just follow through reasonably close or even do better than the road map. What is the "legendary" aircraft for DCS? Fixed wing or rotary? I can only think of a few that qualify and fit in the sim: MiG-21? MiG-23? Mi-24 Hind? Can it be USA? F-4? AH-1? UH-1? F-16 and F-18 are still very current and the F-18 is the most likely next US fixed wing aircraft mentioned. I would bet on a Hind or MiG-21 given that this sim IS Russian, but due to marketing considerations, I could see a "legendary" US helo or jet being added. If it was an F-4, I suspect I still have plenty of time to save up for a new PC.

 

Just did a quick search and it seems "flying legends" could be an aircraft from any period and is possibly a P-51 Mustang or similar aircraft. Just what I need... another P-51 simulator. Possibly the most simulated aircraft in all of flight sim history along with the F4U, and Bf109.

Edited November 13, 2011 by streakeagle

[Ruggbutt 45]

Legendary could mean F-15 or F-16. They mentioned in the past that it will be an American combat jet.

[exhausted 55]

Flying Legends seems to be sperate from the next DCS, which has me hoping for the AV-8B+!

[+streakeagle 867]

According to their road map, there are going to be two aircraft:

1) the previously planned DCS jet, which the current best guess is an F-18 Hornet of some form

2) a "flying legend"

 

Given that DCS is a modern jet sim, I would have expected the "legend" to be one of the aircraft already in the LOMAC/FC/DCS universe like a MiG or Phantom. What would you do with a P-51 in the DCS map?

[JediMaster 451]

There are lots of ways to define a "legend", so I wouldn't jump the gun on predictions. We'll find out in due course.

[+Stary 2,427]

rumor has it it'll be P-51B

[Cali 6]

Rumors are just that, we won't know untill it's released.

[MoToM 0]

Hind, oh please a Hind, I've missed that fat old bird so much. Last proper Hind Sim was more than a decade ago and Eagle Dynamics would surely do it justice.

[JediMaster 451]

Look into the modded one for EECH. It's quite good.

[dsawan 624]

just saw this and puttin my money on it.

 

the Mustang is next

 

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3500666.html#Post3500666

[+streakeagle 867]

Finally got a new PC, and just in time:

Got DCS World A-10C, Ka-50, P-51D, and Combined Arms.

Looking forward to the MiG-21 and there is even a 3rd party F-104 in the works.

 

I have a Thrustmaster Warthog stick and it is a blast using it for DCS.

I can't wait for the FC3 module to integrate some air-to-air jets into the "World".

But it is the MiG-21bis I am really pining for!

[JediMaster 451]

My only concern is the MiG being too limited. Hopefully it will be useful in the A2G role as well (not just a token bomb lifter) since A2A is of rather short duration (between 4 AAMs, limited gun ammo, and short endurance).

[+streakeagle 867]

I seldom fly air-to-ground in any sim and have principally flown air-to-air in SFP1/SF2 all these years with a focus on flying the F-4 and MiG-21.

Recently, I have spent quite a bit of time on the MiG-23.

The MiG-21bis is clearly going to be modeled better than any SF2 implementation which cannot properly support Soviet avionics functions.

But my concern is that it will be modeled at the LOMAC level when I would prefer it to be at the A-10C level of detail.

I have read the flight manual of the MiG-21 almost as much as the F-4 in trying to refine the SF2 implementation.

I would love a fully functional clickable MiG-21 cockpit.

 

The MiG-21bis can carry 4xAA-8 and 2xAA-2, the AA-2 can even be the SARH model for NAW intercepts.

While it did not have the payload, range, or avoinics, it was otherwise the Soviet equivalent to the F-16: a lightweight single engine multirole fighter.

In the bis form, it is very much an air-to-air threat against F-16s that typically carried 6 or less AIM-9s.

The absence of chaff, flares, and ECM are as much a problem as the endurance.

Adding a belly pod with all of those things costs the centerline fuel tank which is critical to MiG-21 operations.

 

While the MiG has many advantages over the F-4, its cockpit view is even more restrictive.

Learning to fight with a limited outside view and a weak radar system will be all the more fun/challenging for me.

[JediMaster 451]

If it says "DCS:" in front of the title, you can bet it will be modeled to that same level.

If it does NOT say DCS, like the F-22, then it will be more like LOMAC.

[+streakeagle 867]

The Su-25T is "DCS" but is still modeled on a LOMAC/FC level.

Of course the Su-25T has the AFM (advanced flight model) and to the best of my knowledge, none of the third party releases will have that yet.

So, the MiG-21bis can be called the "DCS MiG-21bis" but still have a flight model at the LOMAC/FC level and possibly not even have a clickable pit.

The Su-25T is really nice, but lacks little things like toe brakes--you just press a single key to apply wheel brakes.

 

I would rather have low expectations and be pleasantly surprised, than expect perfection and be greatly disappointed.

I went ahead and pre-purchased at the $50 level, though.

People are complaining about $40 addon planes like the P-51D.

But if you give me a plane I want to the level of detail the A-10C and P-51D are modeled, $40-$50 is plenty fair to me as each plane is the equivalent of buying another study sim like Falcon 4.0, DCS A-10C, Jane's F/A-18, etc.

Of course, at that kind of price, I won't buy every addon that comes down the line compared to the much cheaper Third Wire DLC products where I bought everything to support the future growth of the game.

 

I essentially want DCS World with the planeset of the SF2 series, and it looks like it will be even better as TK refused to provide flyable MiGs or proper avionics dlls to support 3rd party versions.

2 or 3 years from now, I may have a DCS library covering the F-4, F-104, MiG-21, F-15, A-10, P-51.

There will even be some aircraft I want from the same time frame that Third Wire would never even do such as the T-38.

Of course, the market could collapse and almost none of this will ever come to be a reality.

But even then, as long as FC3 and MiG-21bis makes it into DCS World before then, I will have a sim with the MiG-21, MiG-29, Su-25, Su-27, F-15, A-10, Ka-50, and P-51.

That's pretty much on the level of Jane's USAF, which along with Fighters Anthology are the sims that set the benchmark for what I want.

 

As an added bonus, I think DCS is becoming what people looked forward to in Fighter Ops.

Nevada terrain plus T-38, F-15, A-10 detailed well enough to follow real life procedures and training.

Fighter Ops isn't vaporware, it just ended up being done by a different company and being named DCS :)

Edited July 15, 2012 by streakeagle

[abmhawk 24]

Hi,

 

Does any one know how I can make my Russian/Soviet weapons show in game?

[JediMaster 451]

The Su-25T is NOT DCS though. It's been included free in DCS World, but it's not DCS: Su-25T. Besides, compared to the Ka-50 and A-10 the 25T in FC was a breeze to fly and fight in...except landing. I still have more trouble landing the 25T than the A-10 or 50, but I think the 25T's gear is overly weak! Oh, and that complicated autopilot. Never got the handle on it so I just flew manual or used the straight-and-level setting for hands-off.

 

I think all DCS planes will have a clickable pit as well. Now here's the kicker: they've said planes like the F-22 will not be called DCS because they can't be modeled that well. Yet they've said nothing about what they will charge! So if the F-22 costs as much as a "DCS" labeled plane, I may have some trepidations about literally paying more for less, or at least the same for less.

[+streakeagle 867]

I have read all of their statements... but ED has been a little shifty over the years as they shifted from making the Black Shark an addon to FC to creating an entirely new game approach that is still being flushed out. Marketing hype means nothing to me. When I have a product in my hand, I don't care whether it is labeled "DCS" or not: what does it actually do, does it meet my needs, and was it worth the price. The MiG-21bis is the focus of my interest, now how long do I have to wait for a release?

[JediMaster 451]

I wouldn't bet on this year, but as it's not ED themselves no one can say. This is supposed to be 3rd party with a little input/handholding from them and that's it.

 

No one was more upset than I when FC2 didn't integrate with BS and A-10C failed to integrate with either of them, necessitating BS2. DCS World is what I thought BS was going to be from day 1, but apparently their ambitions needed 3 more years of coding work to actually achieve.

 

Anyway, when it comes to labeling these products, they've got a rather good framework, the question is going to be in its application. How realistic must it be to be called DCS? How many shortcuts/omissions/workarounds can there be? For instance, I've never liked that Black Shark simply fails to include so-called "classified" systems like the laser jammer. You have a non-working switch in the cockpit, a 3D model that omits the dome clearly seen in many pictures (and blurred in the photos in ED's own manuals), and are sent into combat against many laser-armed opponents with quite simply less than the real pilots get to work with.

Ok, so that system's operation is classified, can't you make a guess? Jammer reduces laser effectiveness by X%? Makes the range smaller before they can fire on you? Anything?

 

ECM in flight sims has always been a sore subject for me as aside from 60s sims, where noise jamming is it, modern ECM has other modes like deception and now towed decoys. How many sims model those? None. Instead we get the same BS about "turning on the ECM broadcasts your presence"...only noise jamming should do that! Deception jamming is about misdirection, and towed decoys are about misplacing your return behind you. Why can I pick up any book or magazine or freaking AW&ST and read about how these things work yet the flight sim devs all throw up their hands and talk about the "secret" bugaboo? Do it based on unclassified sources then! If you can't use real numbers, use fake ones!