Aircraft before the 1993 tech explosion for DCS

Hi Wishlist thread and ED.

I wanted to talk about modules and the current "spread" of eras. I know there are a lot of people with mixed feelings about this, a crowd of "We must have 4th gen + aircraft" and to be fair, it's great we see such a fantastic Hornet, which is already dated, but it has mind blowing capabilities. There's a lot of reasons many would like to see the proper late cold war done with DCS modules from an era before the AIM-120 existed, especially for the multiplayer arena and coordinated virtual groups out there:

1. Ease of data access. This era is easier, mostly, to get data on as it gets close to the 50 year declassified mark for most countries. Which allows most of the crippling restrictions to be worked around and lots of living ex pilots to talk to.

2. Fidelity of technical simulation. This is a big thing that affects everyone. The more complex the system and avionics, the harder it is to get a faithful simulation. Examples... missile data, resistance to jamming, ECM simulation, ECCM, all closely guarded secrets. But the IR missiles, and tech, well we see manpads fired every day and have pretty good sidewinder and other IR AAM data that can be used as well as public archives now open with technical data.

Air to Ground standoff weapons are.... let's be honest, boring, but who takes a Mk82 when there are JSOW's available? Then you get into these player vs designer arguments where people want only the best weapons because they get to choose. The net result is you rely on ED's resource manager to limit weapons, and that's not good enough for large multiplayer servers for a number of reasons - persistance, limiting, artificial scripting. You never have player disatisfaction on a cold war server because that's easy to understand. But making folks understand that there arent 10000 TGP Litening pods so you cannot all have one every 5 minutes, is like trying to beat back the ocean with a broom.

It's also fair to say, the more complex the weapon, the less well DCS can really simulate it's behaviour. Things like weather being absent, ARM's being over accurate, Maverick sensors being over accurate. I believe the average new player doesn't understand that LGB's miss and Laser designation is imperfect. This leads to demands for better weather to affect visuals/optics, then better laser refraction through the atmosphere and it it goes on to more complex requirements, what players want.

3. Shorter development time/cost. Simplicity of modules means one can make cold war modules a year or two sooner, and more is definitely better in this case. Development time is king with profitability but i'm not armchairing, I'm simply saying that the pre 90 tech is in most ways easier to "simulate". Consider the open development timeframe of the Hornet radar to date; still incomplete in it's second year of EA and so much fuss over an air to ground radar that wont have any reasonable use in DCS.

4. Less complexity (sensors) in a mission will run more performantly at large scale. I've done many years of seeing how lots of SAMs and detection sensors affect AI controller performance. The 60's to 80's era keeps sensors more basic and allows for missiles fired over shorter ranges and less in the air at once. Radar is still a huge gap. There's literally no chaff simulation in DCS and ECM is hit or miss simulated, this is still a problem because otherwise we will never ever see a chaff corridor in DCS.

Overall, the soft ceilings of what DCS can simulate are removed the lower the tech density we go. Once damage modelling comes to WW2 and weather is overhauled, the WW2 scene is ripe for being extended into the most advanced and realistic simulator of WW2 ever done, with some scale limits compared to more basic sims, but nevertheless the advanced DCSW engine.

As we move through the post war and cold war periods up to the end of the cold war we have quite an enjoyable era that hasn't had a good public level of exploration. Past 92 and the advent of AMRAAM and prolific smart weapons, the sim begins to lose the ability to perform as accurately, and describe the real electronic battlefield, with no real ECM to speak of, ECCM being non existent, satellite and C3i being gamed by virtual squadrons only, AESA radar being extremely difficult to simulate beyond basic "I see everything" game filters, other Electronic sensors becoming less than accurate and quite binary in what they show and all wrapped into military secret issues with very little accurate data to work with.

TLDR; I'd like to see the cold war era filled out with modules and assets next, once the carrier fascination has died down. There are a long list of benefits for producing in this era that affect ED, the players, the current technology, the accuracy/authenticty, the scalability, time to market, dev costs, explained above. The most important benefit is to the players in multiplayer, in that the lower tech will bring more visceral jet dogfighting, bombs and rockets and gunsback to the game without the constant drive towards standoff and beyond visual range combat that modern warfare has become (and is leaving behind).

At some point DCS will have developed the newest, most up to date jet fighters, we will have reached a limit, but we have to go backwards to get the most we can out of it's engine and I fear that the crowd of folks that only want the latest and best will never understand how to get the most from DCS and enjoy it.

I agree - more or less - with everything.

However my preference for Cold War Era aircrafts comes from them being simply more fun to fly (generally more hands-on) and the cockpit and avionics feeling more immersive and alive with more "physical" buttons and analogue gauges.

I understand that especially the latter is very subjective, but i think many would agree.

I'm especially interested in those retro-futuristic birds, that offer some of the features of todays platforms, but do it with 60s/70s technology. Thunderchief, Intruder and the like...

If it flies I want it in DCS. As small as adding the older Sparrows was I was glad to have them, fighting with Fox1's is as much fun as Fox3's.

That said:

Air to Ground standoff weapons are.... let's be honest, boring

I never understand this. Modern aircraft are no more magical push button than older ones. Really. What makes you have to think is typically the threat. While JSOW's are nearly zero effort in taking out something defended by flak guns, that's not the case with multilayered SAM's mixed with CAP. If the new stuff is boring, the mission you're flying might be uninspired.

3. Shorter development time/cost.

 

4. Less complexity (sensors) in a mission will run more performantly at large scale.

On these, for the planes themselves maybe, but my experience with DCS is that modern tends to work better. It's because the modern aircraft provide more info to the pilots and the AI was originally built around modern combat. In fighters with a datalink you can get a much better picture of the battlefield and act accordingly. This allows a mission designer to put more responsibilities on the pilot that can allow for more varied mission experiences. Go back to the older stuff that rely on a ground controller and you face the rather lackluster DCS AWACS. Older aircraft will need updated support assets to make the most out of, especially in single player. ED is going in that direction (as they should) but it's going to take a time and effort.

For now I stopped buying the WWII stuff. I need the new AI and damage model to enjoy those planes outside of free flights. The F-5 despite being one of my favorites is in a similar boat. At least with something like the F-16 I can create a pretty complex mission and have it play out reasonably well.

In the end though I do support more Cold War stuff and the core changes that need to come with them.

Yes 100% agree.

I mean really, on the "modern" servers, its a Fox3 lobfest between sides, which maybe is realistic, but its not a ton of fun, most of the time no one even gets to the merge. I think pre fox3 environments would be great, you basically get a single fox1 shot for most AC for BVR, and then fights on.

Ground attack also becomes more challenging as well since you don't have magic tpods to find targets with and engage them from 8nm+ out. Though to be honest the ground damage/cluster damage/supression system would need some serious improvment.

Absolutely freaking yes +99999999999999999999

There's so many sought after aircraft and plenty of assets to model, not to mention the whole range of improvements that you excellently explained Pikey.

Agree with everything and add one more:

From virtual pilot perspective era previous to flying computers, fire and forget missiles and standoff weapons, GPS navigation, carefree FBW - gameplay is simply more interesting and exciting than modern fly to point X -> release stealth GPS guided cruise missiles from outside the enemy defense -> return to base not even sure if you hit something or not -> repeat.

PS. "Modern" sexy looking jets of DCS like F-16, F/A-18, F-15, Su-27, MiG-29 were modern, innovative and shiny in 1980s.

In mid 2000 they were badly outdated, close to retirement and already surpassed by Raptors, Superhornets, Eurofighters with stealth, phased array radars etc.

EDIT: and one more thing:

Desert Storm was the last big scale air combat where fighters had to maneuver hard to fight their enemy. All more modern conflicts were just bombing some helpless insurgencies/terrorists or totally one sided 10 vs 1 executions with single AMRAAM. Or fictional conflicts. Which are okeish but obviously not as moody like the real historical symetric to some degree conflicts when both sides suffered some loses.

Aim-120B is a good balance to me, AIM-120C is like lase beam.

I'm definitely for more older cold war aircraft. The more computerized the plane is the less interesting it is.

Yep I agree. I do think there is a place for the modern jets with shiny toys and fancy weapons, but I think DCS is reaching saturation there (minus a full fidelity Flanker or Fulcrum, but that's a whole other can of worms).

Cold war jets and helos on the other hand have immense potential. Some of the most beloved modules like the Viggen, F-5 or Mig-21 have already shown how much fun those aircraft can be.

I Agree fully, not necessarily with the explanations , but DCS needs less complex aircraft, with shorter development times.

Quite frankly to me late 60´s up to mid 70´s is the golden era of jet combat, when Guts, and skill was paramount and technology just assisted.

It was the era of innovation, lots of different models, roles, new technologies, early missiles that had a PK of maybe 5% LOL,

Il-28, SU-17, Su-11 or 15, Yak 28, Mig 17, Mirag III and V, Dasault Etandart, F-100, f-101,102, 105, 106, Bucaneer, Jaguar, Fiat G91, Super Mysteré, and going back to the 50´s lots of jewels, like the Cougar or Fury....

This thread, I like it.

No honestly I am totally in for the whole before Fox 3 era. While I do have two of those aircraft (+FC3), I am always coming back to flying the older ones, as they are just more fun.

sort of agree.

I like the idea, in principle, i do like the modern era jets, and i think you can have carriers without having to have Fox3.

sort of agree.

 

I like the idea, in principle, i do like the modern era jets, and i think you can have carriers without having to have Fox3.

And we already have two carrier aircraft before 1993 announced. Actually all aircraft except the F-15E which are announced for the future are before 1993. Well depending on the modelled systems, even that one could be.

I totally agree! I also wish for more Cold War era stuff in DCS!

In regards to sensor modeling it is not necessary true that the older tech is easier to develop and less performance impacting than the new digital 4gen tech. The analog nature of the 3gen tech with it's much broader spectrum of values is often much more difficult to simulate than the digital stuff that is either 0 or 1.

Take the radar for example: In a modern jet you either have a contact on your radar scrope or you don't. There is no such thing as a weak contact on the filtered radar scope of the F-16 or F-18. On a F-4 radar scope you see the radar returns and simulating this realistically can be pretty difficult. You said the Hornets radar is still incomplete after the Hornet has been released for quite some time now. The part of the Hornet (and Viper) radar that is still missing though is the ground mapping radar, which works with raw returns just like in the old days ;)

If it wasn't for the targeting pods I'd never find anything on the ground. I'd love if the dynamic campaign (whenever that may be) would add some kind of communication with ground units. That you could get info from pinned down ground unit telling you that there is enemy tank/soldier/etc in X position or 2 miles South of our position or something.

If I could nail spotting units on the ground I'd love an old analogue airplane without pods and sensors. As for air to air, I find Fox3 engagements pretty boring although yes it's realistic for how it is today, as someone mentioned already earlier aircraft with low range Fox1 with a low kill probability that inevitably misses and forces a guns or rear aspect Fox2 kill is always much more exciting. I find A2A in the F16 with 120C too easy, even against quite a formidable opponent AI or human, if you can get a 120C off the rail within a sensible range the probability of kill is so high that it's almost guaranteed, where as he older 9M on the Tomcat is much easier to defeat and will usually prolong the engagement.

Sorry for long post, not even sure of my point. I enjoy DCS a lot though!

I think you're probably way off assuming older = easier. Modern planes are basically flying computers, and lack a lot of the crude systems (like masses of infamous circuit breakers) that older aircraft has. It's a lot easier to emulate in abstract a system itself dealing with abstracts than to try to fill in all the myriad complexities of older systems.

It's like comparing modern plug n play PCs with the ones when I was a kid configuring IRQ DMA and COM ports for everything and hoping they didn't conflict. Old doesn't mean simple, usually the opposite because old is also crude and barely understood.

That said, I think 60s-70s era would provide the best balance of gameplay, a sweet spot of modern and old school. Regardless, the die is already cast and much of DCS focuses on newer stuff, but I WOULD like to see more attention to classic eras (not WWII which imo should be wrapped up and left on the shelf asap, that era is sooooooo over saturated)

If it wasn't for the targeting pods I'd never find anything on the ground. I'd love if the dynamic campaign (whenever that may be) would add some kind of communication with ground units. That you could get info from pinned down ground unit telling you that there is enemy tank/soldier/etc in X position or 2 miles South of our position or something.

 

If I could nail spotting units on the ground I'd love an old analogue airplane without pods and sensors.

You're talking about CAS here, which wasn't as big in the Cold War airframe as it is today and usally was carried out by light attack aircraft like the Alpha Jet, Fiat G.91, Saab 105 or in case of the USA and USSR by the uparmored A-10 and Su-25.

Much more common than CAS during the Cold War era were all kind of strike missions (e.g. interdiction, OCA, ...) and these were carried out by the fast jets and dedicated strike aircraft like the Tornado, the F-111 or the Viggen and had no interaction with ground units at all. Unfortunately those kind of missions are very underrepresented in DCS, especially in the multiplayer environment where it's all about CAS (or pseudo-CAS with no friendly units nearby). The classic strike missions (interdiction, OCA, ...) that most A-G aircrews trained for during the Cold War are unfortunately very rare in DCS (unlike in "the other sim"). I really hope that changes with the arrival of the dynamic campaign!

Fully agree. This is what I like seeing in DCS.

I appreciate there are people who likes more modern things. I appreciate it is also the more likely cash cow for developers. Hell I appreciate flying more modern things every now and then.

But lately many of the releases and upcoming ones has been post 90s, even post 2000. It looks like some great cold war birds are getting postponed in favor of those all the time. I think it is time to get soome of the focus back in 60s-80s stuff.

Give us Hind, Cobra, that awesome 80s F-4E got canned because of F-16, A-6, A-7, MiG-23, MiG-27, Su-17, Mirage III, Super Etendard, Mirage F-1, Tornado, Jaguar, Q-5...

I know the Hind, MiG-23, F-8, and eventually also the Mirage F-1 are coming, but there's a lot of cool things we can get from this period.

Recently we got Hornet, Viper, JF-17, arguably also the roughly mid 90s F-14B (though that one is fitting for both sides of argument). It seems Razbam will focus on F-15E. I just think that it would be rather cool to get some older birds too now.

Edit: as for the targeting pods thing, well they were a thing in 80s and ealry 90s too, just not as sophisticated :)

Edit: as for the targeting pods thing, well they were a thing in 80s and ealry 90s too, just not as sophisticated :)

... and pretty rare ;)

But yeah, they existed and are one reason why I'm waiting for the F-4E so badly :D

Yeah rare but, let's face it, as long as DCS is concerned, all that matters is "was it a thing, or was it not?"

Also, even before proper TGPs, attack aircraft/helicopters had optical sighting systems carried on the airframe with more limited viewing/tacking angles, but still some form of optical targeting system with magnification.

So for someone who specifically feels like they need to have something of sort to be able to see ground targets at all, there would be options for oldie birds too :)

... and pretty rare ;)

But yeah, they existed and are one reason why I'm waiting for the F-4E so badly :D

I am looking forward to the F4 as well, but we are going to ned a step up from Jester to make it practical for single player ...

I would welcome a cold war map, asset pack etc, just as we have WW2 map(s).

Korea, Vietnam, and any other scenario that happened during that time period.

And we are getting one too, with the South Atlantic Terrain.

WWII = Great

Cold War = Awesome

Modern = Great

In that order:)

+1

Already a while ago I made the personal decision that for me DCS ends in 1991. I have since then used DCS mostly according to this principle. I would very much appreciate if the development of aircraft, AI and maps would concentrate on the Cold War era.

I couldn’t agree more with the OP. Plus these are aircraft that actually fought each other. Just look at how popular the Tomcat is, and it’s from this era. Also I can’t be the only one looking at that sexy AI F/A-18A, and thinking I want to fly it. To me it’s just a more interesting time. You still get some stand off PGMs, and Fox ones. But any CAS is gonna be up close and personal. And the air to air is probably gonna end in a merge. Plus MiG-23s, MiG-27s, Su-24s, Su-22s, and Mig-29As dueling with F-14Bs, F/A-18As, A-7Es, F-4Es, F-15As or early Cs, A-10As, and a proper F-16A just gives me goosebumps. Throw in a Fulda Gap, and Kuwait/ Southern Iraq map, and it would be legendary. But as I recently said in this forum, alas it’s not to be.

Honestly, after years of the A-10C, I think the pod often gets in the way. If the JTAC pops smoke, look it that area with the good old MK1 eyeball, most of the time you’ll find it. Plus I often place a Huey with WP in these kind of missions. Just bomb the shit out of the WP when it hits. It definitely helps. We need more spotting aircraft in DCS in general. And I would love the ground troops to actually fire WP to mark targets. With the Kiowa coming it will be massively useful in this role, as well as a late Cold War role. It can lase, and mark for you.