What is DCS?

I have not seen anything that would conclude this to be a false statement. All of the modules that ED has released have been at an incredibly high detail or study SIM quality.

ED is multi-sided. They do have both a civilian version and a military version of DCS, yes. Is there something that has lead you to believe this statement on the wiki is untrue? Keep in mind though that because some things are classified systems, they may not be included in the versions of the aircraft that we are flying on the consumer side. You may find some discrepancies to that regard. For what they can model, they model to the extreme. So, you may find the A-10C is missing a particular component, or the KA-50 is missing an updated system(but that's whole nother can of worms with all the variants). That is why ED did not make say the A-10D or E versions.

That is why ED did not make say the A-10D or E versions.

The reason ED didn't do A-10D or A-10E is... There's no such thing as A-10D or A-10E... ;)

The reason ED didn't do A-10D or A-10E is... There's no such thing as A-10D or A-10E... ;)[/QUOT

 

I know that, but I could have sworn there were better suits than the C version.

I know that, but I could have sworn there were better suits than the C version.

Nono, the "suites" aren't "better than C". Suite number is something else. And yes, there's newer suites, but those are still A-10C aircraft. Just newer software and some other stuff in there. (And Sniper pod etcetera, I think.)

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification on that.

I guess this belongs here...

Let's just SUPPOSE that the next "fix winged us aircraft" coming out later on after all projects running already, will be the F-15C. New fancy 6DOF cockpit for it, FC2 already had an upgraded (new engine) Eagle variant, and basically all loading screens are F-15 related :)

IF FC3 is coming out as it is, and there would be a new DCS:Eagle, in the level of detail of the DCS:Warthog, how would it affect FC3 users' Eagle? Obviously two ways to go:

- If you dont buy Eagle, you stuck with vanilla cockpit and Pro guys will have harder time firing an amraam than you have (basically the same will happen to A10C/A10A in FC3)

- F-15 is drawn out of FC3.

My point: Is further development of F-15 in correlation with upcoming DCS series aircraft?

I guess this belongs here...

 

Let's just SUPPOSE that the next "fix winged us aircraft" coming out later on after all projects running already, will be the F-15C. New fancy 6DOF cockpit for it, FC2 already had an upgraded (new engine) Eagle variant, and basically all loading screens are F-15 related :)

 

IF FC3 is coming out as it is, and there would be a new DCS:Eagle, in the level of detail of the DCS:Warthog, how would it affect FC3 users' Eagle? Obviously two ways to go:

- If you dont buy Eagle, you stuck with vanilla cockpit and Pro guys will have harder time firing an amraam than you have (basically the same will happen to A10C/A10A in FC3)

- F-15 is drawn out of FC3.

 

My point: Is further development of F-15 in correlation with upcoming DCS series aircraft?

Not necessarily. Consider DCS A-10C and FC3 A-10A. Is the A-10A getting dropped? Nope.

Now you may say that the A-10C is a more functional aircraft with more capabilities over the A-10A - you'd be right. Though you also have to consider that if DCS Next will be an F-15 variant it will also be modeled and simulated to a greater degree above and beyond what the FC3 F-15 will.

What these will lead to is a more technical and capable fighter - also more complex. Does it mean that a DCS F-15C pilot will beat an FC3 F-15C pilot - nope. The same can be said in the reverse as well.

What it would boil down to is each pilot using the capabilities and functions of their particular aircraft while exploiting the weaknesses of your opponent.

Here's another tidbit...

F-15's have a datalink function between each other as well as with an E3 or E2 AWACS. The simulation of a datalink would be done in great detail on a DCS level F-15 where as on a FC3 F-15 it may not even be available - maybe between aircraft in the same flight. Where as at DCS level of fidelity pilots could manually adjust what flight and or package they are apart of and in FC3 they would not be able to.

Does it mean that a DCS F-15C pilot will beat an FC3 F-15C pilot - nope.

Having a reduced workload, the FC3 pilot should have an advantage over the DCS pilot.

Having a reduced workload, the FC3 pilot should have an advantage over the DCS pilot.

That is too broad a stroke to make. If you're simulating a 1970ies C version then maybe, up to date Charlie sensor and avionics suites would smoke the FC3 version in a pipe.

The process on a DCS eagle would be the same as in the FC3 eagle ... designate and fire. No additional workload ... don't know where you got that idea.

Having a reduced workload, the FC3 pilot should have an advantage over the DCS pilot.

Well, for one thing, an FC3 Eagle can start up in twenty seconds and take off immediately, while a DCS Eagle is surely going to take a few minutes to get everything sorted. For another, even once in the air, managing a DCS Eagle is going to be a bit more complicated than the FC3 one, yes? Not as much so as on the ground, I'm sure, but still ... for example, having to arm each missile before firing. As I understand it, there are more steps in the real deal compared to the simplified FC3 four-buttons-needed-for-air-combat.

Well, for one thing, an FC3 Eagle can start up in twenty seconds and take off immediately, while a DCS Eagle is surely going to take a few minutes to get everything sorted.

You can get both in the air in one minute, just like with the A-10C. Both can get in a fight at take-off. Is there a particular reason to wait for your INU to align if your base is being raided? I don't think so.

For another, even once in the air, managing a DCS Eagle is going to be a bit more complicated than the FC3 one, yes? Not as much so as on the ground, I'm sure, but still ... for example, having to arm each missile before firing. As I understand it, there are more steps in the real deal compared to the simplified FC3 four-buttons-needed-for-air-combat.

You might have to flip the Master Arm switch, but other than that, I don't see any extra complication. Everything is on your HOTAS and there's no 'extra steps' to designate and fire. That is how those aircraft are designed.

Just add a flatcar to the train with a static ZSU, or perhaps troop train, or target train moving supplies,vehicles to the front.(P51) mission. 8)-

:lol::lol::lol:... some remember....:megalol:

 

Having a reduced workload, the FC3 pilot should have an advantage over the DCS pilot.

I think I tend to agree.

If you're simulating a 1970ies C version then maybe, up to date Charlie sensor and avionics suites would smoke the FC3 version in a pipe.

What about a theoretical Flaming Cliffs a-10C vs DCS a-10c? (btw, there was no a10c in the 1970s) I think the latter would be at a distinct disadvantage.

...Admittedly a pretty "out there" and useless comparison. :D But maybe you get my point

You might have to flip the Master Arm switch, but other than that, I don't see any extra complication. Everything is on your HOTAS and there's no 'extra steps' to designate and fire. That is how those aircraft are designed.

That's certainly true, but what about sensors and weapons that have more nuanced modeling. More quirks and things to worry about...I'm sure those same quirks might also give a DCS version a serious advantage in some situations (Assuming we are talking about a hypothetical FC3 A-10C vs DCS A10C)

What about a theoretical Flaming Cliffs a-10C vs DCS a-10c? (btw, there was no a10c in the 1970s) I think the latter would be at a distinct disadvantage.

Why? You have much more capability in the C, especially when it comes to better controlling your sensors and weapons.

That's certainly true, but what about sensors and weapons that have more nuanced modeling. More quirks and things to worry about...I'm sure those same quirks might also give a DCS version a serious advantage in some situations (Assuming we are talking about a hypothetical FC3 A-10C vs DCS A10C)

Even if you don't use any of the niftyness that might come with a DCS F-15C or an F-18C or an F-16C, or even updated versions of an F-4 and the AV-8B, and you set the MPCD to just display the PACS instead of a SIT + Datalink, a DCS aircraft immediately gains BVR combat potential that is not available to the FC eagle ... all hidden in those 'sensor nuances' that are fully automated in the DCS airfract, allowing you to focus on the battle.

Maybe if you were talking about an older aircraft, where a lot more manual input is needed to operate the sensors ... but modern jets do it all for you.

FC jets are LESS automated than modern DCS-level jets.

As far as DCS A-10C v FC A-10C battle, it's all about who sees the other guy first, and guess who has the better equipment controls for getting more SA out of their jet. In the end that fight will be purely visual.

As for a bombing competition, as soon as more difficult scenarios than 'bomb the target at this waypoint' come up, possibly where coordinate input may be needed as well as data-link management, the DCS A-10C will dominate.

I'm an air to ground guy all the way, so you'll have to get down and dirty with me on this one :D (for the record I largely agree with your post)

This is so hypothetical, that it's a bit silly...But what the heck:

Two versions of the A10c are modeled. One a la FC3 and the other DCS.

Both are tasked to search for and destroy a target. My guess is that the FC3 pilot won't have to worry about the gimbal limits of his targeting pod, or his Maverick seeker not behaving in a predictable manner, or his EO timer being active, or his safe escape maneuver not being set up properly for his attack, or his elevation being set to the wrong source.

Assuming all those little quirks are equalized, the actual attacking part would without doubt be on level ground.

Given the fact that I'm one of the few "crazies" out there that likes to use hot elevation and set up my profiles to the letter and do all the crap I see real pilots do in HUD tapes I have to admit I might be a little hard to reach on this one :D

My guess is that the FC3 pilot won't have to worry about the gimbal limits of his targeting pod, or his Maverick seeker not behaving in a predictable manner,

I can see the gimbals, but I have no reason to believe that the weapons would have to work differently. Why would they?

or his safe escape maneuver not being set up properly for his attack,

Why, is his plane invulnerable? Do the weapons explode differently?

Given the fact that I'm one of the few "crazies" out there that likes to use hot elevation and set up my profiles to the letter and do all the crap I see real pilots do in HUD tapes I have to admit I might be a little hard to reach on this one :D

... :joystick:

My guess is that the FC3 pilot won't have to worry about the gimbal limits of his targeting pod

Is your guess that the FC3 pilot wouldn't have sensor slew limitations? Because as you can see with the A-10A as well as the Su-25T, you do have sensor FOV limitations. Thus I have a hard time understanding where you get this guess from.

or his Maverick seeker not behaving in a predictable manner

Personally I find handling the mavs to be a lot easier in DCS A-10C than with FC A-10A. By a HUGE margin. Add to this the additional capabilities offered with things like force correlate etcetera...

or his elevation being set to the wrong source.

Come on. That's not exactly difficult to handle, and ONLY impacts capabilities that the FC3 aircraft wouldn't have in the first place. So at the absolute worst, it becomes equal. Otherwise the DCS level aircraft wins.

I think he meant the cable getting tangled :)

Is your guess that the FC3 pilot wouldn't have sensor slew limitations? Because as you can see with the A-10A as well as the Su-25T, you do have sensor FOV limitations. Thus I have a hard time understanding where you get this guess from.

Is your guess that the FC3 pilot wouldn't have sensor slew limitations?

No, did I ever say that? I'm re-reading my post wondering how you extrapolated that.

Personally I find handling the mavs to be a lot easier in DCS A-10C than with FC A-10A. By a HUGE margin. Add to this the additional capabilities offered with things like force correlate etcetera...

I think I agree with this one... Kinda :D

Come on. That's not exactly difficult to handle, and ONLY impacts capabilities that the FC3 aircraft wouldn't have in the first place. So at the absolute worst, it becomes equal. Otherwise the DCS level aircraft wins.

The original post referred to "pilot workload." I guess I'm of the mind that if a pilot doesn't have sweat the small stuff, he'll be more freed up to see the big picture so to speak. IMHO that makes flying and fighting in FC3 fidelity aircraft advantageous (In a competition i.e. who can blow up the most stuff in 20 mins :D)

Doesn't make FC3 any less valid as a flight simulation. It's just simulating a little bit less

I can see the gimbals, but I have no reason to believe that the weapons would have to work differently. Why would they?

I don't have enough knowledge to say.

All I can say is that when I look back at what I "knew" when flying the FC2 A10a and compare that to what I "know" now flying the DCS a10c I can't help but smile... and cry a bit :pilotfly:

...Did I mention that I'm crazy :D

I don't agree ... in an FC3 plane, you lack the inputs that DCS level planes would get for seeing the big picture and what's more, you lack the ability to manipulate it.

And imagine this: You are hauling 6x65D, starting your attack with them from 20nm away. Which plane's going to employ them faster when the time comes ... the FC A-10, or the DCS A-10? Give it a couple moments of thought, then consider JDAMs for this scenario as well :D

The original post referred to "pilot workload." I guess I'm of the mind that if a pilot doesn't have sweat the small stuff, he'll be more freed up to see the big picture so to speak. IMHO that makes flying and fighting in FC3 fidelity aircraft advantageous (In a competition i.e. who can blow up the most stuff in 20 mins :D)

I think he meant the cable getting tangled :)

Ah, right, then I get it. :)

No, did I ever say that? I'm re-reading my post wondering how you extrapolated that.

Linguistic mixup, GG cleared it up. :)

The original post referred to "pilot workload." I guess I'm of the mind that if a pilot doesn't have sweat the small stuff, he'll be more freed up to see the big picture so to speak. IMHO that makes flying and fighting in FC3 fidelity aircraft advantageous (In a competition i.e. who can blow up the most stuff in 20 mins :D)

 

Doesn't make FC3 any less valid as a flight simulation. It's just simulating a little bit less

Well, okey, if you want less workload: just don't use any of the advanced capabilities offered by the A-10C. The only additional workload between the FC and DCS planes is that with the DCS one you have to flip the master arm switch. After you've done this, you have the same capabilities (and more) that the FC has even without touching anything complicated. :)

@GGTharos and EtherealN

You guys are both correct. I guess in the end it boils down to what people fly the sim for. I love the details... As a gamer I get far more satisfaction flying the same mission in DCS than I do in FC2. I don't mean to suggest that one is more valid than the other. It's just personal taste

...I guess it might actually be a little hard=realistic for me. And the realism is what I fly the sim for. There's no doubt that my SA has suffered as a result...too busy setting up my TAAF and a secondary flight plan :)