O-2A Skymaster

Tweeeeeet......

Or, 98% just don’t care. It’s the popular vote that counts. There is no electoral college.

We will never know, if the 98% and thousands of none forum members bought the O-2A, in the end, until it was released.

If they decide to scrap it, we won't neither.

I got news for ya champ, it ain't Super anything to anyone. Buying that thing will be 100% pointless if a J11A is anywhere on the map.

The same can and has been said about aircraft like the A-10. Saying a ground attack aircraft isn't capable because it's not a fighter is twisted logic mate :megalol:

I got news for ya champ, it ain't Super anything to anyone. Buying that thing will be 100% pointless if a J11A is anywhere on the map.

A competent pilot sure wouldn’t get himself into a situation like that. Who says if I buy it I’m gonna go look for dogfights, I vote yes cause it could usher in something new to the sim. Maybe it’s time that DCS breaks from its run and gun type thing. That being said I’m not a huge fan of the OV-2, but I’m open to change and wouldn’t mind trying it out. I think people need to relax and let the sim expand, if it fails it fails then we know for a fact that we shouldn’t develop aircraft like it. No one is gonna stop making military aircraft, bloody hell the F-15E is coming. Let’s take a chill pill and see where this could take us.

I got news for ya champ, it ain't Super anything to anyone. Buying that thing will be 100% pointless if a J11A is anywhere on the map.

Easy to fix, do not place that J11A on the Vietnam War era map. :music_whistling:

Well whistled! :)

One could also put a CAP in the mission, like IRL... :dunno:

Maybe a flight of 4 F-15C or F/A-18C.

I mean the Marines virtually invented the combined arms and integrated battlefield concept?

I would buy it in a heartbeat. This is a combat simulator, that should simulate ALL aspects of military aviation. Not just the fast shiny pointy things.

I'll reiterate what I've said in the past. If a developer has the access to produce a well rounded as complete as simulation allows module. They should put it into the sim, regardless of the "C" in DCS. If DCS can expand by adding "dual role" aircraft like the O-2/337 by all means develop the hell out of that SOB!

We need more developers to work with ED, we need more content in this game! The only way we will get either is being a little more open minded about comes into the sim. Military, civilian, dual role, if it brings quality to the platform it needs to be here! Basing what you should and shouldn't being to the sim based on this forum is like looking at an elephant with a microscope!

As has been said before if you build it someone will buy it, if it's a quality product people will buy it. Hell, people will pay money for questionable product if it's presented in a half decent way, just look at the Hawk. I pre-ordered the Hawk and Warhawk just because of the dev roadmap.... Lol call me starry-eyed I'm still looking forward to the Warhawk.

O-1,O-2, OV-10, 337, L-100, Pucara, F-100, Super Mystère, A-7..... I could go on, but I'm willing to let my wallet do the talking.

Stop dithering and give me content! If I don't buy it someone will, and hopefully they are new to the platform, fall head over heels in love and never want to fly in another sim except DCS!

In the immortal words of Al Pacino in Heat,

"GIMME ALL YOU GOT!"

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

I got news for ya champ, it ain't Super anything to anyone. Buying that thing will be 100% pointless if a J11A is anywhere on the map.

Not a valid argument but what is a good case against it is that it will get murdered by T-55's and BMP's. It is too slow to use unguided weapons in DCS thanks to limitations in the AI. To be an effective mud mover in DCS, the aircraft must either have guided weapons so it can keep distance or it has to be fast enough that AI gunners can't hit it when flown right. The 0-2 doesn't do either of those things.

The role of the O-2A is not to engage armor directly with its weapons, neither is the UH-1H.

In the Vietnam War the presence of an AFAC was most feared by the Vietcong. They know it carried no bombs, but a radio and some WP rockets, and if the AFAC sees you he will call his friends with tens of pounds of bombs in minutes.

So yes, being in a T-55 and being detected by an O-2A means a sure death sentence.

In DCS world we have used the Uh-1H as scouts/FAC with sucess, even sometimes we have used a P-51 to represent a A-1 and it worked quite well on this role.

Hell yes. That said, we definitely need the mission and scripting structure to better represent other roles that usually don't involve directly engaging hostile targets. On top of that, the ability to better simulate insurgencies would be very welcome and would make aircraft like the O-2A and A-29 extremely welcome.

I got news for ya champ, it ain't Super anything to anyone. Buying that thing will be 100% pointless if a J11A is anywhere on the map.

Or, you could not play on Air-Quake servers, have an AWACS, and rely on your tasked air superiority assets to ensure that enemy air threats are dealt with.

Just a thought. After all, the same complaint could be leveled toward the A-10A/C. Yet, we have them. Offering different aircraft that fill different roles means a variety of gameplay options left to mission makers and to consumers.

One could also put a CAP in the mission, like IRL... :dunno:

 

Maybe a flight of 4 F-15C or F/A-18C.

 

I mean the Marines virtually invented the combined arms and integrated battlefield concept?

Really? I could have sworn it was the Germans and was called Blitzkrieg ;) and of course perfected by the Russians creating the first dedicated ground attack plane Il-2....:music_whistling:

Really? I could have sworn it was the Germans and was called Blitzkrieg ;) and of course perfected by the Russians creating the first dedicated ground attack plane Il-2....:music_whistling:

Depends on the definitions.

The "Blitzkrieg" was focused on mobility and speed, as opposed to more classic concepts.

The use of the Luftwaffe for preemptive strikes and support was new at the time, but totally independent from ground controlled CAS. The pilot did their job but they were not "integrated" with the ground troops.

The Marines as a seperate fighting force as far as I am aware, where the first that had integrated Combat Teams with mixed elements of sea, air and ground that operated as an integrated force.

The use of ex-strike pilots, embedded with ground forces to call in precision CAS, controlled and guided by the FAC is the pillarstone of modern Close Air Support.

At least I am not aware this integrated control was used in WWII.

The early special forces, marked and guided air force assets on strike locations and targets, but they communicated the targets and time way before. There was no interaction or "control" over the air assets...

O-2. No thank you.

I think that RAZBAM could do better then O-2. Really O-2? How about O-1 Birddog. Can't get simpler then that.

OV-10D Bronco, Cessna Dragonfly, or A-29 Super Tucano, FMA Pucara would be much aircraft if RAZBAM wants to explore light attack and COIN simulation. I really like the Pucara. Watching it in action, in The Last Ship, really graceful aircraft. Large cannons, machine guns, bombs. Not quite A-10 with props but still deadly. It was one of the primary targets of SAS raids during Falklands, becouse of its air-ground potency.

My theories:

There is no clear direct link between the subject of this poll and the next module. It's a market study.

The current result is 50-50, never seen before. That may tell that there is not so much money to make out of the O-2, but maybe the revenues will be assured with the half that may really want it.

They ask O-2, for a reason. People answered OV-10. This reaction can help to adjust the product strategy before starting things. But what if people said yes give us the O-2 ? Maybe the O-2 is the fastest/easiest/cheaper module to make by Razbam currently.

Maybe this is actually the OV-10 they want to make, using the O-2 as a decoy…

On facebook they had a poll of king air vs. O-2 so consideing that I'd say they're looking at doing a civil/dual use plane. If they do a militarized version of the king air with a targeting pod to lase/spot targets or a ground/sea radar for surveillance or marking targets for aviodev's sea eagle, I'd vote king air.

Also, pretty shocked how divisive the O-2 is...

On facebook they had a poll of king air vs. O-2 so consideing that I'd say they're looking at doing a civil/dual use plane. If they do a militarized version of the king air with a targeting pod to lase/spot targets or a ground/sea radar for surveillance or marking targets for aviodev's sea eagle, I'd vote king air.

 

Also, pretty shocked how divisive the O-2 is...

Id be all for a militarised king air, tho I would suggest a dhc-4 caribou for the Vietnam era since its a more civil/unarmed military plane.

Those who want Vietnam scenarios should really come to understand how valuable FAC was in the air war over Southeast Asia. The conflict wasn't just Operation Bolo.

@ AirJ247 Look up tailored radials on Facebook if you can. They've been working on a Caribou and I believe they're shooting for third party status. But they haven't made a post since april...

Also, pretty shocked how divisive the O-2 is...

It isn't that people are against it, it's that they want other things instead. Resources are limited and so making the O-2 implies something more appealing, like the MiG-23 or F-15E get cancelled or never even started. 50% of us realize that, 40% don't and 10% want an O-2 more than a MiG or F-15. Made up percentages of course but you get the idea.

The real issue here is that we are trying to outsmart the developers by trying to drive their company decisions with this type of approach.

The first post says it quite clear, really unambiguos

Simple question

O-2A Skymaster in DCS?

There is no question about how do you like us to use our resoruces? or would you prefer a Ju-52 over a O-2A? Should we give priority to this and that?

No that was not the question.

The question just ask if there is space in DCS World for such type of aircraft.

The answer should be the same regardles there is an OV-1 or A-1 or F-100 already in release version or not.

It is a simple question and you really have to be naive if you think you are going to force company decisions saying no to one model but offering your choice instead.

For me the question is quite clear. Do I see future and possibilities in DCS world for such „type“ of aircraft? Yes I see a future for low and slow FAC aircraft of Vietnam War era.

I do not want a DCS only with fighter bombers, I also want other types of aircraft and other type of missions available.

Let the developers manage their resources, they know their stuff.

I was for the O-2 before but after seeing its armament I like it even more.I wouldn't want the development of the o2 to impact the f15 and those in development, if they have the resources to make this aircraft without delaying the rest that have been announced, then please go ahead.

I believe the next plane should be a cargo plane, so we can add a new line of gameplay for the servers. The O2 can fullfill this at a small amount, but I prefer the Kignair (of the two)

Or, maybe the C-119.