What is DCS?

Trains and train stations were definate targets in both WWI and WWII, probably much less so in more recent conflicts but the concept of disrupting supply lines has been around as long as men have been making war.

Trains and train stations were definate targets in both WWI and WWII, probably much less so in more recent conflicts but the concept of disrupting supply lines has been around as long as men have been making war.

 

 

Well then the "GRAND SLAM Mother BOMB" is coming

 

So this will be me then on the choo choo's watch

 

 

LoL.......:lol:

Edited June 13, 2012 by WRAITH

What have civilian aircraft ... to do with a combat simulator?

 

Clutter, Something to be protected or destroyed. A bit of imagination and they can serve some useful purpose...

 

Also:

 

There are people that use DCS / FC for aerobatics, no reason why they shouldn't use it for anything they want.

For me DCS standard is the AFM and not "only" clickable cockpits, model quality and so on. So if a 3rd Party aircraft addon have the letters DCS I expect the AFM on it. Sad news for me.:(

Upper left hand corner. I want to see an A-10. Photoshop go!

 

:D lovely Thomas !

Upper left hand corner. I want to see an A-10. Photoshop go!

Ok :D

 

 

Usually my photoshop skills are higher, but wish is granted. :P

All the point of DCS is a very detail and realistic simulation.

 

It's not just a clickable cockpit, it's an ideology, it's the depth in every single system, in every little sub sub sub menu in some apparently "unimportant" feature in the navigation computer.

like it in real life\simulator as in ED products.

 

So, if will be some third parties less detail and realistic than ED products, we completely lost the way.

 

And i don't understand why to drag Flaming Cliffs to DCS..the only thing i can think of, is take the Su-25\T and make it to DCS standards, when it's not a lot of work.

 

don't get me wrong, i'm very happy with the new way of the DCS World and the third parties, but, it must, must be at DCS level, if it requires to work with ED, or if it require to ED to teach the third parties how to make DCS standard, and the tools, or even the third parties make most of the product and ED to done all the complex stuff.

 

and, for terrain, third parties will be a great idea.

Edited June 12, 2012 by SchniX

So, if will be some third parties less detail and realistic than ED products, we completely lost the way.

 

I agree, that being said others may not. Purchase the addon that meets your expectations.

 

That's the thing about DCS world, I guess since I don't fly public servers I'm not worried about it. The 476th will not incorporate every aircraft released as an official install. We will evaluate each 3rd party airframe and go from there, if it doesn't meet what we feel DCS stands for it won't be included in the vFighter Group.

Press Release: Pre-Purchase “DCS: Train” in July 2012

 

Tuesday, 12 June 2012

DUXFORD, UK, June 12th 2012 – The Fighter Collection and Eagle Dynamics will offer DCS: Train as a digital download pre-purchase.

 

P-51 Owners will now be able to strafe real players. Train enthusiasts have answered back with their SA-22 Greyhound (Train mounted) module due for release later this year.

 

A DCS: Train spokesperson said, "No signal failure will stop this little beauty. Until Eagle Dynamics can model the 'wrong type of snow' or realistic fallen leaves we are almost invicible."

 

An A-10 driver was reported as saying, "That's it for me, some of these Japanese variants are too fast for the A-10. I'm waiting for the DCS Fast mover."

 

:D Thomas equipped with Trophy

a 5 mins Photoshop work :)

Transportation for nations are targets or things to defend depending on what side of the fence you're on. Conflict is not always military on military. Civilians also exist in areas of conflict and play a part in combat tactics. It's pretty clear infrastructure are things of importance to a combat simulation.

 

Agreed. To shift a large detail of armor from one part of a country to another would be efficiently done by rail, and not with a convoy of HET's. Even then, HET's are subject to road conditions. A few runway denial munitions would mean a halt to a convoy.

To model rail in the environment on Combined Arms would be unheard of and very interesting indeed...

(I can't help it, i'm so sorry!)

For me DCS standard is the AFM and not "only" clickable cockpits, model quality and so on. So if a 3rd Party aircraft addon have the letters DCS I expect the AFM on it. Sad news for me.:(

 

+1

+1

What have civilian aircraft and trains to do with a combat simulator?

 

PMDG does a civilian transport who's cargo is one VIP who must make it from point A to B. Fighter escort required...that's a combat scenario where a civilian pilot gets to feel the jeopardy of a combat scenario and the combat pilot has a real package to protect.

 

That's one of a zillion scenarios "combat" would be a relevant term, it's far more than pew pew although PEW PEW is good!

 

Besides, it's going to take a LONG time before we see any number of third party aircraft, and I can see a good majority of developers wanting to do combat simply because unlike FSX they're not shooting blanks ;).

 

I think the "trains" aspect of the sim was a bit of a joke, not really something to be taken seriously but isn't impossible.

 

Remember developers are going to spend the time to make an airframe they hope that people will buy, to do that they must have a general idea what the community in this simulator is looking for and will most likely yield to that.

 

I'm a glass half full guy (most of the time) I'm optimistic about the future of the series.

For me DCS standard is the AFM and not "only" clickable cockpits, model quality and so on. So if a 3rd Party aircraft addon have the letters DCS I expect the AFM on it. Sad news for me.:(

 

All ad ons may not sport the DCS prefix, some of those aircraft may fit into the FC3 arena. I don't think a third party who doesn't model a 3D clickable cockpit will ensure many sales for themselves. A2A, PMDG, VRS all have great flight models and accomplished them on their own...so I'm thinking the same can be done with ED third party.

 

If ED said "we're not making aircraft anymore and leaving it all to third party, but unfortunately we can't supply them with our AFM SDK. Sorry all you high fidelity junkies, you're SOL"

 

I am genuinely sorry you feel saddened by the news, I hope in time you will be pleasantly surprised with what develops. :)

I think we should just let the time to the baby to grow up...

In years, we've seen coming :

- AFM

- 6 DOF + clickable cockpit

- many updates on the terrain complexity (scenary, details, clutters, trees,...)

- many updates on the graphic engine (shadows, details, rendering,...)

- Complex Mission Generator

- Many new triggers for mission building

- DCS World: modular concept

- Clever opening to third parties

-...

 

And many more to come:

- New terrain engine (EDGE)...

- ... coming with a new scenary (Nevada)

- New DCS 'Fast US Jet' (guess with AFM)

- DCS: CA

- Creation of a SDK for the third parties (Thanks ED, Beczl and all the contributors)

- ... And other project we don't even know (are they?)

 

So, for those who reads only last sentences or has only 3 minutes attention, I'm back to my first sentence: I think we should just let the time to the baby to grow up... And it might take loooong time.

Edited June 12, 2012 by Cedaway

For me DCS standard is the AFM and not "only" clickable cockpits, model quality and so on. So if a 3rd Party aircraft addon have the letters DCS I expect the AFM on it. Sad news for me.:(

 

+2

Edited June 12, 2012 by Altair_w

I Agree. The DCS Prefix must be something like an award to 3d party Devs after quality check pass and contribution from ED.

DCS is not a "prefix", it's a brand name. I feel you can rest assured that ED will protect it.

 

Just don't mistake your own preferences for being the one and only way, you can make someone happy all of the time, but not everyone happy all of the time. :)

Can somebody please explain the actual differences between the SFM and AFM? is it Flaming Cliffs 2 compared to A-10C?

 

yes one is Standard the other one Advanced, but what's the difference? why are people upset about this? does it mean the plane will not behave as they should? aircraft will be easy to fly? easy to land? lower resolution graphics? physics will be that different?

 

what does AFM provide that aircraft that SFM will not?

 

If somebody that actually KNOWS about this (without guessing or assuming) could clarify this that'd be great, i'm very curious since this has been talked about since 3rd party developers started to come out.

 

Thanks!

Did it ever occur to anyone that the train part might not actually mean driving a train? I would imagine it has much more to do with the SOON TO BE AWESOME supply system and other targets of interest. Maybe some kind of simulator where you control how supplies are moving around the map and so forth and also being to fly the cargo birds that supply distant bases.

 

My imagination has just left the building......

 

One thing though, ED better come up with a way to bomb runways and give us some good airfield crater animations and munitions. Let us take out a supply line and aerial threats the old fashioned way.

I don't know why there is so much distrust concerning the recent developments. I also like the realism that the DCS products brought, but...

 

Nobody will take your high-fidelity models away, there are just more coming. And if one out of five meets the standards set by BS, A10 and P-51D, it's one more. And a lot of others, that others will buy and "play". This is what keeps such a niche product running, you need customers, you need partners, you need dependencies -- well, at least I guess that it works that way ;).

 

Just don't mistake your own preferences for being the one and only way, you can make someone happy all of the time, but not everyone happy all of the time.

That's exactly it, most of the not-so-hard-corers do not write that much and that dedicated in forums. Only because a lot of people say "AFM or nothing" doesn't mean that there is no one looking forward to modern, classified fighters at the cost of a little less accuracy. Finally, these 3rd party developers are no "script-kiddies", but mostly professional developers (another guess ;) ).

 

In the end, without being a fighter pilot, I guess (not again :music_whistling:) that none these pilots gets new aircraft as often as some of you want it. So for the sake of realism, keep up with what you got at the moment ;).

Can somebody please explain the actual differences between the SFM and AFM? is it Flaming Cliffs compared to A-10C?

 

yes one is Standard the other one Advanced, but what's the difference? why are people upset about this? does it mean the plane will not behave as they should? aircraft will be easy to fly? easy to land? lower resolution graphics? physics will be that different?

 

what does AFM provide that aircraft that SFM will not?

 

If somebody that actually KNOWS about this (without guessing or assuming) could clarify this that'd be great, i'm very curious since this has been talked about since 3rd party developers started to come out.

 

Thanks!

If I am correct, which I am not on many times :D :

 

The SFM is the flight model used in LockOn. The AFM has been used in Flaming Cliffs(SU25 + T) DCS:BS and DCS:A10

 

For me, the difference between the two is night and day. When I first tried Flaming cliffs and flew the SU25t, I felt the old FM was like Battlefield or something and never really wanted to have go back again. And I don't think I ever will.

 

The Flight Model affects how the plane feels, it's "weight", how it lands, how it turns, how it stalls. Its basically the physics of flight.

 

I think it is pretty disappointing that the 3rd parties will have to use the Standard Flight Model.....but as Wags said, they can make there own. So this to me is glimmer of hope. And I hope most of them go this route.

Edited June 12, 2012 by BTTW-DratsaB

 

:D Thomas equipped with Trophy

a 5 mins Photoshop work :)

 

That's amazing, nice work. :D

 

As for the trains I think it was a joke...

Can somebody please explain the actual differences between the SFM and AFM? is it Flaming Cliffs 2 compared to A-10C?

 

An advanced flight model obeys the laws of physics. It is a set of physics equations and algorithms that create a basis for the FM that mimic real life situations. In other words a stall will happen given these conditions and it varies with altitude and pressure and wind and amount of fuel and loadout, weight, drag...

 

Basically there is a shit ton of math that goes into a detailed flight model. Simplified flight models only model some are all conditions with less detail. Say instead a stall always happens at 90 knots no matter what altitude or wind speed.

 

 

Thats a basic explanation anyhow