If you could have only one DCS module, which one?

I grew up watching GBUs hitting targets in MFDs on CNN, so A-10C is worth all the money. I am still waiting for F-15E which I am sure will take the crown.

Edited September 19, 2018 by dmatt76

From that list, the F/A-18c.

It's the only plane, if finished, that can do everything. A/G, A/A, anti ship, SEAD....easy to start-up, to fly, can land on land or a carrier....what else do you want? :joystick::smilewink:

 

This ^^

 

So many other aircraft are more or less specialists. The F-18 can do everything but hover and that high alpha maneuver comes pretty damn close anyway.

 

Build quality is also a factor. Some modules, IMO, could benefit from the level of detail, in both cockpit textures and sound that these newer modules are coming with. The Viggen's sound is unreal. Same with the F-18 and early shots of the F-14's cockpit redefine attention to detail.

If I had to choose only one. It would be the Gazelle yep thats the one.

 

The Gazelle :thumbup:

If I had to choose only one. It would be the Gazelle yep thats the one.

 

The Gazelle :thumbup:

If you love flying the Gazelle, check this out then:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=219304

If you love flying the Gazelle, check this out then:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=219304

 

Indeed, just need to develop some skills,.. :D:thumbup:

I'm not sure if asking others what they would pick is the best way to solve your issue. What is it that you want to get out of DCS?

What I would like is to really understand an aircraft. Not just be able to take-off, fly, (combat), land etc. but really understand how everything works. Given that I don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on this hobby, this is a challenge.

 

 

 

For sure asking others is not the way to "solve" my "problem" (which actually doesn't need solving) but I thought it is an interesting question. And I think the "problem", which is due to simulation depth, is inherent to DCS and for sure more people have the same "problem".

 

 

My opinion on DCS as it is currently is that more modern aircraft work better in the simulation.

If we are talking about pure simulation of a certain aircraft, I'm not sure if I agree, because on more modern aircraft it is more difficult to get accurate data. But if you take the entire DCS ecosystem into account, you make some excellent points.

What I would like is to really understand an aircraft. Not just be able to take-off, fly, (combat), land etc. but really understand how everything works. Given that I don't have a huge amount of free time to spend on this hobby, this is a challenge.

That makes things little clearer. I suppose that can apply to any module, so it's probably best to just go with the one that leaves the best impression, maybe the L-39 in this case.

 

 

 

 

For sure asking others is not the way to "solve" my "problem" (which actually doesn't need solving) but I thought it is an interesting question. And I think the "problem", which is due to simulation depth, is inherent to DCS and for sure more people have the same "problem".

I just wanted clarification because I was trying to help. I wasn't sure exactly what you wanted from the thread, but I assumed it was ultimately an aircraft focus on in DCS.

 

 

I'm actually familiar with the situation that you're in. I own almost everything but the depth to which I know each module varies a lot. Mastering all of them would take a lot of time. I just fly some more than others and more seriously than others. The aircraft that I know best I make full missions for, with cold stars, long routes to targets, etc. Some I just put in air start dogfights with another AI.

 

 

 

If we are talking about pure simulation of a certain aircraft, I'm not sure if I agree, because on more modern aircraft it is more difficult to get accurate data. But if you take the entire DCS ecosystem into account, you make some excellent points.

Yes, the modern stuff can suffer from a lack of information. I was talking about DCS as a whole. I think it's still evident that it evolved from Flanker/LOMAC/FC, and still lacks some design elements that you would expect from WWII, Korea, and maybe even Vietnam era aircraft.

Ka-50. Yes, it is a jet. Perhaps you meant fixed wing though, in which case the F-18.

My order is, and will remain (only including modules that have been officially announced):

 

1) Hornet

2) Tomcat

3) Viper

4) Strike Eagle

5) Harrier

6) Warthog

 

AH-1Y Viper first choice. FA-18c out of what's in the list.

I voted F-18 but if the F-14 was on the list it would have been that.

 

As above:pilotfly:

Ka-50.

 

Always Ka-50.

Ka-50.

 

Always Ka-50.

I think you have a typo there, right? KA-52 is what you wanted to say, right? :D ;)

 

Just joking. :)

Oh! Ahaha! Yes, yes! You're right. It was a huge typo.

KA-52N I want. :D

 

 

 

Surprised no on brought up this non Lister

I have probably more hours in the Mi-8 than all the others combined, so... Mi-8 for me. I'm surprised so many others picked it as well over the cool and capable jets. There's a lot of us "truckers" out there.

Other, F-16 :D