Which full sim modules you'd like in FC3?

Let's not lose sight of the fact that FC3 is currently the only method we have of flying 3rd or early 4th gen Russian military aircraft, at least fixed wing. I suspect a lot of the long-time "Flanker" / DCS fans were drawn to this sim precisely because it featured things like the Su-27 / 33, or Su-25, which at the time were simply not available elsewhere, whereas there was very much a time when cookie-cutter F-16 and F-18 sims were numerous.

 

I'm very glad that we have the F/A-18C to DCS standard and will in the future be getting the F-16C Bk.50 to a similar standard, but let's not dismiss the very significant portion of the fan base who enjoy red air. FC3 is their (our) only route to getting that experience for now, and likely for the foreseeable future.

THIS^^^^^^^ :thumbup:

Let's not lose sight of the fact that FC3 is currently the only method we have of flying 3rd or early 4th gen Russian military aircraft, at least fixed wing. I suspect a lot of the long-time "Flanker" / DCS fans were drawn to this sim precisely because it featured things like the Su-27 / 33, or Su-25, which at the time were simply not available elsewhere, whereas there was very much a time when cookie-cutter F-16 and F-18 sims were numerous.

 

I'm very glad that we have the F/A-18C to DCS standard and will in the future be getting the F-16C Bk.50 to a similar standard, but let's not dismiss the very significant portion of the fan base who enjoy red air. FC3 is their (our) only route to getting that experience for now, and likely for the foreseeable future.

Probably the only way to get a Eurofighter or similar as well that will take decades to be declassified enough to make a study sim. It has its place as do the WWII planes. Calling those who would enjoy such a module as "lazy" or "incompetent" is fairly petty.

Probably the only way to get a Eurofighter or similar as well that will take decades to be declassified enough to make a study sim.

Transcendental profound questions:

If you don't have the info to do an Eurofighter, will that be an Eurofighter?

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

Does flying something like that really scratch your itch to fly an Eurofighter (or another plane) in DCS?

this is probably an age thing.

20 years ago in il2 all I wanted to do was fight.

so I would autopilot and time advance through takeoff and flying to target.

take control for the battle and then autopilot home.

20 years later I spend more time on the start-up, preparation and take off than the combat.

I suppose because combat gets boring once you figure it out.

I got bored of death match around the time of unreal tournament 2.

so I'm not here for air quake, or to quickly blow stuff up.

I'm here to study interesting things.

and DCS is the best study sim on the market.

but a mediocre death match simulator. way to many problems for that.

Having thought about it some more, I think in the future FC should actually be fragmented:

SU-27:

I've said it before and I'll say it again here: I think there's a good argument to be made for bumping the current Su-27S to an Su-27SM. This would introduce a modest ARM, PGM and multi-role capability beyond what we currently have without having to guestimate any advanced and secret systems such as a BARS radar or the like. Of course this assumes that a DCS-level module is not a possibility in the short term.

MiG-29:

Similarly I think there's an argument to be made for bumping the MiG-29S to the MiG-29SM for the same reasons. Obviously the MiG-29 variants should all receive PFM's which we know they will.

Su-25:

I feel the Su-25T offers a good mix of strike & attack capabilities and is well modelled for an FC3 level aircraft so I see no need to change it any further. The baseline Su-25 offers a good modelling of that aircraft so I see no need to take it any further, assuming that a DCS level module is not a possibility.

F-15C:

On the flip side of the coin I see no reason why the current version of the F-15C shouldn't eventually become a DCS module. I wouldn't expect a Golden Eagle or F-15S any time soon but a mid-1990's F-15C should be a DCS module. With the forthcoming F-14 and eventually the F-16C Block 50 we would then have the entire teen series of US fighters modelled to DCS standards which would obviously be immensely popular with the customer base.

A-10:

Since we already have an incredibly detailed A-10C I see no reason for taking the A-10A any further than it's currently modelled, with the exception of a PFM if it doesn't already have one.

Obviously the down side of implementing the above would be that with the exception of the A-10A, the only remaining FC-level aircraft in DCS World would be the Soviet / Russian ones. I can't imagine that going down this road would be popular with those who view FC aircraft as easy mode air quake (I disagree entirely with that viewpoint but that's a different discussion for another time) but if it's the only way that we'll see any red aircraft that have capability parity with the modelled NATO types then so be it, I think it would be a useful and popular thing to do. My dream option would be for every FC3 aircraft (with the possible exception of the A-10A) to become a DCS module, but in the case of red air that's simply not a realistic prospect at the moment.

F-15C:

On the flip side of the coin I see no reason why the current version of the F-15C shouldn't eventually become a DCS module.

1. Not even single mention of a long term plan to do one by ED or 3rd party.

2. I remember reading old poll results on DCS wishlist and almost no one was interested in DCS F-15C, even less than Strike Eagle. Of course it's only forum users which is in minority but full DCS modules are specially directed to them.

3. Look where they go with the FC4...

A-10:

Since we already have an incredibly detailed A-10C I see no reason for taking the A-10A any further than it's currently modelled, with the exception of a PFM if it doesn't already have one.

A-10A has Advanced Flight Model + (AFM+)

Amen to that but I already stopped dreaming.

1. Not even single mention of a long term plan to do one by ED or 3rd party.

Uhm, RAZBAM is already working on an F-15E :huh:

none of them

Uhm, RAZBAM is already working on an F-15E :huh:

It is something really good too, but I was talking about C.

It is something really good too, but I was talking about C.

I don't think anyone wants to make a C if there is an E already, which retains all the capabilities of the C with the addition of A-G. The only difference would be that the C is a single seater, but would that justify all the required work?

Transcendental profound questions:

 

If you don't have the info to do an Eurofighter, will that be an Eurofighter?

 

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

 

Does flying something like that really scratch your itch to fly an Eurofighter (or another plane) in DCS?

You can create a realistic enough interpenetration of a Eurofighter more than likely. What you cannot do is get a full fidelity version.

There is more to an aircraft than shape. You have weapons payload, fuel capacity, flight dynamics, cockpit visibility, speed & acceleration, ect. Are you implying the F-15C and A-10A in FC3 perform exactly the same, with the only notable difference being the external 3D model? :megalol:

Then also consider the A-10C is not a proper replica of the real thing either. A few systems were skimped on (if I recall) due to them being classified. If true, in your eyes does it now perform the same as the FC3 MIG-29S with the only notable difference being the 3D model? Both examples are ludicrous, but it seems to be the stance you have taken.

To answer your question, yes, an FC3 level Eurofighter would certainly scratch the itch. It would perform entirely differently compared to the other FC3 planes in the game bringing new flight dynamics, weapons payload, weapon types and a new cockpit to get used to. :)

so I'm not here for air quake, or to quickly blow stuff up.

I'm here to study interesting things.

That comes down to mission design and your play style. If you're playing "air quake" that is the fault of the mission designer or yourself. In FC3 you can take off from an airfield, refuel, enter the combat area, and then RTB when all is done. That is far from "air quake". The only major difference is you won't be clicking around the cockpit during start up. Otherwise, the mission will be just as realistic.

On the other hand, blowing up Russian T-72s around Las Vegas in an A-10C is about as "air quake" as you can get. The idea of Russians invading the western US and deploying MBTs that far inland is comical.

Then we had paid DLC campaigns such as the following:

The "P-51D: High Stakes" campaign is a single-player, story-driven campaign for DCS: P-51D Mustang. The premise of the campaign is that a powerful businessman and gambler named "Maslov" has employed the pilot-for-hire pilot Vasily Sinitsa with promises of mountains of money.

If you're playing a medium fidelity FC3 level plane as if it was "air quake", you only have yourself to blame.

Having thought about it some more, I think in the future FC should actually be fragmented:

 

SU-27:

I've said it before and I'll say it again here: I think there's a good argument to be made for bumping the current Su-27S to an Su-27SM. This would introduce a modest ARM, PGM and multi-role capability beyond what we currently have without having to guestimate any advanced and secret systems such as a BARS radar or the like. Of course this assumes that a DCS-level module is not a possibility in the short term.

 

MiG-29:

Similarly I think there's an argument to be made for bumping the MiG-29S to the MiG-29SM for the same reasons. Obviously the MiG-29 variants should all receive PFM's which we know they will.

 

Su-25:

I feel the Su-25T offers a good mix of strike & attack capabilities and is well modelled for an FC3 level aircraft so I see no need to change it any further. The baseline Su-25 offers a good modelling of that aircraft so I see no need to take it any further, assuming that a DCS level module is not a possibility.

 

F-15C:

On the flip side of the coin I see no reason why the current version of the F-15C shouldn't eventually become a DCS module. I wouldn't expect a Golden Eagle or F-15S any time soon but a mid-1990's F-15C should be a DCS module. With the forthcoming F-14 and eventually the F-16C Block 50 we would then have the entire teen series of US fighters modelled to DCS standards which would obviously be immensely popular with the customer base.

 

A-10:

Since we already have an incredibly detailed A-10C I see no reason for taking the A-10A any further than it's currently modelled, with the exception of a PFM if it doesn't already have one.

 

Agreed. I'd be interested in further variations of the FC3 aircraft. An Su-27SM2, Su-25SM, F-15C with AIM-9X capability and the more modern radar, and a modern MIG-29 variant.

If entirely new aircraft are too difficult to invest in, I'd still be willing to pay for further variations of the current aircraft. Ideally I'd be interested in those as well as all new FC3 planes, like a Hornet, Super Hornet, F-16, ect.

Full fidelity modules of lame duck, off variant aircraft are of little interest to me.

There is more to an aircraft than shape. You have weapons payload, fuel capacity, flight dynamics, cockpit visibility, speed & acceleration, ect. Are you implying the F-15C and A-10A in FC3 perform exactly the same, with the only notable difference being the external 3D model? :megalol:

 

Then also consider the A-10C is not a proper replica of the real thing either. A few systems were skimped on (if I recall) due to them being classified. If true, in your eyes does it now perform the same as the FC3 MIG-29S with the only notable difference being the 3D model? Both examples are ludicrous, but it seems to be the stance you have taken.

Dude... what are you smoking?

To answer your question, yes, an FC3 level Eurofighter would certainly scratch the itch. It would perform entirely differently compared to the other FC3 planes in the game bringing new flight dynamics, weapons payload, weapon types and a new cockpit to get used to. :)

Anything different from the current FC3 ones would perform different from the current FC3 ones. Again, what are you smoking, I didn't understand anything you said.

PeaceSells, there is no reason to resort to insults because you cannot formulate a counter argument and/or dislike someone else's opinion. You made some fairly silly statements and asked a question to which I responded. :)

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

This is your argument/question. An argument you made, not myself. Fairly silly is it not?

Even if all the information is classified on a Eurofighter, you can likely make a realistic enough interpretation of it. Much like the F-15C in FC3. There is a lot more that differentiates the FC3 aircraft from one another aside from the 3D models.

Likewise, the A-10C module is not a 100% recreation systems wise of the real thing. By your logic, that would not qualify as an "A-10C". That your logic, not mine.

Anything different from the current FC3 ones would perform different from the current FC3 ones.

So now you are agreeing with me? What line of thought do you agree with, the above quote or the below quote? Because you've backpedaled and changed your entire argument. They're entirely contradictory:

If you don't have the info to do an Eurofighter, will that be an Eurofighter?

Is the FC3 F-15C not a F-15C because it is not a full fidelity flight sim? Is the Su-25T not an Su-25T because the RWR was classified and therefore functions the same as the Su-25A? You imply that if some information is classified or the module is not of full fidelity the only difference between the two are the 3D models:

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

... and then ask:

Does flying something like that really scratch your itch to fly an Eurofighter (or another plane) in DCS?

To which I say of course it does! Even if every radio setting or radar mode is not fully modeled, it will certainly behave entirely different from the F-15C or A-10A. To say otherwise would be idiotic. So of course it will scratch that itch. It will perform very much like a Eurofighter, although with simplified avionics.

Again, what are you smoking...

You might want to re-read what you had wrote, because it made little sense. :D

@Flogger23m:

You can't be serious.

I say "Using the 3d model of an aircraft doesn't make it be that aircraft" and from that you conclude that I said "if the module is not of full fidelity the only difference between the two are the 3D models". Don't you think you're stretching my words to your convenience?

Is the FC3 F-15C not a F-15C because it is not a full fidelity flight sim?

Yes, you are finally seeing it.

@Flogger23m:

 

You can't be serious.

 

I say "Using the 3d model of an aircraft doesn't make it be that aircraft" and from that you conclude that I said "if the module is not of full fidelity the only difference between the two are the 3D models". Don't you think you're stretching my words to your convenience?

 

Then why don't you clarify what you had wrote here:

If you don't have the info to do an Eurofighter, will that be an Eurofighter?

 

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

What exactly are you trying to say? You seem to be contradicting yourself, which you did yet again:

Yes, you are finally seeing it.

So what is it?

Perhaps before accusing other members of doing drugs you should proof read what you wrote. Because it makes little sense, if any sense.

Transcendental profound questions:

 

If you don't have the info to do an Eurofighter, will that be an Eurofighter?

 

Using the 3d model of an aircraft makes it be that aircraft?

 

Does flying something like that really scratch your itch to fly an Eurofighter (or another plane) in DCS?

+1

Amen to that but I already stopped dreaming.

1. Not even single mention of a long term plan to do one by ED or 3rd party.

2. I remember reading old poll results on DCS wishlist and almost no one was interested in DCS F-15C, even less than Strike Eagle. Of course it's only forum users which is in minority but full DCS modules are specially directed to them.

3. Look where they go with the FC4...

 

 

 

 

A-10A has Advanced Flight Model + (AFM+)

Actually when Belsimtek built the PFM for the F-15C, they mentioned a possibility of it being considered for becoming a full fidelity module. Several aspects of the F-18 systems would apply directly to the Eagle. The Hornets radar was largely built upon the Strike Eagle's which was built upon the C eagle. The eagle (we'd be likely to get) has a few more air-to-air options, but none of the ground stuff (enabled). The link-16/MIDS datalink would also be potentially applicable to the Eagle. The Eagle already has its PFM, and the animations for all knobs and switches are already in place. They claim that the engine start-up procedure is fully modeled internally, it just happens to be auto-start only. So avionics is really the only thing in the way, which could largely be built from what is learned about the Hornet.

As you may have noticed most of ED's focus has been on air to ground craft or at best multi-role with no fully modeled Air Superiority fighters. I wouldn't personally care for another module that does more on the ground than it does in the air. So I feel kinda meh about the F-16 since the F-18C covers all its bases while being able to land on a boat. Until CA is fully fleshed out (as well as being usable in a heavily populated server), AG is nothing more to me than knowing the limitations of the AI. Every air engagement I've lost there is something learned about either the jets, weapons, or the other guy, and is usually something they'll only get away with once. I or they adapt or die.

The only issue is that this would not be easy to get information wise. The Typhoon would be highly classified at its current state and getting a contract to put it into DCS even if it is at a FC3 level position would be hard. It wouldn't be a simulation, but an "emulation." :)

 

Well said on the other parts though, nailed the coffin.

There's Enough Information to make a Representation in the manner of Standard Systems Modelling. Even if Aerodynamics Data is limited, they can use the 3d Shape and their new WindTunnel Software Suite that they are using for other Modules.

Don't Comment on how hard contracts would be to get, you have no experience there, and it's an assumption.

That being said, such debate is pointless.

As it was announced it would be a FC3 Version of Existing DCS Modules.

What exactly are you trying to say?

I said a 3d model doesn't make an aircraft, I didn't say all non-fidelity modules are the same, they are very different among each other. Still the F-15C is not an F-15C and the A-10A is not an A-10A. And they aren't the same between each other, that was you. Stop ingesting hallucinogenic substances.

Until CA is fully fleshed out (as well as being usable in a heavily populated server), AG is nothing more to me than knowing the limitations of the AI. Every air engagement I've lost there is something learned about either the jets, weapons, or the other guy, and is usually something they'll only get away with once. I or they adapt or die.

So true.

There's Enough Information to make a Representation in the manner of Standard Systems Modelling. Even if Aerodynamics Data is limited, they can use the 3d Shape and their new WindTunnel Software Suite that they are using for other Modules.

Exactly. These aircraft wouldn't be an option for a full study sim module but would work fine for FC. If ED or the current 3rd party line up is uninterested, perhaps another 3rd party developer will come aboard and specialize in these modules. No reason you can't please a different audience, just like how WWII is being integrated into DCS. :)

I said a 3d model doesn't make an aircraft...

Okay, but what was the point of saying that?

Still the F-15C is not an F-15C and the A-10A is not an A-10A.

And why is that? You're contradicting yourself yet again in the same post.

And they aren't the same between each other, that was you.

What are you even trying to say?

Stop ingesting hallucinogenic substances.

For someone who hurls a lot of drug related insults to other members, you seem to be unable to make any relevant points. At this point I'm just going to assume your intention of your initial post was just to add some insults to others who may not agree with your opinion. At least make it coherent next time. :thumbup:

Ok then.

Amen to that but I already stopped dreaming.

1. Not even single mention of a long term plan to do one by ED or 3rd party.

2. I remember reading old poll results on DCS wishlist and almost no one was interested in DCS F-15C, even less than Strike Eagle. Of course it's only forum users which is in minority but full DCS modules are specially directed to them.

You aren't the only one, and it's not just on the forums. This was posted on the FB group a while ago. I wasn't as surprised by the 2 top results as i wa surprised by the lack of 15 anywhere near the top (or almost at all). The question of this poll was (i think) "if you could fly only one plane in DCS, which would it be?"

The poll I mentioned:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=51462

Isn't the 15 most flown aircraft in DCS? ED already has statistics. And every time I read "The F-15 has often been labeled as the greatest U.S. fighter aircraft from the 1970s until the early 21st century" I don't get why.

As a new pilot I can tell you the full modules are way too overwhelming!!! I bought FC3 and appreciate being able to learn by osmosis a bit. Maybe you all are prodigies or I’m backwards, but I can hardly spot planes before I’m toast. Just flying and landing is a challenge to new players and flaming cliffs will attract more players due to the value and fun factor of being able to start a jet and fly without a 30 minute tutorial. That said, I don’t think FC3/4 needs 10 aircraft. 2 or 3 examples of certain generations would work. It would be nice to have a more simple version of gen three jets like mig 21 , F4 phantom, etc. maybe a ww2 simple plane too. Appeals to various interests. On phone so forgive spelling mistakes etc.