Jump to content

Would you want ANY heavy aircraft modules for DCS?


Wing

Would you want ANY heavy aircraft modules for DCS?  

595 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you want ANY heavy aircraft modules for DCS?



Recommended Posts

Could be anything, from a B-58 Hustler, C-130, KC-135, B-52 or a B-1. This is just to get a feel if anyone would be open to purchasing ANY sort of heavy multicrew module.

 

 

The other thread was confused with just a B52. This is asking on a broad scale, about the heavy aircraft idea in general for DCS. Keep in mind, a new developer team could step up and take the plate with this idea... it doesnt necessary need to take time away from ED development resources.


Edited by Wing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heavy aircraft in general are quite possible, imo. Personally, for reasons I already explained, I think the really ''crew intensive'' aircraft are a poor choice, but there are plenty of larger 1-2 man aircraft that wouldn't have some of those issues (F-111 or C-130 for example).

 

For the record I disagree with those saying the size of the maps is a factor (it isn't, as was mentioned these aircraft do not necessarily HAVE to roam thousands of miles per sortie).

 

Cargo aircraft also have a place in supporting logistics for airbases and other similar activities currently done by utility helos we have now.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heavy aircraft in general are quite possible, imo. Personally, for reasons I already explained, I think the really ''crew intensive'' aircraft are a poor choice, but there are plenty of larger 1-2 man aircraft that wouldn't have some of those issues (F-111 or C-130 for example).

 

For the record I disagree with those saying the size of the maps is a factor (it isn't, as was mentioned these aircraft do not necessarily HAVE to roam thousands of miles per sortie).

 

 

Appreciate you being in agreement with that, for whatever reason it seems like a trend around here that people believe USAF bomber aircraft are always flying strategic long range flights, and not low altitude short duration tactical range flights aswell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Range can easily be converted into loiter time. Those B-1s previously mentioned performing CAS (I saw this before, as well) were likely on station for hours before being called. They definitely did not fly in from Europe or the continental US to perform a single strike.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion (as I also said in all of the other posts about this subject):

 

AI heavies: yes

Full fidelity heavies: I wouldn't buy

 

Except maybe for an AC-130 (but I'm not sure if these "light" transports qualifies as "heavy")


Edited by sirrah
English translation error :)

System specs:

 

i7-8700K @stock speed - GTX 1080TI @ stock speed - AsRock Extreme4 Z370 - 32GB DDR4 @3GHz- 500GB SSD - 2TB nvme - 650W PSU

HP Reverb G1 v2 - Saitek Pro pedals - TM Warthog HOTAS - TM F/A-18 Grip - TM Cougar HOTAS (NN-Dan mod) & (throttle standalone mod) - VIRPIL VPC Rotor TCS Plus with ALPHA-L grip - Pointctrl & aux banks <-- must have for VR users!! - Andre's SimShaker Jetpad - Fully adjustable DIY playseat - VA+VAICOM

 

~ That nuke might not have been the best of ideas, Sir... the enemy is furious ~ GUMMBAH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A full fidelity tactical airlifter, sure, especially one with some more unique systems like night flying aids or even TFR . As long as it's something that's used more like an oversized helicopter than an airliner.

 

If one day we can get much more dynamic battlegrounds where loiter time for anything but AFAC is actually useful, then I'll be more interested in CAS bomb trucks.

Most Wanted: the angry Naval Lynx | Seafire | Buccaneer | Hawker Hunter | Hawker Tempest/Sea Fury | Su-17/22 | rough strip rearming / construction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too bad

 

First of all, it would attract more people, who love airliners but still miss a military simulator. This means additional income, so why not.

Although would there be enough of these people? Don't know.

I wouldn't mind C2 for the thrill of traps.

C-130 would be somewhat interesting if there was a concept of airborne assault (paratroopers, equipment, vehicle drops).

AC-130 surely would be attractive to some.

 

I guess there is nothing that stops any 3rd party from investing and seeing this through ...

 

So, yes.

Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB ::  MSI RTX 4080  Gaming X Trio  :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I would like to see a TU-22M....oh that would be so much fun :joystick:

Modules: KA-50, A-10C, FC3, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, CA, MIG-21bis, FW-190D9, Bf-109K4, F-86F, MIG-15bis, M-2000C, SA342 Gazelle, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, F-14, C-101, FW-190A8, F-16C, F-5E, JF-17, SC, Mi-24P Hind, AH-64D Apache, Mirage F1

System: Win 11 Pro 64bit, Ryzen 3800X, 32gb RAM DDR4-3200, PowerColor Radeon RX 6900XT Red Devil ,1 x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe, 2 x Samsung SSD 2TB + 1TB SATA, MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - VIRPIL T-50CM and VIRPIL MongoosT-50 Throttle - HP Reverg G2, using only the latest Open Beta, DCS settings

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely yes. There are many interesting 'larger' aircraft that could be very useful in DCS. I'd love a transport myself as well, provided that DCS would be enabled to make it useful in a manner beyond a scripted message saying 'well done', really. Perhaps something with a multi-use capability like the 'gunships' (AC-130, or maybe AC-119) would be beneficial, too.

Some actual bomber craft would also be mighty interesting. Quite frankly, so far I've had very little interest in DCS:WW2 and one of the prime reasons is its lack of bomber planes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would, I agree with Zhukov in that we should probably stick to smaller, less multi-crew intensive platforms at least tasks where they're really necessary. Best candidates are probably larger tactical attack aircraft like the F-111, maybe early gen jet bombers that aren't too multicrew intensive (largest I'd go for is the Avro Vulcan) and then maybe tactical airlift aircraft.

 

Just to get the ball rolling

 

  • General Dynamics F-111
  • English Electric Canberra B(I).6
  • Ilyushin Il-28
  • Avro Vulcan B.2
  • Lockheed C-130H
  • Aeritalia G.222 /C-27A


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

despite saying yes for b-52, im gonna have to say no to heavies for the reasons i explained in my post for that poll.

regarding some of the suggestions above, im not sure id include the c130 as a heavy, certainly not the f-111.

c-130 or casa or some of the other light cargo aircraft could be a lot of fun- STOL from unimproved runways, resupply/ air drop missions

 

tactical aircraft are a lot more suited to dcs than strategic ones

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welp fellas, those of you that are heavy aircraft fans, I tried, I really did. Hopefully this poll will help show that there is true interest. Going to post this thread link into the official Discord as well, in hope it catches a developers attention.

 

 

If this never happens, its the effort that counts. Hopefully sometime in the next 30 years, we will eventually get a heavy aircraft study sim set inside the DCS environment.

 

 

 

Thanks to all that participated with these discussions on this topic. Its been a pleasure the last couple days!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would love a C-130, or maybe a C-2 for carrier ops. Ideally we’d also get more troop deployment mechanics like paradrops, vehicle drops etc.

 

There is something that for me would one-up both of these though: the V-22.

You get a decent cargo capacity, VTOL for troop deployment and naval ops, and all at a decent cruise speed. Its newness could cause issues though.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These sorts of polls tend to be a bit vague. Nearly everyone will want new content, sure. But not everyone will want new content at the expense of something else. So, if a new 3rd-party dev comes along and develops a heavy bomber... great! But if ED has to do it at the expense of, say, their new map or current work on the Mi-24... no thanks!

 

Don't get me wrong, I like bombers. My unit used to run bombers in a different sim before we switched to DCS. But we also need to look at the bigger picture here. Yes, there definitely is a role for non-fighters. Especially those which add to the current "ecosystem". That's why any flyable C2, E2 or SH60 would be better. They are interesting in their own right and would appeal to the non-fighter-pilots, but they add to the environment of the F/A-18 pilots and the upcoming super-carrier module. Thus, their mere presence promotes both the F/A-18 and the Super-Carrier modules. They also don't need multi-crew to be functional. Given the current state of multicrew in other modules, it is clearly a very non-trivial thing to develop.

 

A flyable heavy on the other hand, would be flying in isolation and without the challenge of carrier landings, integration with the existing fleet, and so on. And it is not just the aircraft itself, but also the assets and game mechanics to support it.

 

I recall when one of the flight combat games added a transport aircraft. The problem was that there was no integration of its abilities into the game mechanics (mission objectives, scores, etc.). As was pointed out, you could get the same score sitting in a fighter with your engine off than you could navigating that transport through a combat zone, surviving AAA and enemy fighters and limping back with a dead engine. Needless to say, there was little incentive to keep flying it, once the initial novelty wore off. It is rarely seen on those servers these days.

 

So, if there is a call for developing some light/medium aircraft with different roles... yes please. But I think developing a multicrewable heavy aircraft would be a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It already takes a considerable amount of time to create a module for single and two seat planes.

 

Most heavies have more than 2 crew members and the amount of systems that also go by is too many. Then there is the number of engines.

 

 

There is also a lot of pending fast planes on the way and that will take 2-3 years. Those heavies might even take more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather see ED and 3rd party Devs finish the modules which are currently underway than spend the resources to do this type of aircraft. I think they’d be expensive to do and not very popular.

i9-13900K @ 6.2GHz oc | ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO | 64GB DDR5 5600MHz | iCUE H150i Liquid CPU Cooler | 24GB GeForce RTX 4090 | Windows 11 Home | 2TB Samsung 980 PRO NVMe | Corsair RM1000x | LG 48GQ900-B 4K OLED Monitor | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has been mentioned in another topic somewhere, but for me, the E-2D would be a great addition for MP (SP functionalities would be a different beast there if you cant talk to folks).

 

I would love to take off from the carrier ahead of most others, get to altitude, set my autopilot and then jump into the back to do AWACS coms, maybe mission commander role or whatever, and after the other players are home get back to the boat.

 

 

Maybe some day, but sadly i guess it would be a toooo specialised airframe to generate much income.

 

RR

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

"There's nothing to be gained by second guessing yourself.

You can't remake the past, so look ahead... or risk being left behind."

 

Noli Timere Messorem

"No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always been there first, and is waiting for it."

Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah some heavies would be cool, especially the C-5 which I flew on. And bombers would be fun too. "Castling" with JDAMS and gliding them in from outside the target area. BOOM!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

It's perfectly ordinary banter Squiffy, "Bally Jerry, pranged his kite, right in the 'how's your father.'" - Monty Python, RAF Banter Sketch.

Squiffy, a. slang. 1. Intoxicated; drunk. 2. Askew, skew-whiff. - OED

 

"Put that sucker in a 4G turn and keep it there!!" - Maj. Gen. "Boots" Blesse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C-130 nice...

But I remember years and years ago a "game" of a B-17 in wich you could

act as a bomber, behind the Norden bombsight, while the plane was being piloted by

ai. Imagine that in DCS....

Mainboard: ASUS Maximus X Hero Intel Z 370

CPU: Intel Core i7-8086K @ 4.0 GHz

Memory: 32GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4-3000

Graphics Card: ASUS NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB

Monitor ASUS PA 329 32" @ 4K

1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 256 GB

1 SSD Samsung 860 PRO 4 TB

Windows 10 - 64 V. 2004

CH Pro combatstick, throttle and pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather see ED and 3rd party Devs finish the modules which are currently underway than spend the resources to do this type of aircraft. I think they’d be expensive to do and not very popular.

 

It's 4 to 1 in favor of heavies atm. While the forum is a small population, polls become statistically significant after a few dozen people. I'd say safely there is substantial interest in larger aircraft, though it seems a lot of people share my concerns about forays into ultra large and/or crew intensive aircraft.

 

Using the other poll as reference as it has nearly the same number of participants (probably most of the same people), the notion of heavies is well received in general, while a majority are opposed to the B-52 specifically.


Edited by zhukov032186

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...