Jump to content

Feelers - RAZBAM DCS: IA 58 Pucará


Feelers - RAZBAM DCS: IA 58 Pucará  

280 members have voted

  1. 1. Feelers - RAZBAM DCS: IA 58 Pucará

    • Yes, I would (please reply to this thread to explain why)
      106
    • No, I wouldn't (please reply to this thread to explain why)
      174


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 253
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Regarding the Falklands and the Pucara. Did any of them actually participate other than as static ground targets for Spec Ops?

 

I have seen nothing about them ever being in action in the entire campaign. Am I mistaken?

According the Wikipedia they did saw some action.

Link to post
Share on other sites
According the Wikipedia they did saw some action.

 

"Some action" is a little understated. They actually saw quite a lot of action as close air support aircraft and helicopter hunters.

Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Needs supporting environment/modules/addons/DLC to make it a really compelling buy for me. I buy every module though, due to rate of release, this question was about if it would be my choice. Quoted someone who explains my feelings exactly .

I voted no, but it's a soft "no". :)

 

I like the idea of the Pucara and the unique features it brings to DCS. It's more a matter of what would come with it.

 

If you created a Falklands map or some other ideal/realistic theater with supporting units for a complete scenario - then I'm all for it and would definitely buy it.

 

But in the absence of those supporting features, it has much less appeal.

 

I think that upcoming modules should be selected to "fit" into the existing DCS theaters - maximizing their utility and potential fun.

 

The AV-8B is a great example, it fits in perfectly to the Black Sea, NTTR, and Strait of Hormuz. There are so many options for campaigns and a wide variety of scenarios (even more so if a LHD carrier is created at some point).

 

My 2 cents,

 

-Nick

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to post
Share on other sites

On balance I'd have to vote no. We have plenty of choice for a light attack aircraft with current and announced modules. Personally I'd rather see more cold war era aircraft, or for prop planes more WW2 aircraft. If we're considering a dual-prop, how about the legendary Mosquito?

System Spec: Cooler Master Cosmos C700P Black Edition case. | AMD 5950X CPU | MSI RTX-3090 GPU | 32GB HyperX Predator PC4000 RAM | | TM Warthog stick & throttle | TrackIR 5 | Samsung 980 Pro NVMe 4 SSD 1TB (boot) | Samsung 870 QVO SSD 4TB (games) | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

 

Personal wish list: DCS: Su-27SM & DCS: Avro Vulcan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
How do you know it was an outstanding gtround attack aircraft? If you need the strength of 2 men to pull it out of a dive, it doesn't suggest for a moment it is suited to it's role to me!

 

What exactly do you base your opinion on?

 

Two men to pull it out of a dive? Sorry, you are very (but very very) missinformed. Unless I flew another type of Pucara.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Vote is no, a SOLID NO for a couple of reasons:

 

We already have many options for light ground attack aircraft, we don't need to devote valuable resources to making another.

 

I'm sure it's a cool and interesting aircraft but come on Razbam grow some Cojones and take up a more challenging newer aircraft. I respect you guys I really do, trust me it's not because I "like you," but because you all are not afraid or intimated by projects other's will leave behind because it seems too difficult to simulate in DCS or it might take too much time.

 

Save those projects for another developer, I know RAZBAM does a mighty fine job with their projects and constantly delivers on time; look at their team and the M-2000C! So once again my answer is NO, use those VALUABLE QUALITY RESOURCES and make a "newer" aircraft, not enough developers are making them. You guys will relentlessly deliver a quality product as always, so why not do it with a more modern jet, be it a fighter, ground, support... attacker? Sure time will be a factor, but imagine all the HYPE! Case and point LN''s F-14A&B or ED''S FA-18 to name a couple.

 

I want RAZBAM to make a more up to date jet because I know they will do it right and continue to support it like the M-2KC. Rather then let it dwindle off and seem dead like some other products from specific developers and/or ED (trying not to point anyone out, it's not classy lol)......................


Edited by tkid
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it was a choice of either Pucara of some other, modern, aircraft. The way I see it, RAZBAM was considering to hire some guy(s) to make the Pucara, not something else. So it was a choice of either Pucara or nothing.

 

We chose nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense but even though RAZBAM hired a company to make an exciting but unconfirmed MIG- 23 at first, but now since it's been rolled back..

I would rather them wait a little bit for the team to evaluate the community on what aircraft to build then spend close to a year developing an aircraft that won't be used a lot by like the Pucara when they could be making progress on an aircraft that will be used a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people de-vaule the intricacy in developing and properly flying a realistic turbo prop simulation. Having flown turboprops of all kinds IRL i do agree that the tucano should have priority but I would of liked to see more yes votes on this personally. Just my two cents

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]1000 miles of road will take you around town, a 1000 feet of runway can take you around the world...unless your in a Huey, you can go anywhere with no runway in a Huey!

 

multiplayer name ''DustOff=3=6''

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it was a choice of either Pucara of some other, modern, aircraft. The way I see it, RAZBAM was considering to hire some guy(s) to make the Pucara, not something else. So it was a choice of either Pucara or nothing.

 

We chose nothing.

 

In fact, he chose to do a Mirage III CJ....:smilewink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

came to late to vote. But Hell yes. Its a turbo prop, COIN, its wings were designed by Kurt Tank Himself, incredible felxibility and performance, iconic Malvinas plane, two seater. what is there not to like?

 

Oh yeah the no map.. bullshit, if its up to the maps available you should not fly the A10 in combat, it was never deployed to the caucasus AND there was no war on Hormuz till today.... so chill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if blowing them up on the runway with Lewes bombs is an option :megalol:

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...