Jump to content

Multicrew warbird for training


PETER SHIFTY
 Share

Recommended Posts

how is then, possible make multicrew warbird T6 Texan in future? TF-51 isnt multi crew, one training warbird, would be welcome, and the DCS is missing.  Haven't you considered it? It is a way to lure young virtual pilots who find DCS difficult. 

To expand our range, I would then have to buy 2x modules even for my children:)))

 

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

+1...

 

I think this is an excellent idea, but since the TF51 is already in the SIM, wouldn't it be easier if ED just had the rear seat modeled?

 

Modeling the rear seat in the trainer could really help draw more people in, or at least try it out with a more experienced pilot as all they would have to do is download DCS for free. I always thought it was a missed opportunity that the rear seat in the Mustang trainer wasn't modeled.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2021 at 7:09 AM, PETER SHIFTY said:

how is then, possible make multicrew warbird T6 Texan in future? TF-51 isnt multi crew, one training warbird, would be welcome, and the DCS is missing.  Haven't you considered it? It is a way to lure young virtual pilots who find DCS difficult. 

To expand our range, I would then have to buy 2x modules even for my children:)))

 

Peter

why not make the TF-51 multi-crew though an AT-6 would be nice 


Edited by upyr1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with having “trainer” aircraft in DCS is that the reasons that these are necessary in the real world, safety, cost etc aren’t present in a game. You’re free to jump into the cockpit of a combat aircraft and kill yourself and wreck it as much as you want. So I don’t think the trainer aircraft probably sell very well. The TP-51 is only in the game as a free aircraft. 

  • Like 1

Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K 4.7GHz | Corsair Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA RTX 2080 Ti XC | 240gb Intel 520 Series MLC SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | LG 32UD99-W UHD Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

So I don’t think

Setting aside the rare accuracy of this statement, what you “think” is irrelevant.

Do you have any actual numbers to support your random assumption? Any sales figures for the modules we already have that do exactly this?

 

The “problem” you're stating is not an actual problem — it's just your personal preference. Others prefer realism, and community, and interaction with other players, and being instructed rather than fumbling around blindly with all the ill effects this entails.

  • Like 3

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, upyr1 said:

why not make the TF-51 multi-crew though an AT-6 would be nice 

 

 

2 hours ago, Tippis said:

Setting aside the rare accuracy of this statement, what you “think” is irrelevant.

Do you have any actual numbers to support your random assumption? Any sales figures for the modules we already have that do exactly this?

 

The “problem” you're stating is not an actual problem — it's just your personal preference. Others prefer realism, and community, and interaction with other players, and being instructed rather than fumbling around blindly with all the ill effects this entails.

I agree, groups of serious people have taken the time to form squadrons, set up training missions, historical missions and so on. Having the rear seat in the TF-51D modeled would only help groups like that get more out of the SIM in their effort to add realism. It could also be used to help recruit new people into both DCS World, and or a squadron.

 

In another recent thread, someone stated that the TF-51D had little purpose in the SIM and that ED would have to throw everyone a free Hellcat to jump start DCS WWII. But I disagree, the Mustang trainer is beautifully modeled and is an excellent introduction to the WWII part of the SIM. I do agree though, in order for the Mustang trainer to fulfill its role more completely as a trainer like the SU-25T does on the jet side of things, ED should really consider modeling rear controls and adding multi-crew to the Mustang.

 

I just opened DCS World for the first time in over 2 months, where I did a low level flight in the Mustang trainer over Normandy just to check out the latest map update. No stutters at tree-top level flying 350+ MPH. Good job Ugra!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think the lack of real world-like training is the obstacle to bringing new players to DCS. It’s more a matter of the inherent complexity and need for additional controllers & peripherals that keeps this a niche game. Novice players are more attracted to making stuff go boom than patiently getting instruction. FC3 and the upcoming Modern Air Combat are a more likely path to full fidelity DCS modules. 

  • Like 1

Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K 4.7GHz | Corsair Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA RTX 2080 Ti XC | 240gb Intel 520 Series MLC SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | LG 32UD99-W UHD Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SharpeXB said:

I don’t think the lack of real world-like training is the obstacle to bringing new players to DCS.

No-one said it was.

 

Just now, SharpeXB said:

Novice players are more attracted to making stuff go boom than patiently getting instruction.

And you know this, how, exactly? Your posting history only ever shows one consistent theme: that you are wholly unfamiliar with the new player experience and will argue against anything and everything that would help them. So what imaginary well are you drawing this fantastical assumption from?

  • Like 2

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish they would model it just so I could take friends and family screaming through the mountains in the backseat while in VR on our second PC haha. I guess I could do that now if I bought a 3rd copy of the Tomcat (I buy 2 of each module... one for me and one for my son) but I'm just not gonna buy it 3 times.

  • Like 2

ASUS ROG G701VI-XS72K 17.3" - i7 7820HK - GTX 1080 8GB - 32 GB 2666mhz - 512 GB SSD - Win10 Pro 64-Bit - T̶r̶a̶c̶k̶I̶R̶5̶ - Samsung Odyssey HMD!! (Amazing!!) - X56 Rhino HOTAS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can’t you just use the Yak?

  • Like 1

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Can’t you just use the Yak?

It's far too trivial to operate and fly (and especially land) to really teach you anything about the warbird experience.

 

The only things that would translate is that you hear a constant droning from the propeller, and that you need to prime your fuel system. In all other aspects, you might as well use the Albatros or Aviojet — at least those have some quirks in their flight dynamics that you need to manage, and you also actually have to manage your engine.

  • Like 2

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Tippis said:

Setting aside the rare accuracy of this statement, what you “think” is irrelevant.

Do you have any actual numbers to support your random assumption? Any sales figures for the modules we already have that do exactly this?

 

The “problem” you're stating is not an actual problem — it's just your personal preference. Others prefer realism, and community, and interaction with other players, and being instructed rather than fumbling around blindly with all the ill effects this entails.

Your assumption that “others in the community prefer instructions and interaction “  is also an irrelevant assumption and personal preference. If we’re going that route keep your thoughts to yourself.

or you could just be nice for once….

  • Thanks 1

I9 (5Ghz turbo)2080ti 64Gb 3200 ram. 3 drives. A sata 2tb storage and 2 M.2 drives. 1 is 1tb, 1 is 500gb.

Valve Index, Virpil t50 cm2 stick, t50 base and v3 throttle w mini stick. MFG crosswind pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t think the lack of real world-like training is the obstacle to bringing new players to DCS. It’s more a matter of the inherent complexity and need for additional controllers & peripherals that keeps this a niche game. Novice players are more attracted to making stuff go boom than patiently getting instruction. FC3 and the upcoming Modern Air Combat are a more likely path to full fidelity DCS modules. 

No one said the current lack of rear controls in the Mustang trainer is THE obstacle stopping new players from joining. It is simply a relevant feature that has not been implemented, and like the other available trainers it would be nice to have this feature added to a tail dragger.

 

This thread is about having a multi-crew war bird for training. The OP made a great suggestion to have the AT-6 added. While it would be great to see a full fidelity version come to DCS, a quicker route to a WWII trainer would be the TF-51D already in the game. And what makes the Mustang trainer relevant to this discussion is that it is the free module that comes with the game, so it is in a unique position to help make DCS World more accessible to people not already in. Unlike the Mustang, if a full fidelity version of the AT-6 was added, you would likely have to purchase the module first to get access to the training features.

 

And if we look at the two free planes, the one module lets new and old players alike experience some of the most interesting capabilities of DCS World from a jet aircraft perspective. The other gives the new player a taste of what DCS WWII has to offer. The free jet offers a pretty complete experience, while the free war bird is only half there in a way. Adding this feature would only be completing the actual plane being modeled, but more than that, the feature would actually be useful especially for groups/squadrons interested, and who may also be in the best position to attract new players.

 

9 minutes ago, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

Your assumption that “others in the community prefer instructions and interaction “  is also an irrelevant assumption and personal preference. If we’re going that route keep your thoughts to yourself.

or you could just be nice for once….

Not sure where this is coming from, but @Tippis wasn't trying to suggest anything negative toward the OP's request. While you could say that every comment ever made on this entire forum is based on personal opinion/preference, @SharpeXB is using his opinion to suggest the discussion started in this thread is irrelevant, unimportant, or not needed.

 

Its one thing to object to a suggestion/comment with valid reason, but what valid point is SharpeXB adding to this discussion when other training aircraft already exist in the game. Training aircraft don't sell well? The Mustang trainer is free, and is used as a tool to introduce new people to DCS World. Adding to that capability could only be a good thing, and I understood that Tippis was simply pointing that out.

 

Imagine your running an active squadron, and you want to organize a "welcome to DCS World" event. Having the rear seat in the free Mustang modeled would give you the opportunity to take anyone joining your Discord for a spin. You could use it to practice system failures as part of your squadrons pilot training. Or you could use @LithiumR suggestion to let close family and friends experience DCS.

 

Regardless of why someone might see value in it, I think the OP's suggestion is excellent and I would love to see the AT-6 added. The Mustang trainer was a real plane and asking to have it modeled correctly isn't asking anything more than what is being asked of every other module in the SIM.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

Your assumption that “others in the community prefer instructions and interaction “  is also an irrelevant assumption and personal preference.

It's not an assumption, nor is it irrelevant.

It's not an assumption because this very thread shows that such preferences exist.

It is not irrelevant because it's the very heart of the topic: does a market exist for the proposed kind of module?

 

The relevant non-assumption is also not a personal preference. It's just a statement of fact, again as the thread itself demonstrates. The preference for realism, community and interaction is indeed a preference but again, that preference is exactly what creates the market interest. As such, it's quite worth bringing up and discussing, whereas preferences to the contrary don't really ad much of value. It matters how many would buy a product; it much pretty much none at all how many wouldn't.

 

And no, I'm not going to keep my thoughts to myself. That would rather defeat the point of all of us being here to begin with. However, I'm not going to conflate that with some imaginary problems, nor am I going to make faulty generalisations from my preferences. In fact, I'm not going to use my personal preference as an argument for (or against) anything beyond the regular ‘+1’ answer here and there. So sorry, you don't get to backseat-moderate this one — you're simply going to have to live with how I rip apart weak attempts at argumentations.

 

1 hour ago, Mr. Big.Biggs said:

or you could just be nice for once….

Nah. Especially not when it comes to his standard procedure of trying to shut down any and all discussion about features that would not benefit him for spurious and nonsensical reasons.

 


Edited by Tippis
  • Like 2

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

While it would be great to see a full fidelity version come to DCS, a quicker route to a WWII trainer would be the TF-51D already in the game. And what makes the Mustang trainer relevant to this discussion is that it is the free module that comes with the game, so it is in a unique position to help make DCS World more accessible to people not already in.

I agree if the game were to include a two-seat WWII trainer, this might be the easiest route to one. And the fact that it’s a free aircraft obviously benefits newcomers. However I would bet that the two-seat functionality in DCS goes largely unused. The other problem with utilizing the TF-51 is that it’s an ED product and they would have to devote resources towards developing that feature. It would be fun but I don’t think it would help bring in new players very much.

11 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

You could use it to practice system failures as part of your squadrons pilot training.

New players aren’t really going to be interested in system failures. 

  • Like 1

Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K 4.7GHz | Corsair Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA RTX 2080 Ti XC | 240gb Intel 520 Series MLC SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | LG 32UD99-W UHD Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

However I would bet that the two-seat functionality in DCS goes largely unused.

What do you base this assumption on?

Have you been paying attention to the hubub surrounding, say, the UH-1, the Mi-28, the F-14, and the AH-64? Your bet doesn't jive well with how some of the most anticipated, celebrated, and talked-about things added to the game in the last year have been exactly that supposedly “largely unused” feature. 😄 

 

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

It would be fun but I don’t think it would help bring in new players very much.

So? Is anyone suggesting that it would? Also, as always, what do you base that assumption on?


Edited by Tippis

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

Having the rear seat in the free Mustang modeled would give you the opportunity to take anyone joining your Discord for a spin.

Getting a warbird ride in a video game isn’t that exciting… not like getting a ride in a real one. 

  • Like 1

Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K 4.7GHz | Corsair Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA RTX 2080 Ti XC | 240gb Intel 520 Series MLC SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | LG 32UD99-W UHD Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

I agree if the game were to include a two-seat WWII trainer, this might be the easiest route to one. And the fact that it’s a free aircraft obviously benefits newcomers. However I would bet that the two-seat functionality in DCS goes largely unused. The other problem with utilizing the TF-51 is that it’s an ED product and they would have to devote resources towards developing that feature. It would be fun but I don’t think it would help bring in new players very much.

 

New players aren’t really going to be interested in system failures. 

In terms of the resources, it probably wouldn't be that much to tackle considering the FM is all there. In terms of bringing in more new players, it is currently the tool being used to introduce people to DCS WWII, so modeling the rear seat would simply add to that ability.

 

I agree, new players would be less interested in system failures, but groups of virtual pilots/squadrons might be.

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Getting a warbird ride in a video game isn’t that exciting… not like getting a ride in a real one. 

That is a little like saying the MP experience in a video games isn't that exciting.... because its not like actually flying in a real war.

 

Its not just about getting a ride in a video game, its about introducing people, connecting with people, practicing with people, or just simply using DCS World to simulate something that was actually a thing.... which is kinda the point to DCS World.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Getting a warbird ride in a video game isn’t that exciting… not like getting a ride in a real one. 

I guess we should just shut down the entire sim genre then since it's apparently not worth-while ever developing any features that go into it. 😄 

 

4 minutes ago, Callsign112 said:

In terms of the resources, it probably wouldn't be that much to tackle considering the FM is all there. In terms of bringing in more new players, it is currently the tool being used to introduce people to DCS WWII, so modeling the rear seat would simply add to that ability.

The biggest issue has always been control syncing, so a lot of it comes down to how much duplication and redundancy there is between the front and the back seat. It sort of goes both ways: if there's a lot of the same, then on the one hand, it's already there and largely done, but on the other hand, it means more that has to be synced.

  • Like 3

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Tippis said:

I guess we should just shut down the entire sim genre then since it's apparently not worth-while ever developing any features that go into it. 😄 

 

The biggest issue has always been control syncing, so a lot of it comes down to how much duplication and redundancy there is between the front and the back seat. It sort of goes both ways: if there's a lot of the same, then on the one hand, it's already there and largely done, but on the other hand, it means more that has to be synced.

I'm not really sure, but one would think it would mostly be duplicating what is already there. But I also think it would add more to the SIM then it would add in terms of the work needed to make it happen.

 

It is all of the little things added together that make DCS World so great IMO. Take the recent news about the new SAM system coming soon, was the lack of a working SA-5 preventing people from getting into DCS, likely not, but its addition brings a lot to the SIM and adds another reason that will likely attract more people in as the simulation gets completed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2021 at 2:57 PM, upyr1 said:

The T-6 needs to be an armed version but both would work

Yes, with guns too, of course, why not. just for reviving airfields, training will be faster and more real. And reality is that's why many of us fly in DCS. (I hope, many) with the T6 you better understand the warbird engine management, energy, or training according to the instruments... Using the blackout in the cabin, the weather. there's a lot to use. Good way for MP, SP, or training campaigns. Maybe  drag target sleeve for shooting practice? I don't think that "kill yourself and wreck it as much as you want" is the way to learn something:( ))) on the contrary. Yak is not the way to learn Allied warbird, I have it too. The engine, drag, energy and gear is diferent. The way to make the WW2 era more attractive, help and offer something that I personally have been missing from the simulators. I'm sorry if my post upsets anyone.


Edited by PETER SHIFTY
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PETER SHIFTY said:

Yes, with guns too, of course, why not. just for reviving airfields, training will be faster and more real. And reality is that's why many of us fly in DCS. (I hope, many) with the T6 you better understand the warbird engine management, energy, or training according to the instruments... Using the blackout in the cabin, the weather. there's a lot to use. Good way for MP, SP, or training campaigns. Maybe  drag target sleeve for shooting practice? I don't think that "kill yourself and wreck it as much as you want" is the way to learn something:( ))) on the contrary. Yak is not the way to learn Allied warbird, I have it too. The engine, drag, energy and gear is diferent. The way to make the WW2 era more attractive, help and offer something that I personally have been missing from the simulators. I'm sorry if my post upsets anyone.

I think adding multi crew to the TF-51 would be a good way to show off the capability and the at-6 will be awesome

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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