A2A for DCS ?

[ImpendingJoker]

Dominique,
I am sorry for not being clear: My flight LOWS to LOWI was in P3D. I was trying to explain that the goal of P3D and its add on providers is authenticity in both scenery and aircraft behaviour. Whereas DCS provides a game slbeit with very good sceneries and aircraft. But as their emphasis must be on the action it does not need authenticity to that level that we have come to rely on in our sim(s). If you want to fly VFR or even nape of the earth, then you need a scenery in which you can recognize where you are because that is what it is all about.
In a military game, I would assume, the emphasis is more on realistic ‚behaviour‘ of the guns and the projectiles‘ flight profile. The realism would be in representing realistically how to get your bullets to the enemy plane. That leaves the scenery underneath the shooting with second priority... As I said, it just needs to be accurate enough i. e. have enough POIs to help your Me 109/Spitfire pilot find home.
Volker

I have made it no secret that I am big into RL aviation, and I was former US Army, and worked on every helicopter the Army had in the mid 90's to early 2000's, and the one that I loved the most was the UH-1H. I was fortunate enough to be a rated observer and certified for doing the in flight main rotor track and balance after blade swaps or head removal for whatever the reason, and I had an old maint test pilot that more than once handed me the bird after the he had checked it out and found everything to be in order(since the UH-1H was a one pilot bird I got fly left seat often but, not always), and from this I can tell you that the UH-1D modeled in DCS flies much like the real thing(just less power than the 1H and more prone to vortex ring state and decent with power), so I can tell you, the flight mechanics are not skipped over nor are the weapons systems given priority. In fact a number of modules have released with complete aircraft flight dynamics and modeling with the weapons systems added at they get them done, the F/A-18C having just gotten Joint Stand-Off Weapon(JSOW) is a good example of this. The aircraft are being worked on all the time, and systems that are the same for the F-16C will be integrated from the work on the F/A-18C, and the F-16C will be out sometime this fall with a lot of the systems modeling having been completed in conjunction with the F/A-18C and as the team gets done with work on the Hornet, they move over to the Fighting Falcon.


TL;DR: It's free. Give it a shot you have nothing to lose but but some hard drive space and some time.

[Skycat]

I contributed to the DCS:WWII Kickstarter campaign several years ago so I have the Normandy map, WWII assets pack and P-51D. I initially enjoyed the novelty of DCS but after a while the limited area of the maps dulled the fun. For touch and goes & etc., I prefer the A2A Accusim P-51D and its maintenance panels, and the flexibility of FSX. IMO the major weakness of DCS as an offline WWII simulator is that it doesn't have a worthwhile instant mission generator and the P-51D 'campaign' is a series of navigational challenges on the Kuban map. In some of the included stock P-51D combat missions you fight modern aircraft and ground assets. It is possible to buy a few WWII scripted missions for the Normandy map at a premium; or build your own missions in the mission editor.

If jets and/or online combat is of interest to you, a lot of people swear by DCS. But personally -- as an offline WWII flyer -- I can't justify the high cost of each DCS module, especially since the IL-2 series (Cliffs of Dover; Battle of Stalingrad) provides true WWII maps and several flyable aircraft, usually for a much a lower investment.

[Dominique]

You have a point here, can't say that you are wrong. I don't fly on-line and FS then P3D has been and still will be my main sim. The DCS maps are a little limited in scope and quality but the aircraft are superb. I sweat mastering flying the circuit with the L-39, a really good older jet.

There is a "feeI" in DCS you don't have in P3D. Th jets I am flying right now in P3D are also the L-39 and the Milviz F-100. I "feel" the latter unconvinging.

I started a parallel thread on the OrbX forum on the scenery dimension.

[thomas_mac]

I have a few of the WW2 DCS modules including the P-51, Spitfire and Normandy 1944 map but can't seem to stick with them. I would like to get more comfortable with the modules but am so used to FSX+A2A it is a real struggle to not just boot up FSX. Does anyone here flip back and forth between the two sims?

[Ron Attwood]

The only thing scenery is good for is letting you know when it's time to pull out of a loop?

[ImpendingJoker]

I have a few of the WW2 DCS modules including the P-51, Spitfire and Normandy 1944 map but can't seem to stick with them. I would like to get more comfortable with the modules but am so used to FSX+A2A it is a real struggle to not just boot up FSX. Does anyone here flip back and forth between the two sims?

I go to DCS for two things: 1)the helicopters are spot on. 2) for planes not currently in P3D(eg Fw-190A-8).

For everything else, I use P3D/A2A but, as said in another post, even if A2A came out with an A-8 tomorrow I wouldn't buy it, not because of the quality but because I already own it for DCS, and there wouldn't be much logic in buying the same aircraft at such high fidelity, twice. For combat flying though you can't beat DCS, and I pretty much use the Mission Editor to build my own missions and I find the Huey more than enough challenge to fly from A to B without bullets whizzing past me. So yeah I go back and forth between them to fly what I have the itching to fly, and in truth, helicopters in FSX/P3D though many, do not handle anywhere near close to the real thing with a notable exception being Bluebottle's Bell 206 but, I will say this, if A2A builds an Accu-sim Huey, I'll be all over that like mud on a pig.

[gulredrel]

Same for me. Helicopters and jets in DCS and setting up own simple missions in mission editor. Hot and high in the Mi-8 in the Persian Gulf, challenging to keep the power up.
As far as the small terrain issue, there are quite some nice places and community build things to add. Like target ranges in Nevada.
Will see what I'll do, when A2A brings the T-38

[vtracy]

#skycat, can you point me to a user guide for DCS and the WW II scenarios (BoB,...) that has the proper installation, the optimal settings etc., everything that makes the game run as it should. I have trouble finding out what can be done with the settings etc. I want to compare the Me 109E and Spitfire of DCS with the A2A ones.
Volker

[Skycat]

#skycat, can you point me to a user guide for DCS and the WW II scenarios (BoB,...) that has the proper installation, the optimal settings etc., everything that makes the game run as it should. I have trouble finding out what can be done with the settings etc. I want to compare the Me 109E and Spitfire of DCS with the A2A ones.
Volker

Start by installing the free DCS World that includes the free TF-51D. However, DCS really isn't the best option for BoB because the Normandy Map provides only a sliver of a generalized England -- it's a lot like the old IL-2 Forgotten Battles map's coverage. You'll need Normandy and the WWII assets pack that provides circa 1944 vehicles and AI aircraft for a true WWII environment. After that, each flyable aircraft is a separate purchase including the Spitfire L.F. Mk. IX, Bf 109 K-4 Kurfurst, FW 190 A-8, FW 190 D-9 Dora, and P-51D Mustang.

My aircraft and environments looked good upon installation but there probably is a user guide available made by the community. My greater problem has been remembering key assignments, both learning the stock commands and assigning new commands to suite my flying.

[ImpendingJoker]

I contributed to the DCS:WWII Kickstarter campaign several years ago so I have the Normandy map, WWII assets pack and P-51D. I initially enjoyed the novelty of DCS but after a while the limited area of the maps dulled the fun. For touch and goes & etc., I prefer the A2A Accusim P-51D and its maintenance panels, and the flexibility of FSX. IMO the major weakness of DCS as an offline WWII simulator is that it doesn't have a worthwhile instant mission generator and the P-51D 'campaign' is a series of navigational challenges on the Kuban map. In some of the included stock P-51D combat missions you fight modern aircraft and ground assets. It is possible to buy a few WWII scripted missions for the Normandy map at a premium; or build your own missions in the mission editor.

If jets and/or online combat is of interest to you, a lot of people swear by DCS. But personally -- as an offline WWII flyer -- I can't justify the high cost of each DCS module, especially since the IL-2 series (Cliffs of Dover; Battle of Stalingrad) provides true WWII maps and several flyable aircraft, usually for a much a lower investment.

As for the cost, the WWII modules are actually the same price or cheaper than A2A's newer Accu-sim planes, and they participate in the Steam Summer and Winter sales, as well as have their own throughout the year where they are discounted by as much as 50%, so I don't think your cost argument holds up. I myself have not paid more than $40 for any DCS: World module because I wait for the sales. I bought the new Fw-190A-8 at 20% off so it was only $40.

[Dominique]

DCS does the same kind of sales from their shop.

[Marvin-E34]

DCS has superior flight dynamics, especially over the edge (spins, stalls).
If i take the A2A P51 and the DCS P51.
The A2A version has far superior sounds and a more complex engine management (accu-sim !).
The DCS version sounds really bad and starting the thing is really simple, but it's got a complete damage model, functionnal guns.
But then if you take something like the A10 or the F18, the amount of systems modeled is on par with (if not more complex than) some PMDG airliners.
DCS has a better quality control over its modules but you still need to research each modules in detail to make a valid comparison with other addons on P3D or X-plane.
Calling everything "study sim" is not really helping.

[Marvin-E34]

The only thing that would limit me from wanting GA airplanes in DCS is the limited airspace that is available,

It seems they have had discussions wih OrbX too

Yes they have but I would most likely see that as re-texturing existing maps or texturing future maps, I don't think they would be making the maps from the ground up though I won't dismiss the possibility that they could.

The limited airspace in DCS maps is not really a problem.
In P3D and X-plane we have nothing to do execpt flying from A to B.
While it's nice to fly around the world, i'd rather have missions or challenges.
Persian Gulf is a big map, with roads, cities, construction sites, oil rigs, cars and trucks driving around ... ED could take the Huey and bluid a civilian campaign for it.
So much to do, yet there's barely any campaign for most DCS modules (Dora, BF109, Mig 15, F-86 ...). Not everything has to be historical and ultra realistic.

While I do agree that not everything has to be historical, I do use DCS for the realism, just as most of here that use A2A products do as well. A civilian Huey campaign would be cool, as it could range from, logging to firefighting to law enforcement to VIP transport to crop dusting, but I would like any of those to be as real as possible(I dont want to be in a Lear Jet chasing an ekranoplan). As for flying from point A to point B, that is about 95% of RL flying, even in the military most of the time is spent getting to and from the target, and while the Persian Gulf map may be big(200,000 sq km) it's still half the size of Orbx's Central Rocky Mountains(466,000 sq km), and truthfully, I want something other than desert to fly over and the Normandy map is currently the only one that I am interested in and it's "only" ~92,000 sq km but, even in P3D, I fly where I feel like flying because I can. I used to live in Chicago, so I often fly up there. I used to be based in Hawaii, so I like to fly there. I live in Florida so I fly around there the most. I lived in CT for a number of years so I like to stage out of KBDR(the airport I used to work at), and fly around New England. I am originally from Texas and have flown all over that state. You see my point? While the maps in DCS may be sizable, they don't include places I want to fly, so I am not prepared to shell out money for areas of the world I don't want. I want the world so that I may choose my own adventure, because that is truly what flying is all about.

I get what you are saying, this is the main reason i'm still on P3D and X-plane, there's always something special about flying around a real life location you've already visited. And even without quality scenery, it still feels special to make real life flights. I can enjoy A to B flying but it gets a lot better when you add a captain of the ship module or when you have scripted events / failures with good voice acting for your co-pilot. The world still feels a bit empty in our simulators. Where are the F15s warning me not to reach for a restricted airspace when i'm doing stupid stuff in my Bonanza

[Dominique]

In a way, some of you raise an interesting dilemna : if A2A was transporting its T38A to both DCS and P3D, which one would you choose ?

One thing I see in the L-39 is that some characteristics of the flight are the same in P3D and DCS, but not the feel ...

[Skycat]

If jets and/or online combat is of interest to you, a lot of people swear by DCS. But personally -- as an offline WWII flyer -- I can't justify the high cost of each DCS module, especially since the IL-2 series (Cliffs of Dover; Battle of Stalingrad) provides true WWII maps and several flyable aircraft, usually for a much a lower investment.

As for the cost, the WWII modules are actually the same price or cheaper than A2A's newer Accu-sim planes, and they participate in the Steam Summer and Winter sales, as well as have their own throughout the year where they are discounted by as much as 50%, so I don't think your cost argument holds up. I myself have not paid more than $40 for any DCS: World module because I wait for the sales. I bought the new Fw-190A-8 at 20% off so it was only $40.

Except I wasn't basing my statement on A2A vs. DCS. I take no issues with DCS as a study sim and I've even considered getting the F-86 and the Nevada map for the learning experience; and if they ever release the P-47 I'll feel compelled to buy it. My comparison between A2A and DCS at this time can only be with the P-51D. DCS has working guns and bombs but also its maps are small in scope and foreign in location to me; A2A's Mustang is not weaponized but it has interactive maintenance and it lives in a world I know and recognize. Which is why I said that for touch-and-goes and adventure flying I prefer A2A in FSX.

Neither platform is, in my opinion, a complete or wholly satisfying WWII simulation for the offline player. And this is why I stated that for the purposes of offline WWII combat the IL-2 series has been a better investment for me. IL-2 has its own limitations and design considerations but for Tuesday evening combat sorties Great Battles is my go-to sim right now.

I did notice last night that DCS is having a sale right now and many of the modules are at a price I'd consider reasonable for my level of interest (ie, $25 for the Sabre). So I accept your argument to that point.