A2A for DCS ?

[Dominique]

Interesting post on the DCS forum

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p= ... stcount=86

[Hook]

Ooo!

Froogle mentioned in his new video look at MSFS2020 that DCS has the highest proportion of study level aircraft of any sim. No idea if this is true, but it is very interesting. And A2A makes good study level aircraft.

Interesting times ahead.

Hook

[Dominique]

Ooo!

Froogle mentioned in his new video look at MSFS2020 that DCS has the highest proportion of study level aircraft of any sim. No idea if this is true, but it is very interesting. And A2A makes good study level aircraft.

Interesting times ahead.

Hook

I am rediscovering DCS and sweating to learn the L-39 that I loved in FSX/P3D. The aircraft is excellent , I hate to say maybe better than the Lotus one which was pretty good ! I am not sure to know what study level is but this is no Carenado stuff !

Anybody to look for a T33A in DCS ? Or a F104 for that matter. Old boys can dream, can’t they ?

[AKar]

DCS is brilliant sim, IMO. Flight dynamics and depth of many systems are top notch. It could use some diversity.

-Esa

[ImpendingJoker]

I mentioned in another post how much I love DCS, and I recently bought the new Fw-190A-8 in early access. I can say this, that flying the A2A warbird stable really helped me tame that thing, and from what it seems from the comments on that forum, land it better than most of them(though still not perfect). It is a very different environment than FSX/P3D to be sure but I love it none the less. DCS comes with an un-armed TF-51D and the Su-25 Frogfoot, and these are great to cut your teeth on but you'll soon find you want more, and I have added not only the Flaming Cliffs 3 pack but, also the, F-86, UH-1D, the KA-50 Blackshark, and the Fw-190A-8, and the Nellis AFB pack and am thinking of adding the F-16 in the near future. However with planes like the Su-52 and the Christen Eagle, I think that A2A could do well there with the Warbirds as there is not a P-40 or a P-47 over there yet, though the P-51, Bf-109, the Fw-190D-9 and the Spitfire have been covered. The only thing that would limit me from wanting GA airplanes in DCS is the limited airspace that is available, and you can only load one at a time. Still it would be very interesting to see the T-38 and the T-6A Texan II ported over to DCS, those I think would be HUGE in that community as other than the L-39 there isn't really a trainer for DCS.

[Dominique]

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

[Marvin-E34]

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 build 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.

[ImpendingJoker]

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.

[Dominique]

Found that at Avsim on the DCS forum.

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/3768 ... nt=4016059

I don’t do Facebook myself it seems a pic out of A2A FB page.

[Dominique]

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.

Well, they already made SoCal from China Lake to Ft Pendleton and Miramar, didn’t they : LC map, vector networks etc

[vtracy]

Do all of you here really think that the sceneries and the aircraft in DCS are of the same realistic quality as P3D and the A2A birds? I have not yet installed DCS but bought a license (I could not find a comprehensive manual that tells me how to install and set up the software). A few weeks ago, I did a „mission“ that I set up myself: I recorded a flight from Salzburg (LOWS) to Innsbruck(LOWI) with Flight Record, then set it up for „AI playback“ and flew the flight again, i. e. I followed my recorded flight, trying to stay as close to the wingtip of the first aircraft as possible. I used ORBX scenery and the airport sceneries from various sources. Even with the quality of ORBX scenery, when flying so close to the earth (usually ca. 30m above ground), I saw photoscenery areas in between the autogen and manually placed buildings etc. What I am trying to say here, is: If even this high-level scenery and aircraft is admittedly not 100% realistic, do you think that DCS whose aim ist to provide the scenarios for „missions“, fights etc. using recreated scenery of the 40ies to make the missions as wartime-realistic as possible, do you think that DCS can or wants, to be as close to the real, recognizable scenery like P3D? And that they want to be as close in the modelling of their aircraft as A2A?
I think that they do not need that degree of realism maybe don‘t even want it... users (i. e. fighter pilots) will be fighting most of the time, looking for enemy a/c far too much to be able to appreciate any unnecessary realism They only need to be able to recognize where they are, for example over the Sussex coast or the French coast, and to be able to find their home airfield (which often cannot be real either).
I saw a video of a DCS action between Me 109s and Spits/Hurricanes, including squadron starts and landings. They did not seem to experience the same degree of aircraft that I had when starting and landing a Me109 or a Spitfire, like yawing (Me) or near nosediving (Spit). So, it does seem to me that DCS have not the realism that we all want for our simulations.
I should be interested to learn what your views/experiences are.
Volker

[AKar]

Do all of you here really think that the sceneries and the aircraft in DCS are of the same realistic quality as P3D and the A2A birds?

I'd go as far as to say the top-of-the-line airplanes for DCS are the best simulations of military airplanes available for purchase as of today, bar none.

I'd avoid direct 1-to-1 comparison, though, because different platforms have different limitations as they are built for different purposes. For example, it is difficult to compare the sceneries, as the other sim provides the entire globe with various layers of addons usually in place, whereas the other concentrates on limited theaters intended to fit in, at maximum, some medium-sized combat scenarios.

-Esa

[Dominique]

I am not sure that I understand which licence you bought as the basic game is free and there is no scenery for Austria in DCS.

It comes with the Caucasus region and two aircraft ( a Su-25 and a TF-51). You download it and run the .exe. Esay peasy. It gives you plenty to do. If you want to go further you buy modules which are aircraft, sceneries or campaigns. I just bought my first payware the L-39 Albatros.

There is a limited number of regions to buy (Normandy, Persian Gulf and Nevada I think). I find the landscape in the Caucasus attractive but it is not as sophisticated as an OrbX fat region ! This is defintely not meant to fly from A to B to enjoy the scenery. It is meant to fly aircraft in war missions or aerobatics. Still quite nice in an arcadidh kind of way.

The aircraft on the other hand are NOT arcadish !

I bought the L-39 because I flew her a lot in FSX and P3D, the Lotus simulations one. I loved that plane. The complexity and the flight modeling seem superior to me in DCS. You have a great feeling to fly a complex aircraft. I wouldn't go further because I am not a pilot and I bought the module few days ago only. First impression.

[vtracy]

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

[Dominique]

OK, sorry for the misunderstanding from my side too., Volker

DCS is primarily focused on aircraft and on, not action, but missions. You define what the missions are. You can enjoy their birds from the only point of view of flying an aircraft without any military dimension. You do that with A2A magnificent warbirds in P3D you can do the same in DCS without firing a bullet in anger. They also sell two aerobatics civil aircraft. Some people do only aerobatics in DCS because of the FDE.

The scenery may not be as sophisticated as OrbX and is limited but still nice all the same (rivers, roads, trains, cars, navaids etct.). I compared the Caucasus scenery they offer with Google Earth !

The aircraft are at least as good a P3D and, for the Albatros, I think superior (and the Lotus was very good) . And the subjective feeling of flying is great. Take that again with a pinch of salt, I am a newbie with DCS.

The game is free with two superb aircraft, one ground attack aircraft and a P-51 trainer with no armement, they make their money on addons.

That is because they focus on aircraft and the feeling of fly that having A2A making modules for them would be great.