I get a longer load on initial run of DCS, but mission loads are roughly the same for me.
2 Likes
āIt felt as thog Angels were pushingā
Adolph Galland on the Me-262.
Free flight on the Sinai Map puts Mud Hen drivers in a Israeli Jet with Full A2A and Bags of Fuel. I set up the minimum controls needed for a little tour. Going through the clouds the Jet feels effortless to fly. Does it really need Auto Pilot? The clouds are beautiful and i fly just above them enjoing the scene. Im looking at the coast through the gaps. I make it it Jordan before Real Life makes me turn back. The front pit isā¦ uncomplicated. The displays are vibrant. You fly w two fingers. Back at Tel Nov i taxi, park, shut down and say to myself. I cant believe how good that was.
8 Likes
Canāt wait until all the new threads are
DCS: F-4 Phantom
2 Likes
Oh the bafflement at the Phantom radar is going to be epic.
5 Likes
Wonder if the missiles will be realistic, and mostly ineffective, as well
1 Like
There is something about DCS, IL2 and all other combat flight sims that has been missing. Or at least ive never experienced it. PROGRESSION.
This first came to me when i was flying Rise of Flight. You fly the 1918 birds first. D7, D8, Camelā¦ then later you step into the Fokker E1 and you are underwhelmed.
Imagine if DCS started w the F-5. Later you got the F-4ā¦Maybe the A7 Corsairā¦ Then the F8 Crusaiderā¦ by the time you step into the Eagle you are seasoned.
Im desperately awaiting the Phab Phantom. Just wished it would have been before the Strike Eagle.
5 Likes
Imagine a trilogy of Vietnam campaigns where you progress from A-1 Skyraider > A-4 Skyhawk > F-4 or A-6. Could be a real possibility in a few years! 
4 Likes
Excellent idea you have there
4 Likes
I donāt know how accurate the Iris FGR.2 Phantom was in FSX, but I once did a navigation exercise around the coast of the UK mainland using VOR for the whole route and thoroughly enjoyed it.
2 Likes
Remember Fighter Ops? Thatās exactly how it was supposed to work. You start in the T-38 and move on from there.
DCS is more platform than package. In my 25 years with this family of simulations Iāve only twice seen any structure to what it presented to the user, Flamming Cliffs and Black Shark. FC brought two jets with AFMs, an enhanced and heavily detailed region (for its time) and a series of coherent missions to complete the package. Black Shark followed with a brilliant FM and clickable cockpit, another terrain upgrade and Wagās Georgia Oil War staged campaign. Neither of those are progressive. But they were so focused that users had months, even years, to get to know them inside and out. Today DCS is a huge catalog of modules. But none of them are a full package. Some users prefer this and revel in the ability to create missions, write scripts and blaze a vast personal sandbox. Other users would be better served by getting in all in a package. Put me in that last category. Iāll pay the money. But give me āI-Corpsā in Vietnam, The Falklands, the Six Day War. Each with a plane or two, terrain accurate for the period and campaigns, both SP and MP. There is a reason this will never happen: ME! I will pay for Syria, the Huey, the Harrier, the Mirrage, etc without insisting on anything else to add value. Iām totally OK with this in large part because some brilliant script-monkeys have made DCS multiplayer a place to do everything: learn, support, kill. All thatās needed are the assets, AI and script logic to make something that seems plausible to the participants. But I do long for the old days where the game was at least part of the intent.
7 Likes
I agree to the sentiment. I feel it too. But it is what it is, and it aināt what it aināt.
F/A-18C , supercarrier, gulf map and raven one make a package, combined. One hella expensive one but there you have it.
Mosquito, channel map, ww2 assets pack and reflecteds campaign, again, itās a package.
MiG-15 and Museum relic, voila.
So no itās not all badly disjointed toys. It does take some picking and choosing and I think ED would serve themselves well to offer things in such coherent packages.
4 Likes
I am with you on this one.
Iāve got a selection of maps and modules and tried to line them up in such a way that the MiG-15 came first, then the MiG-19 and the MiG-21 waiting next. I also intend to touch the F-18 only after I get most of the F-5.
I enjoy learning the modules with training missions if they are included and then fly hell out of the campaigns.
But all in all, I would say it is a āscattered funā if you see what I mean? E.g. why not to have a Korea map since we have the MiG-15 and F-86? What to do with the MiG-17 and the Phantom once they are out as the Vietnam map is as available as the Korea map? 
Then there is āRataā with the Lavochkin in development but the whole context is somehow missingā¦
Dunno. DCS is a good fun and personally for me it is my child-era dream come true.
Only I feel it has SO MUCH MORE potential if offering the experience in more āpackagedā way (a bit like Il-2 GB for instance).
Rant over. Back to MSFS 
6 Likes
Exactly, it has to be implemented separately somehow.
1 Like
if only a Sim ever tried to take that directionā¦
Wasnāt there a Sim/Game where in order to get to The Meat of The Sims missions or Campaign You had to pass series of test missions? It was kinda like a Flight Schoolā¦I remember I got a sense of Accomplishment when I passed itā¦and I was a bit smarter about The Aircraft.
That would be a neat feature to implement into The DCS Dynamic Campaign 
I think I recall the old Jet Fighter sim made you carrier qual in the F-14 before you could fly missions in it.
As my PC at the time was so poor it was doing like 10fps it was not possible to land on the carrier so I was stuck with nothing but free flight.
1 Like
Digital Integrationās Tornado had you fly the āsimulatorā a good 30 missions before you flew the ārealā thing and it honestly was one of the few games where doing that actually was intriguing and paid off too.
3 Likes
I like what Im hearing in this thread. For my part Iām still nose to the grindstone - real world issues aside - trying to address this very topic.
getting there, slowly, with some notable compromises due to platform limits. When we send the grandkids on their way in a few weeks I may get to ver. 1.0. (Currently at 0.8 if that means anything) Itās a real challenge to make [DCS in this case] do things that are unsupported.
My question (something I fret over) is how āmyā version of structure will work ā in the wildā. Itās all loosely based - think high level/simplified- on somthing that resembles the real world - as pointed out to me, correctly, you can know too much, which can throw someone with RW experience off: kinda like watching Gonky (on YouTube)using a physical analogy, thrash about cus heās used to the real thing. Or something like that
I thought it would take 18 months. Just passed 24 
not counting finishing the manual and demo videos. @Deacon211 and @WarPig have been a valuable resource to dateā¦gotta goā¦a 5 year old needs to find their swim shoesā¦
PS; I donāt talk about this āthingā much cus, well, thereās next to zero cycles Remaining at the end of the day to answer questions. Will be seeking a couple more testers soon however (once relieved of grandad duties)
3 Likes
I have something similar going (see above) but modeling a build up to theāhotā parts: you fly training sorties. Thing is, Iām getting the impression this may not be all that popular; the narrative that goes along with each campaign seems important here - to set the stage if you will. I need Tom Clancy to come out of retirement
2 Likes
I could swear I was really playing virtual skeeball!
1 Like