DCS Newsletter for 29 January 2016!

The more I think about it the more I am torn about the carrier:
It is nice that they put all the detail in it, no question.

But what will it contribute to the flight sim? As in most cases it is the functionality that is most important for me, not the looks. I hope they will provide us with a bit more of information what we will actually be able to do with it during the next few months.

@Aginor, I think if they’re looking at tackling Naval Ops to the same degree as Combined Arms, an incredibly detailed carrier is a good starting place- after all, you’re basically looking at a giant floating missile and radar platform as well as a runway. Especially if they’re going to look at modeling datalink systems down the road (hugely important to both the Tomcat and Hornet).

Then again, that’s just my speculations and hopes based on the little bit of info provided. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I would have to say that it adds environment. That’s one of the big tenants of a dynamic campaign - feeling that you are part of something bigger than just your aircraft, just your flight. It is one of the main reasons that some mission designers have activity at the airfield when you take off … a sense of something bigger happening.

But functionally, you are correct. It is not going to contribute much more that atmosphere and procedures. Although to be honest, I would love to have someone directing (marshalling) my helicopter flights: atmosphere and procedure.

That’s not the only tenant of a dynamic campaign, not by far, but it is one of my top three.

1 Like

THIS. Biggest thing I’m hoping for with the new carriers.

1 Like

Marshalling and tanking. Two major components of carrier aviation. As to the detail level…well, modeling people on the carrier will be nice since it will have down the line advantages to populating airbases, military facilities, bunkers…etc…with more realistic actions.

I’m really looking forward to perhaps being able to land, get out, get in a vehicle, or get in another aircraft - and/or be rescued by another player, climb into his helo, and get dropped off back at base. There is a coolness factor to that that can’t be overstated…


If the radar dishes on the carriers do not spin at their real life RPM I will not get these modules.



@Tyco if they don’t properly model the 4160V, 450V, and 400 Hz electrical distribution systems and how they’re affected based on where the carrier takes missile hits, I’m not buying either.

1 Like

Btw: I hope they use their new stuff developed for the carrier for improving airfields as well.

  • Marshalling (ok, I could do without that to be honest, the way FSX does it is good enough)
  • a few ground units that add to immersion, like GPUs, and bomb carrier thingies when rearming, pretty much the way the C-101 does it with the GPU. (I could do without that as well, but it would be nice)
  • working cables/barriers that can be raised when an emergency occurs (again, I am a fan of functionality. There is so much missing in this sim)
    EDIT: Cool pics in this pdf: http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/faqs/arrestingsystems.pdf
  • some way to get plane wrecks out of the way. (especially useful in multiplayer)

And while we are at it: If they do a proper carrier I hope they do some rework on the AI planes that land on it as well. Some of those models are still from LOMAC and look REALLY bad. I guess they would look weird on a new detailed carrier. :smiley:
…and maybe they could give the tankers a bit more AI. IIRC I read a post by a real boom operator somwhere that basically said those tanker crews in DCSW are dicks, and make some aspects of tanking much harder.
When you are dependent on air refueling (which happens to the F/A-18 more often) that really sucks.

I think a detailed dcs ship would be great. I would love a detailed frigate or something similar. Aka dangerous waters.

In a DCS carrier:

I need the meatball and the catapults.

I want the TACAN and ILS.

Everything else is gravy.

1 Like

hee hee LOL @Tyco

Allow me to introduce you to “Tilly.”

The crash and salvage crane is standard on any US aircraft carrier that’s conducting flight operations, just for the purpose you’re speaking of. Though while I find the idea of it being driveable very very exciting, it also makes me very, very nervous. As much crap as I might talk about the Airedales who run the flight deck, moving around large airplanes while simultaneously fueling, arming, launching, and recovering them is as much an art form as it is a science. And depending on how many slots are going to be available on deck, I’m already seeing the potential for lots and lots of accidental mayhem. And maybe some purposeful mayhem as well.


Dang @Navynuke99 - I had no idea such a thing existed on a carrier! That thing is HUGE! Is it stored below decks or on deck? And I assume it folds up like a transformer or something…?

1 Like

They park her behind the island on the flight deck- I don’t know that it would really fit well on an elevator, and the damn thing moves slow as cold molasses in January. And yeah, it does fold up, to an extent. But it’s still flipping huge.

Damn, that thing is HUGE!
Thanks for posting! :slight_smile:

1 Like

F-14 in the works, F-18 in the works, carriers x2 in the works. This is sooo cool. My expectations are going through the roof. What’s next? A-4?
I wonder if the DCS team put on the song “In the Navy” by the village people every morning. You know, to get them in the mood. I’m just saying…

1 Like

Welll… :smiley:


Wait, what? A dev group from the Reddit group? Nice!

I’m still just sitting here waiting for the Rafale M to be developed… :frowning:

1 Like