Now that I think about it, I would say that a DCS Eurofighter early access could be in the realms of possibility.
7 Likes
That would be amazing. Not getting my hopes up thourgh.
Still thinking 26 or 27 for that one.
1 Like
That got me thinking. Back when I upgraded from a 486 to a Pentium so I could play EF2000 in all it’s 640x480 glory; I didn’t care that pretty much everything about it was ‘simulating’ an advanced jet fighter that only existed as a prototype at that time and was as close to reality as me getting it on with Claudia Schiffer…
I would actually love to see DCS get a bit more ‘speculative’ and even cater for totally fictional aircraft.
I know it is at odds with their philosophy of only providing aircraft that they have enough open source data on, but I would definitely buy a F-22, or Su-57 or even a F/A-37 Talon
Even if it doesn’t happen. Just the hint of an announcement would get the rivet counters over on the DCS forums frothing. And that alone would be worth the price of admission 
7 Likes
An alternate suggestion: Shenyang J-15. More carriers to fly from, including a CATOBAR supercarrier being built now, and both EW and tanker versions to round out the mission planning …
4 Likes
Ironically War Thunder does that and if they just went a little further and made a slightly better way to do Sim Battles with planes it would absolutely smash.
2 Likes
Would definitely take a full fidelity J-15 and J-11.
An FC level F-22 or F-35 and SU-57 would be pretty good.
5 Likes
I can hear the whining from the purists starting already! 
I have no problem with that but they would have to make it clear which modules use approximations, and which are ‘full fidelity’. Then it will be up to those who run servers to decide which modules are available to the players.
3 Likes
Honestly, until they get the whole electromagnetic combat environment sorted out “realism” is a wash. Some jets have all the buttons and knobs but a FC level radar system, while other newer jets appear to some pretty solid radar modeling. Let’s not even get started on the current state of ECM. Until all the planes are operating on the same base sensor modeling worrying about realism in PvP is kinda pointless. I’d definitely fly some speculative aircraft if they offered them!
6 Likes
Oooh I’d forgotten about that one
4 Likes
And then there’s the AI which instantly do anything and everything correctly with their “sensors.”
2 Likes
I’ve heard they won’t do it, or anything, unless there’s pubic data. If true I think people would understand that coming up with something that just adheres to physics - and explain how it works - would be good enough. It would be something at least and you’d think people would understand, it’s “DCS ECM”. And move on.
To do nothing leaves a gaping hole in the game play. Does turning on the ‘tron’s’ in, say, the Hornet do anything, at all right now? I’ve no idea.
3 Likes
Exactly. I can’t and won’t go into detail, but I worked with a lot of very smart people who’s job it was to ‘analyse’ various bits of kit that operated across the electromagnetic spectrum and picked up a fair understanding of the ‘problem’ via osmosis.
All I will say is that even the highest fidelity modelling of a radar, ECM or ECCM system in DCS is a best guess. Physics only gets you so far, most of the really funky capabilities are defined by software.
5 Likes
I’m hip. On this subject the adage, “perfect is the enemy of good” comes to mind"
3 Likes
This is one of the things I really love about VTOL-VR. The decision to not model real world aircraft gave the developer the freedom to do a lot of best guesses and the result is in some ways superior to DCS (electronic warfare, RCS modelling etc etc).
5 Likes
While I do agree and I would like better EM modelling, the current situation where ECM pods are basically just waving a big “I’m here!!” spotlight and flying low is the best defence is a bit of fun 
And I don’t know how you do a properly realistic radar horizon when the terrains are “flat earth” either…
2 Likes
Yeah the whole point, and something I am very adjacent to, is to have a EW simulation.
Not the real one, just a working one!
A lot can be done without having any need for real world secret data- all it takes (and I admit it’s not a simple task) is to build a coherent EW environment, a workable one that can realistically emulate real-world-adjacent results.
EDIT: Not to toot my own horn but I was instrumental for the creation of something like that when I was working for the italian eurofighter milsim.
6 Likes
Hardcoded limits are not too hard to implement.
But I absolutely agree that so far EW is one of the most important, yet almost completely ignored, aspect of modern warfare…
Yes even more than ATC, graphical eyecandy, and extra maps.
#SorryNotSorry
4 Likes
It just bugs me we have these overpowered raytracing engines doing very little, that could easily be used for a rudimentary approximation of a radar set, but even that wouldn’t work well because of a design decision made in like 2005 or whenever Flanker came out 
Edit: Flanker came out in 1995… off by a decade!
3 Likes
EXACTLY!
2 Likes
Wishful thinking.
Just one item. The ability to save an in-progress multiplayer mission.
As it is now, multiplayer pilots have 3 options:
- play the whole mission through to completion in one setting
- setup a server to keep it running or leave the hosting computer on and walk away till later
- save the in-progress mission with a screenshot then edit the original mission to the screenshot progress
5 Likes