Combat Pilot Series (Naval Spin Too)

[SUBS17]

Well VRS Tacpac is not just for the VRS SH but it will also have an SDK which will allow weapons to be added to other aircraft types and vehicles/helicopters/ships etc. And those weapons would be functional in mp combat so you can see that it is a mod that is aimed at not just VRS SH users but any aircraft or object in FSX that people want to mod with that capability. So the cheaper would be Tacpac as you only pay $34.95 and get that mp combat capability(compared to an expensive subscription). The mp potential for FSX and with FSX@War is immense as players could potentially have any type of combat vehicle aircraft combat in mp. So for a carrier battle group you can have pilots flying jets, guys controlling the ships and ship bourne weapons etc. And its on a global map which gives it an even greater potential.

"Ace Combat/LOMAC/DCS" beginner level stuff

I don't know what gave you the idea that DCS was ACE level(try it I dare you DCS World is free with a free SU25T http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?ProductId=21&end_pos=137&scr=product&lang=en), its actually beyond whats modelled in any other sim as far as combat is concerned and the release this month of Flaming cliffs 3 means that DCS World will have all the Lomac flyable aircraft in DCS World along with DCS A-10C, KA50, P51. All Lomac aircraft are more detailed than 99% of FSX addons including the acceleration hornet if you take a closer look at what they can do.

This combat pilot reminds me of FighterOps:



But the difference with FighterOps is that it is a sim that is going to be built from the ground up as a combat sim so the initial release of the T38C and T6 would be with trainning modules based on the real UPT course and train pilots upto a level which is extremely high. I'm currently testing a new pilot trainning course that is on the same level in DCS. The stuff shown in CPs manual is basic and unrealistic incomparison. I do not know what it is they are trying to achieve with what I read there even compared to Airwolves courses are better than what I saw there. I'll wait and see when they release this stuff as to what the feedback, videos etc show. The trainning CP is doing is done through AI, nothing wrong with that as FSX is good for that but the issues will be realisim in certain key areas which will stop the people who are into jet combat sims from wanting to use it.

[jimi08]

Well VRS Tacpac is not just for the VRS SH but it will also have an SDK which will allow weapons to be added to other aircraft types and vehicles/helicopters/ships etc. And those weapons would be functional in mp combat so you can see that it is a mod that is aimed at not just VRS SH users but any aircraft or object in FSX that people want to mod with that capability. So the cheaper would be Tacpac as you only pay $34.95 and get that mp combat capability(compared to an expensive subscription). The mp potential for FSX and with FSX@War is immense as players could potentially have any type of combat vehicle aircraft combat in mp. So for a carrier battle group you can have pilots flying jets, guys controlling the ships and ship bourne weapons etc. And its on a global map which gives it an even greater potential.

While the TacPack can be "bandaided" on many things concerning combat functions, there are many other things that it can't, such as packet sharing pushed by other aircraft, and LOD models of other aircraft in the server.  For those hosting sessions with outstanding rigs, great internet connections, and a moderate number or players involved, that works fine.  But for large scale operations, having a ton or high-fidelity VRS SHs and/or Aerosoft F-16s and a few Captain Sim C-130s flying around will cripple most systems.  So Thunderhawk is working with reputable companies  to produce aircraft that are steamlined for what they are trying to accomplish given some of the limitations of FSX. I am not trying to downplay what VRS has done and what they have accomplished, but they are not the solution for everything...

I don't know what gave you the idea that DCS was ACE level(try it I dare you DCS World is free with a free SU25T http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?ProductId=21&end_pos=137&scr=product&lang=en), its actually beyond whats modelled in any other sim as far as combat is concerned and the release this month of Flaming cliffs 3 means that DCS World will have all the Lomac flyable aircraft in DCS World along with DCS A-10C, KA50, P51. All Lomac aircraft are more detailed than 99% of FSX addons including the acceleration hornet if you take a closer look at what they can do.

I'll give you the point on some of the systems modeling in SOME of the aircraft in DCS/LOMAC.  I'll also give you a point for how the game streamlines computer resources that allow you to play the game.  But at the same time, I have witnessed some things that were off, such as proper flight modeling, and I've definitely seen some things done in the game that lead me to think that the modeling is a little less than 99%.  From what I remember, the aircraft that LOMAC/DCS did release, they were well done.  But I also remember coming back from OIF, and seeing a bunch of F-16s and F/A-18s flying around with F-15 cockpits and flight dynamics.   Just my opinion here, LOMAC/DCS is a decent platform, but I personally don't see what the big hype about it is.  I personally like the fact that I can do in-game voice communications (that might have changed with more current releases, not sure...).  I like the fact that I can conduct ANY type of operations (combat, training, aerobatics, etc) ANYWHERE in the world.  The fact that real-world weather updates are provided continuously.  I can open an approach plate or an AP/1B and be able to execute them.  I can get FARs and METARS from NOAA and actually use them because I know that FSX will replicate it for me when I do my flight.  I don't think LOMAC and/or DCS is up to par with that yet... When it actually does, hit me up and I'll change my tune...

.....Anyways, I digress...This is an "FSX-based" forum anyways, so I'll go back to talking FSX stuff....

The whole point of my last post was to wait and give this thing an honest shake.  If it comes out and it's crap, then so be it.  Hell, I'll jump on your side and say it's crap too.  Let's see first.  Also, as I mentioned the last time, I'm pretty sure ThunderHawk is trying to reach the "middle-man", or those who are tactical aviation savvy, but not those who spend their free time/bathroom time/bed time reading the NATOPS or TTPs (like me).  So if you are going into this expecting every system in these jets to be replicated 100%, your probably fooling yourself.  Ideally you want something  that motivates people to jump in and get their hands dirty and to have fun, but work hard to become successfully and proficient.  If you set the bar too steep at the onset (I know this is what some of you prefer), your level of participation will be low, or might not happen at all, and this project might not succeed. 

Let's just wait, keep an open mind, and see....

[3wire]

It seems like these platforms (FSX/DCS/etc...) are moving towards considerably improved multirole/multiplayer capability. Back in the day I used Flight Assignment ATP for instrument training, Chuck Yeager's Air Combat for dogfighting, and Jet (F/A-18 for carrier ops)...... dating myself ( I was a faithful Micoroprose F-117,F-15 Strike Eagle and Fleet Defender junky; although I got my first taste with Solo Flight and Acro Jet while getting my pilots license....)

After leaving the Navy I used X-Plane, because I was taking aerospace engineering courses and it covered/ bridged gaps from what I learned in the classroom and I could use it for instrument work too.

So many decades later I find myself still exploiting different sims to meet my need/get my fix...

Personally... Naval Aviation (Flying around the boat) is my favorite type of flying... the F-18 is my favorite aircraft

So... today I use FSX, JANE's F/A-18 (TSH), and DCS  (I used to like F/A-18 Korea buy not anymore because of joystick/throttle limitations)

FSX lets me fly around the boat (thanks to many of the guys who hang out in this forum it's even better than the FSX COTS "out of the box")
With FSX I can fly a J-3 from the airport I flew at as a kid... Fly the T-6 in primary...a T-45 etc... I can study the F/A-18... VRS has made that a sim in a sim; much like A2A with their WWII acft. I mostly fly sludge's  F-18 (works with my current system, superbug is a slideshow). Sometimes I just want to sight see or train instruments... or do aerobatics all which FSX lets me do.

When I want the combat side of the house I use TSH... although dated its still a fun study sim of the hornet.

DCS.... at first I was curious about Russian fighters, my favorite is the SU-27 and as it progressed you could fly around the boat (of course the Russian Boat) I got hooked on it. Funny I work in simulation for a living and every year at IITSEC I would see F/A-18 Pilots at the DCS booth commenting that they wish they had an F-18 they could use because they saw real training value. Last year Boeing had these portable F-18 Simulators that  all of us should have ( )


So despite a bad economy and Microsoft/FSX sudden stoppage... the community is finding itself again? Are the days back of choosing your  sim of fancy or are we moving to the JSFof PC SIMS/one sim fits all ? Time will tell. For now I will keep flying my FSX F-18s and cross my fingers that DCS gets a hornet soon.

It seems there is a hardcore crowd (small in numbers) that wants to experience the dream of naval/military fighter aviation vicariously through their PC... don't feel bad, I'm one too.

And all the rest that don't want to dedicate valuable  man years to get to the virtual Naval Aviator level of 2000 hrs and 500 traps.... but are curious and love it all the same.

I feel sorry for these developers... they invest more time then us virtual Naval Aviator's and have to do it for little ROI... just something to consider before you pull the trigger on a comment in a forum.



 

[SUBS17]

Thats true approached the wrong way a dev team can have a far smaller profit than what is possible. I'll wait and see what CP come up with but from my prespective they should throw out that manual, get the real life pilot trainning modules and do it that way. They could have a virtual Air Force and Navy and use their trainning program to make pilots at a very decent level of capability by the end of each course. From my own experience its easy to train a Virtual pilot Noob from not knowing how to fly right upto much more complex mission scenarios and team execution of missions. That includes refuelling, rampstarts, JTACs the works so do not rule complex systems or aircraft out and do not limit the development to just basic modelled aircraft or survey sim level complexity. Do not think large scale MP because the reality is that is unlikely with FSX currently. So using just half done aircraft most likely wont gain much and the pilots you train will not hang around just to clock hours up. They should get rid of the 2 types of customers as well, all pilots should have the same trainning and work their way up the chain of command to senior rank. Theres alot of flaws in the approach to CP and the above is just a few ideas which will make it a program that would nudge them in the right direction. Their biggest flaw of course is to ignore the serious pilots who fly Falcon 4 BMS, DCS etc. If its good enough to get these guys to join then its going to have everyone sign up.

I'll give you the point on some of the systems modeling in SOME of the aircraft in DCS/LOMAC.  I'll also give you a point for how the game streamlines computer resources that allow you to play the game.  But at the same time, I have witnessed some things that were off, such as proper flight modeling, and I've definitely seen some things done in the game that lead me to think that the modeling is a little less than 99%.  From what I remember, the aircraft that LOMAC/DCS did release, they were well done.  But I also remember coming back from OIF, and seeing a bunch of F-16s and F/A-18s flying around with F-15 cockpits and flight dynamics.   Just my opinion here, LOMAC/DCS is a decent platform, but I personally don't see what the big hype about it is.

Its a pity that you do not know the difference, DCS has fully modelled aircraft. The A-10C is the best jet addon ever made so far and its relevant here because we are discussing modern air combat pilot trainning in a sim. The A-10C has almost everything modelled and yes there is coms for UHF/VHF/Ground crew.(except IFF) DCS World is by far much better than any other sim for combat aircraft trainning, we have for a start DCS World and then all the DCS aircraft can fly with in it, DCS A-10C, DCS KA50 Blackshark 2 and DCS P51 Mustang. Now this is getting Flaming Cliffs 3 this month which includes all of the aircraft in LOMAC in that same enviroment. As well as that we have combined arms so now players can be a JTAC on the ground and they can control ground units. This is a big deal as we have a sim with very detailed aircraft and sytems flying together in a dynamic battlefield. As well as that since the sdk was released FSX addon makers have joined in and are making alot of addons at dcs A-10c level including some carrier bourne aircraft such as the T2, Superhornet, F-14D. There is a teamspeak mod which is ingame voice coms and we can even send text messages(9 liner briefs etc) via the sims datalink. And no they are not using F-15 pits for F-16s anymore the devs for these addons are making full 6dof clickable pits(in some cases front and back seat for 2 seat trainers that will work in mp)with everything working even fuses etc for their addons. I would not be surprised if DCS eventually got global terrain a wise dev would take a serious look at DCS if they are planning to do anything aircombat related IMO. As far as flight trainning is concerned if we compare FSX to DCS World currently FSXs tutorials is actually quite good in the stock FSX and is more detailed in some areas. DCS skips the early pilot trainning and only focuses on the systems and weapons in its addons and how to employ them. There is some basic stuff like NAV with Tacan and ILS. In development though are a Hawk, T2, and T38A and these 3 trainers are going to be 2 seaters in mp and the devs of the Hawk and T38A are planning on doing a detailed pilot trainning program based on the real life RAF and USAF trainning programs. And then there is the BFT campaign which is already now available for the A-10C which is IMO the best and most indepth pilot trainning I have yet come across and compares to what FighterOps was aiming for. If I were the devs of CP I'd download DCS World, buy the A-10C and get the BFT campaign and take a good look at it. Since some of FSXs pilot trainning programs are quite similar to the BFT campaign and BFT is directed at jet combat pilot trainning in DCS. It gets better since BFT is not the combat aspect, that is the next series of modules including refuelling and countermeasures/threat avoidance. The best pilot trainning in any sim is the one that teaches the pilot how to do the stuff the right way.(so Real life pilot trainning manuals are what you need)    

 

[jimi08]

I'll wait and see what CP come up with but from my prespective they should throw out that manual, get the real life pilot trainning modules and do it that way.

There is DEFINITELY something in the works based on what you has stated above, but it's not done by CP.  It's called Virtual Flight Academy (VFA).  It's been in the works for years and is currently being fielded by the United States Air Force Academy and Wentworth Flight School.  They are trying to revolutionize the way we train our future combat aviators/pilots, and they are using FSX as the mission enabler.  Although the website is still a work in progress, you can get more information about it here at http://www.virtual-flight-academy.org/.  I have also attached a few articles behind their training philosophy with this post.


....about the rest of the stuff you have written in your last post....

LOL, well you definitely sound like a LOMAC/DCS salesman.  Maybe you'll convert a few in the forums here.  This has definitely turned into a FSX/LOMAC/DCS pissing contest which wasn't my intent.  I was more aimed at the perception Combat Pilot was receiving.

The best pilot trainning in any sim is the one that teaches the pilot how to do the stuff the right way.

Agreed.  Hopefully we'll see something in the near future that will cover all of the bases that will enable us to do just that...

[SUBS17]

It wasn't a pissing contest I was merely informing you on what you're missing out on.

[2Dog]

I've been away from flight sims for quite some time, too long, and I've never flown online before but I'm slowly getting back into the swing of things with FSX, I'm also really looking forward to flying CP's F/A 18D.

One of the reasons I'm drawn to CP is because the 'Recommended System Requirements' are so low, and I would imagine there's quite a few out there in a similar boat to myself as far as their hardware is concerned. I also like the idea of having a structured training program and hope CP tries to get as close as possible to the real thing.

There was also an announcement recently that there's going to be squadron restructuring which will include aircraft flown etc, I just hope that it gives more information about the F/A 18D that's in development.

[2Dog]

Combat Pilot has just announced that it's looking for beta testers to start testing by the end of this week. More info can be found here -

http://combatpilotseries.com/board/index.php?/topic/81-closed-operational-evaluation-opeval/