How many of my fellow /k/omrades plays combat flight simulators?

>>32947221
Not sure if it's really a "simulator" since it's pretty arcadey but I play warthunder sometimes.
What do you play OP?

>>32947221
IL-2 Sturmovik. Plenty of mods, and dropping a nuke on an airfield is fun as fuck.

>>32947239
I enjoy a bit of war thunder here and there aswell. Right now i'm working on learning the A10C in DCS, been flying alot of Su-25 on there aswell.

Good fun

>>32947245
Sweet, is that Sturmovik 1946 that you speak of?

DCS if I feel like like mindlessly killing things, a bit arcade but some realism.
BMS if I feel like ultra realism with less killing of things and low graphics.
IL2 BOS if I feel like like being in realistic WW2
War Thunder if I feel like playing an arcade shooter but with planes in WW2.

>>32947288
I agree that DCS in its whole with flamming cliffs isn't full sim, The A10C,Mig 21 and viggen sure seems up there though, from my personal experience.
Depends on what module you buy i suppose.

>>32947288
If you're mindless killing things in DCS you're playing the wrong missions and/or using the wrong modules.

3rd gen is where this sim is really shining right now. MiG-21 and Viggen are great. Mirage is also fun while still being competitive against SPAAMRAAM servers that have 30 people in them.

BOS is great though, can't wait for them to move onto the pacific campaign.

File: 7.jpg (477KB, 2560x1080px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 2560x1080px

DCS is the modern gold standard for me. If they continue to produce hi fidelity modules at a study-sim level i'll continue to support them. only drawback is a lack of diversity for theatres and lack of dynamic campaign. Lately I've been playing the Mirage 2000 campaign but my absolute favorite module to fly is the KA-50 hands down.

>>32947277
yeah. Really fun, even though I cant dogfight for shit

File: k5Bantl.png (240KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1920x1080px

>>32947221
I'm totally in love with the AJS-37 Viggen (which just released on the Stable build btw)
Call the swedes cucks for as long as you want, but they do know how to build a plane

>>32947363
Yeah, actually, Flight Model wise, the fcs f15c is more accurate than the a-10c. the rest is correct.

>>32948274
no.


wrong.
stop.
Swedes cannot build anything that isn't pre programmed for 10 hours each time before flight.

>>32948792
yeah that's kind of a bummer. but it's more an issue of doctrine than design

File: 28547628331264.png (71KB, 500x332px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 500x332px

>>32947221
Ka-50 is my one true love. What we really need is a purebred attack helo like AH-1 or AH-64, but the Ka-50 is really fun once once you what you're doing. I like reading the manual and knowing everything about one aircraft.

>>32947221
I used to play Jane's longbow sim and Jane's combat flight sim back when it was popular.

Nothing feels better than hiding behind dunes and tagging tanks on radar while your ai wingman launches hellfire missiles on Iraqi t60s.

>>32949053
Hopefully we will see more multicrew vehicles after they've finished the F-14 for dcs

>>32949187
I would love to see a sim based around a company of merc helos, hauling guerillas (or government troops) around Africa, trashing drug facilities in South America, or doing contract work in the Middle East.

How does BVR work in DCS, do they have any stealth aircraft in?

>>32947288
>DCS if I feel like like mindlessly killing things, a bit arcade but some realism.
>BMS if I feel like ultra realism

This is bait, BMS is 20 years old and has on-rails FM, it's much less realistic than DCS

Is DCS worth trying to get into if I am working on my IRL pilot's license? Not as a training aid obviously.

Also, why are there so many completely random craft and yet no Typhoon?

>>32950017
The developers say that the F-15/SU-27 radar is an abstraction of the real thing but it looks the same as footage i've seen of them. I think they mean the EXACT behaviour of how easily it picks up targets at certain ranges and relative altitudes is not precisely based on real world data. It still has the correct scanning deflections, controls and visual representations

The functions as far as I know are exactly the same. There's probably a bunch of utility and tuning functions missing though.

It is very realistic.

>>32947221
I play DCS when I can, thought my video card is in need of un upgrade to run 2.0 well. I play a lot of War Thunder simulator though to fill the gaps.

File: Poor Little White Boi.webm (2MB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 960x540px

>>32947239
WT doesn't count as a simulator at all.

>>32949053
I played the KA-50 since Blackshark 1. I haven't touched it in over a year but I tried it again a few days ago and the cockpit just feels like home.

>>32950377
I mean if you like realistic flight models then yeah I'd say so.

>>32948196
DCS sucks compared to Falcon BMS for actually having an engaging environment, though.

>>32950017
It's pretty cartoonish because electronic warfare basically doesn't work at all in most sims.

File: 975397539753070.png (3MB, 1500x1168px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1500x1168px

>>32947221
Air to air combat feels the most fun in the older jets, probably because you see the vibrations more and there's probably a difference in how much movement of the joystick is required compared to modern fly-by-wire jets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZeiCGxFlGQ

The most fun thing to do in modern jets is low level attack/anti-ship stuff. Being closer to the ground makes you feel faster and compensates for the super-smoothness of the control system which can make it the experience a bit too gentle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB8nUaATjpo

DCS will fucking own once everyone is playing with 2.0 graphics and they bring in actually good explosion effects and maybe better sounds too

>>32951963
Do they intend to continue supporting and updating the game and its individual modules indefinitely?

>>32947221
Fuckin' AJS-37 makes my dick diamonds.

Is there a good flight sim I can use on a iPad?

> pls no homo bully

File: PhotoFunia-1480973415.jpg (297KB, 877x1200px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 877x1200px

>>32952604
Delet this

>>32947245
>not killing Me-262s with your I-16's 7.62 caliber pulse laser cannons
>dat superior turning capability

>>32947221

Just started playing DCS again, the F-15 is a blast to learn.

>>32950377
Yes, DCS is far leagues ahead of any other sim in terms if flight modeling. It's well worth flying just to experience the physics and graphics. No other sim comes close, especially when it comes to the way helicopters are modeled.

I also suggest downloading Rise of Flight, and puttering around in the two free fighters you get for that. New fighters are pretty cheap at $3+ a pop.

>>32954629
https://riseofflight.com/download/

>>32950252
While DCS is obviously a lot more modern it feels sterile compared to the dynamic campaign of BMS, both are great games but I think DCS is yet to completely replace BMS

>>32951941
Modeling EW is hard as hell as much of the capabilities are classified, so they just go with the noise jamming burn-through bubble bullshit.

File: hh2.jpg (102KB, 1126x1429px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1126x1429px

>>32955120
You can literally use your keyboard to fly BMS through your 'dynamic campaign', it is no flight sim by modern standards. Besides, DCS has a much more powerful mission editor and you can make whatever scenarios you like in it.

With BMS, there are sadly still old falcon 4 players even today who do not know what stalls and spins are like, and who have no idea they've been flying along on rails for rails for years.

Sad.

>>32947221
The only one i play is War Thunder and i have quite a lot of hours.

My favorite planes to fly out are the p47 and P36 usually.

>>32955762
That's not a sim

>>32955866
yes it is faggot
There are 3 categories depending on how hardcore a flyer you are.
I play sim battles and Realistic battle on the reg.
never any of that arcade crap

>>32955889
No, it's not, it's an arcade game that pretends to be a sim like that Console IL2 game

>>32955897
Its like you didnt even read my post
atleast do some research before you shit on a game you drooling retard

File: Yourethefuckingretard.png (88KB, 482x138px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 482x138px

>>32955932
I have 1500 hours, it's not a sim. It's an arcade game that pretends to be a sim.

DCS is a sim.
IL-2 is a sim.
BMS 4.0 is a sim.

Warthunder, is not a sim.

>>32955939
And yet here you are.
As far as the absolute Simulator mode, YOU have autism anon.
Swallow that and think about it tonight.

>>32955943
Sorry, Warthunder isn't a sim, go be a child elsewhere

I play ace combat

>>32955939
No, it's a fucking flight sim. If it's not a sim then why do I have a HOTAS setup w/ warthog for it then you dumb nigger?

File: 20160413194724_1.jpg (235KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1920x1080px

Personally when it comes to war thunder i play ¨Realistic¨ i don't find it too much arcade and not too much simulator, just somewhere in the middle.
Simple but not too much arcade or too much simulator, just easy going.

Simulator mode itself i would say is a simulator, BUT, not an hardcore simulator still, i'd say its up there though, of course not on the level of any of the newer IL-2 sturmovik games or the older birds of DCS. Larger quantity of planes, but lower quality of flight model and such of course. But the fundamental basics is in there and i dont know how anybody can deny that.

>>32956676
Because you can?

Doesn't make that shit-fest a sim anymore than WoWP.

File: FagetKill.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

I like to fly most things in DCS that aren't WWII or shitty trainers, I've had a lot of fun with it but the lack of a dynamic campaign and devs that are all over the place and dedicate their time to who the fuck knows makes in frustrating.

There's so much untapped potential in DCS and they could dedicate their time to fixing the game but they would rather shill WWII because that makes them money.

Also we play flight sims and shit at
>>167856608

Our thread is shit sometimes but we have a pretty chill TS.

>>32958716
True, but if you play Blue Flag, for example, it's heavily scripted to be semi-dynamic, and the mission designers are very good.

>>32958831
Yeah the only issue is it's been in testing for half a year and noone plays when it's testing (except right now because they added viggens)

>>32955939
Is DCS the only good sim with a variety of modern aircraft?

BMS 4.0 is definitely good, but only has the F-16 unless I'm mistaken.

>>32958956
Well BMS has other aircraft too, the only issue is they have to use F-16 avionics, which honestly isn't much of an issue for the planes like the F-18 and Harrier, but everything else just feels wrong.

>>32948792
>>32948882

What are you talking about?

>>32950377
The Typhoon is in development

>>32949053
I thought they were making an AH-1 Module.

>>32951907
TIL: Prop planes have a jet wash.

>>32951907
Did the other guy turn around that fast or did some other dude happen to be there to fuck his shit up?

>>32960705
2 different planes altogether, the first one was a mig-15 and the second was an Me-163

File: IMG_3533.png (744KB, 1136x640px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 1136x640px

>>32956447
Ayyy

>>32960671
There's not a single prop plane in that webm though....

File: ACE7_PSX_su30_01_1449344322.jpg (1MB, 3840x2320px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2320px

>>32960926
Can't wait for ace combat 7

File: IMG_3529.gif (3MB, 422x214px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 422x214px

>>32961385
>the old man is pixy

>>32947221
DCS su25 cuz it was free. su27 becasue all i had was 10$ in my steam account and ive been pretty pinched for money lately. Ive gotten to the point where i aggressively hunt f15s on the 104th server now. i still need practice dogfighting but ambushing always gets a kill.

>>32947257
su25s are nice to fly. i still havent gotten the hang of launchign vikhrs safely. 58mpu missiles are always nice though.

>>32947363
i want the mig 21 next. the su27 is getting a bit old for me.

>>32959095
the Viggen heavily relies on preset nav points (they can be enter in the cockpit too, but it's a hassle)
also for precise bomb delivery it needs the local QFE, as the bord computer uses it for it's calculations

>>32961462
Are half your kills friendlies?

>>32955581
BMS is not on rails, it has advanced flight model for F-16.

>>32964370
No, it doesn't. The software needed to model advanced fm's didn't even exist when old Falcon 4 was developed. Its fm tech is very archaic

>>32956676
You can set up a fucking HOTAS for Ace Combat too you dumb nigger.

>>32964421
BMS has rewritten source code, so it has completely different FM.

>>32964550
Still no where near the complexity levels of DCS, the stalls are still scripted, you can't even get a departure from flight

How realistic is combat in DCS anyway?

>>32964588
It's the most realistic modern combat sim on the market... and the only that not only has advanced flight modeling for the aircraft, but also the weapons themselves

File: shaky.gif (486KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 500x250px

>>32947221
I played Over G fighters once, and that's how I learned that flight "simulators" aren't really fun. Then I went back to playing Ace Combat, and it's a whole lotta fun.

>>32964586
F-16 itself is very little prone to deep stalls due to DFLCS. Maybe you think that BMS has worse FM just because real F-16 has considerably different flight model from DCS aircraft?

>>32964701
Is there weapons I am more curious about.

I have a hard time believing modern fighters can actually evade missiles and force maneuvering fights as they seem to in game footage I've seen.

>>32955120
I know modeling EW is hard, hence why no one does it correctly.

>>32964743
BMS has worse fm because it literally has worse fm. You clearly know zero about flight modeling development and the different software used to simulate physics in different sims, nor are you aware of how aircraft actually behave in real life.

>>32964586
>>32964370
>>32964743
>>32955581
Dude, I am no fanboy, I love both games, and the F-16 and A-10 are tied in second place for my all time fav.

But you know nothing of BMS. The F-16 in BMS feels like its on rails because the f-16 flies like its on rails. BMS has completely rewritten FM code, "borrowed" from a public domain NASA simulator for the F-16 from the 80s. Thats right, BMS has the FMs from an actual F-16 simulator.

And it will very much stall, its just that the computer is very good at not letting you. assault two or more limiters at once and see what happens. Or go CAT I with wing bags and bombs and try and dog fight....
But enough about that, what is the story with the leatherneck F-14 for DCS? Ive been out of the loop for a while.

File: pilot.jpg (48KB, 564x425px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 564x425px

>>32961385
I'm not the only one who thinks Ace Combat could be improved by making in charge of the whole Air Force am I? Think about it like this, as we've seen in the 6th game the developers have become fantastic at creating huge battles with all kinds of units, so perhaps your character could be responsible not just for his own aircraft and maybe a few wingmen, but for all the air support going into battle.

Heck, maybe even have the player buy the airforce from his own funds gained in battle, so he has to choose between quantity and quality, and in SP newgames he can bring a buttload of aircraft from all the funds he's recieved in the previous games.

File: Untitled.jpg (121KB, 1278x789px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1278x789px

Can someone explain to me how an Aircraft's RWR can possibly differentiate between potential sources? For instance, how can it tell the radar reaching it is coming specifically from a ground-based platform or alternatively from an AWACS?

>>32965010
>F-16 from the 80s. Thats right, BMS has the FMs from an actual F-16 simulator.
>from the 80's

Take a deep breath. And think about what you just wrote here.

A sim from the 80's, an old PC game from the 90's....

Now, ask yourself, is the Air Force still using the same sims from the 80's?

Are you still using Windows 95 and using the same PC from the 1997?

No?

Why?

Oh, because technology has changed since then?

Really?

Wow.

So, now ask yourself. Could a flight game from 20+ years ago have anything close to the ability of physics modeling as a 2016/17 flight sim?

The answer is course, no. The software simply did not exist at the time the way it does now. Modern sims, like DCS, and RoF, model flight in a completely different manner than old sims from the early 2000's and before. They model true 'dynamic' flight. No scripting, no invisible rails.

The reason BMS F-16 feels like it's on rails because the FM is literally based on scripts, the flight model has to follow a certain set of rules, boundaries, and it's not allowed outside of those boundaries. BMS does not model edge of the envelope flying because it can't. Dynamic stalls and spins are not present because the game simply is incapable of modeling them.

DCS has a single engine FBW fighter you can directly test against BMS, they do not behave at all the same.

Take the helicopter modeling in DCS for example, there's no way the BMS engine could ever do that. The base flight model code simply is not up to par to model any of it.

It's not 1998 anymore. Real world physics may be the same, but what your computer can model isn't.

>>32965010
>what is the story with the leatherneck F-14 for DCS?
Now that they're done with the Viggen, it's what they're working on currently, so Soon™.
>>32965466
In short? They use different kinds of radar to do different things. An Air-search radar uses a different technique to find targets than a launcher's guidance radar. With a bit more signal resolution, suddenly you can tell threats apart, for instance tell apart a Mig-29 and a Mig-31.
Of course, there's limitations. For example, if you want to fuck with some people, switch your radar to flood mode (6 in the F-15, not sure if other modules have it). That just turns on the radar like a big-ass flashlight, providing no scanning at all. It's intended for close-range AIM-7 shots, but that behavior is exactly what an active radar-guided missile does. In short, anyone you point your nose at while in flood mode has their missile alert go off. Great for fucking with people rearming at an airbase, for instance.

>>32965619
>Now, ask yourself, is the Air Force still using the same sims from the 80's?
You'd... be surprised.

>>32965644
That's fascinating, is there a good, fairly-current book, or even set of videos, that cover radar and other air combat electronic systems and countermeasures? One that also goes into the interface between these systems and the various weapon systems employed in air war would be wonderful.

File: a-10.jpg (2MB, 1920x1275px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1275px

>>32965010

>>32952055
Yes. The idea behind DCS is that it just keeps being continuously updated with more modules and better graphics and performance and those modules are constantly updated with bugfixes and performance improvements. Right now it's at 2.0 but its basically implied it will go continue to 3 and 4 and 5 endlessly until there is a massive collection of aircraft.

>>32947221
I used to play Falcon 4.0 way back when, but kind of fell out of flight simulators. I tried to play War Thunder recently, but ended up just getting frustrated trying to play with a stick.

I really want to try the DCS F-5 though.

>>32967190
Was that when playing ¨simulator¨ mode in war thunder?

And yea the F-5 looks like good fun

>>32967196
Every time I've tried anything that wasn't arcade, it just waits indefinitely. I eventually find something else to do and give up.

>>32967257
Yea i gotcha, arcade or realistic is strictly mouse and keyboard if you want to be somewhat competitive though, you might enjoy IL-2 sturmovik, have you tried it?

>>32947221

I play DCS. I used to play fighters mostly, but then I discovered the awesomeness of CAS aircraft. Then I got the KA-50 which is currently my favorite.

I hope for an Apache and then a UH-60 module, but knowing DCS I'll die of old age first.

>>32967291
MIGHT be closer then you think, Leatherneck is bringing in the F-14 two seater ¨soon¨.

(http://www.leatherneck-sim.com/f14/ )

That means multi crew support, after that you might just see an Apache or so, hopefully.

>>32967271
I haven't tried IL-2, more into the modern stuff. War Thunder just seemed like a fun concept even in arcade mode, I just can't do the controls. Using the mouse just isn't fun for me.

>>32965619
>So, now ask yourself. Could a flight game from 20+ years ago have anything close to the ability of physics modeling as a 2016/17 flight sim?

Well, the real deal is from the late 70s, soooo

Is the Ka-50 worth geting for DCS?
How hard is it to learn and manage its magical ways?

>>32961601

That just makes sense to me, lets you do more work on the ground when you are preparing the aircraft for takeoff anyway.

>>32951850
Lol wtf are you talking about? The actual specifications and details are classified so you can hardly call DCS a sim, it's more like a arcade game. The BVR is about as complex as COD, point and shoot

>>32950377
The typhoon is being developed by VEAO (awful company, previous modules have been scam tier) and it's only a block 1 so it's only armament will be AMRAAM and ASRAAM. And it won't be based off real world data since it's classified

>>32967190
What's this, a DCS F-5 FREEDOM FIGHTER pack??

:D

Time to go get a HOTAS joystick and get downloading.

>>32969718
>>32967196
>>32967190
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/tiger/

>Steam incompatible

That's why I never saw this.

>>32965648
Modern fighter sims that the air force uses are actually pretty sweet. The F-15E sims basically have you sit in a globe with projected images surrounding you 360 degrees. Each sim takes a pretty enormous room to house as well. Flight model still needs some work but for training how to employ weapons BVR and air to surface, it is great.

File: ScreenShot_002.jpg (475KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1920x1080px

>>32968572

Its difficult to fly it, but it gives you great satisfaction once you learn to control this baby.

>>32968572
Yeah, it's actually pretty easy to learn as the systems are divided up in a way that makes it easy to learn one thing at a time.

>>32969511
Honestly why even bother then.

>>32970560
Because people will buy it no matter what, it's a Eurofighter.

>>32970077
>Its difficult to fly it

Its the easiest helicopter to fly, the only issue is the rotors striking each other during hard turns. Its incredibly smooth to fly and once its trimmed out it practically flies itself.

Anyone know the reason behind why the F-5 and the Viggen isn't being released on steam as a DCS dlc?

>>32970804
They're both early access and DLC, which steam has a rule against

>>32965644
>anyone you point your nose at while in flood mode has their missile alert go off.
They changed it because they decided it's more likely your RWR would realize how unfocused the beam is and know it's a FLOOD mode. Now it gives a lock warning instead.

>>32970605
Should be the best turn fighter in the game though so that will be nice. If they incorporate the ASRAAM even nicer. It won't be nearly invincible but it will be by far the best fighter in the game

>>32969484
You have obviously never had a BVR fight in DCS, or don't know how to do it if you have. If anything, DCS heavily discourages long range missile shots because an AIM-120 has a terrible flight profile and too much drag, and as one of the longest rnaged missiles can only hit a maneuvering target at around 8nmi. Understanding the situation and position of the enemy, you, and any active missiles is incredibly important to surviving.

>>32971002
Yeah AIM-120s are shit in DCS, yet servers ban it because they think it is OP for no fucking reason so you're stuck with AIM-7s.

But then again, if it was a realistic flight profile then F-15s would be invincible as long as you played somewhat conservatively.

Can some one tell me what the difference is between the F-15C in Flaming Cliffs 3, compared to the F-15C DCS World module?

>>32971870
No difference in terms of the plane itself, just whether you want to buy it separate form the FC3 pack or not.

>>32967615
......

>computers from the 70's could simulate the 70's perfectly

Do you have any idea what you're trying to say?

>>32947221
i play dcs world