Need more civilian aircraft

[wjayson1981]

Looking at the fancy cities in Nevada, Dubai and flew past airports seems less realistic without various common airlines widebody aircraft. Perhaps ED should come up with more Boeing 767. 747, 777. 737, 767 and Airbus A380, A320, etc? Add few different civilian vehicles too, I expect to see American, Japanese, continental cars in the 2 rich countries instead of Soviet era cars.

[Insônia]

Such idea can trace back to 201x.
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/121464-civil-aviation-wish-list/

AI/(human)unflyable assets. maybe?
However consider ED can only "survive" by keep pumping half finished early access modules into the market. i dun think they will ever prioritize such thing.

Flyable full fidelity, maybe not. lol. DCS may not ready to such thing. It has weakest map, ATC, traffic and weather in GA context,

Here's civilian aircraft DCS mod to enrich your game environment:
https://cam.em-key.de/

[wjayson1981]

Originally posted by Insônia:

Such idea can trace back to 201x.
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/121464-civil-aviation-wish-list/

AI/(human)unflyable assets. maybe?
However consider ED can only "survive" by keep pumping half finished early access modules into the market. and potential be exploited by bad actor to make fake footages. i dun think they will ever prioritize such thing.

Flyable full fidelity, maybe not. lol. DCS may not ready to such thing. It has weakest map, ATC, traffic and weather in GA context,

Here's civilian aircraft DCS mod to enrich your game environment:
https://cam.em-key.de/

I'm not interested in mods by the way. Is it that hard for ED to make airliner when most of the widebody aircraft design are similar?

[Troll Norris]

Partially. In my opinion you can not make Boeing 747 or Any other Boeing or Airbus e.t.c... without getting the manufacturer licence.

[Gunn]

Originally posted by wjayson1981:

...Is it that hard for ED to make airliner when most of the widebody aircraft design are similar?

Probably not. But keep in mind just because you want something that ED has determined to be not all that important when looking at the bigger picture, doesn't mean they think it's "hard" to do.

[spike2071]

Originally posted by Gunn:

Originally posted by wjayson1981:

...Is it that hard for ED to make airliner when most of the widebody aircraft design are similar?

Probably not. But keep in mind just because you want something that ED has determined to be not all that important when looking at the bigger picture, doesn't mean they think it's "hard" to do.

In addition to Troll Norris' comment, this is a key one. It seems to take an inordinate amount of time to just update the older models. We're still intercepting that terrible looking Bear, and refuelling from that terrible S-3. They announced the S-3 was getting a model update over a year ago and it's still not done (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

[Insônia]

Same reason why you dont see many GA sim companies try to make successful combat sims. Are they stupid? ofc not. everybody stay in their lane for a reason. it's not technology hard but financially unfeasible with their current available assets.
Is getting a commercial license harder than government and military red tape clearance? i dun think so.

[Gunfreak]

Originally posted by spike2071:

Originally posted by Gunn:

Probably not. But keep in mind just because you want something that ED has determined to be not all that important when looking at the bigger picture, doesn't mean they think it's "hard" to do.

In addition to Troll Norris' comment, this is a key one. It seems to take an inordinate amount of time to just update the older models. We're still intercepting that terrible looking Bear, and refuelling from that terrible S-3. They announced the S-3 was getting a model update over a year ago and it's still not done (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

3 years actually since they announced the B1, B52 and S-3 were getting new models.
6 years since they said ww2 assets pack was getting B24,B25,B26 Me109G and Typhoon AI assets.

[SSerponi76]

Have some more civilian IA plane might be good for various things.
However, I don't understand why someone whould like to fly a 747 on a COMBAT flight sim...

[Grapplemania]

I feel like its pretty self explanatory why there aren't civilian aircraft in a game called "Digital Combat Simulator"

[unknown]

Originally posted by SSerponi76:

Have some more civilian IA plane might be good for various things.
However, I don't understand why someone whould like to fly a 747 on a COMBAT flight sim...

As Ai I think it could be interesting for certain senarios. particularly because in real life there is a ton of air traffic. And while warzones tend to be avoided, there are senarios that can be done where the 2 sides don't start in a hot engagement, but rather a tense situation where there is a plethra of unidentified aircraft including civilian planes. I guess variaty is always welcomed. But I don't ecpect or even want a flyable version given the X-plane and MSFS versions are fine and those sims have far more GA oriented features which make it preferred.

[SSerponi76]

Originally posted by unknown:

Originally posted by SSerponi76:

Have some more civilian IA plane might be good for various things.
However, I don't understand why someone whould like to fly a 747 on a COMBAT flight sim...

As Ai I think it could be interesting for certain senarios. particularly because in real life there is a ton of air traffic. And while warzones tend to be avoided, there are senarios that can be done where the 2 sides don't start in a hot engagement, but rather a tense situation where there is a plethra of unidentified aircraft including civilian planes. I guess variaty is always welcomed. But I don't ecpect or even want a flyable version given the X-plane and MSFS versions are fine and those sims have far more GA oriented features which make it preferred.

/ This

[wjayson1981]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Partially. In my opinion you can not make Boeing 747 or Any other Boeing or Airbus e.t.c... without getting the manufacturer licence.

You don't need to pay if you don't make it 100% accurate. Like US military vehicles & aircraft in movies and toys, some don't need to pay royalty if they look just slightly different be it Hummer, M-1A2 Abram, F-16C, etc to Boeing 747. Same goes to cars in PC games, movies, TV series, they'll remove the badge, logo and name tags on the cars. ED can put all the real world aircraft as long as they don't put the actual name and don't give them actual airline markings even if the pattern & paint color on the Airbus A380 look like Emirates Air but without the logo and names.

[wjayson1981]

Originally posted by SSerponi76:

Have some more civilian IA plane might be good for various things.
However, I don't understand why someone whould like to fly a 747 on a COMBAT flight sim...

To make it look like you're flying in Dubai and Nevada where their airports and airspace are always busy with these airliner and freightliner flying in and out of famous tourist spots. Also you can make emergency intercept and escort mission in possible war scenario incursion of enemy fighters threatening to down civilian aircraft. Maybe later, DCS would want to challenge MS Flight Simulator that has serious action with Airport 77 style where we get to fly Concorde escaping from enemy Mirage F1 or Israeli Et Al airliner with countermeasures trying to spoof enemy missiles getting low on terrain masking while waiting for friendly fighters to arrive. Unlike MS Flight Simulator, DCS can make things more violent.

[Troll Norris]

Originally posted by wjayson1981:

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Partially. In my opinion you can not make Boeing 747 or Any other Boeing or Airbus e.t.c... without getting the manufacturer licence.

You don't need to pay if you don't make it 100% accurate.

Accurancy is not the problem. Name is the problem. You can not name it Boeing 747-400 because it is licenced name. Look into NTTR, its hotels and casinos. The names and logos on the buildings are intentionally fake to avoid copyright infringement. Problem is not the 3D model. Problem is the name.

[wjayson1981]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Originally posted by wjayson1981:

You don't need to pay if you don't make it 100% accurate.

Accurancy is not the problem. Name is the problem. You can not name it Boeing 747-400 because it is licenced name. Look into NTTR, its hotels and casinos. The names and logos on the buildings are intentionally fake to avoid copyright infringement. Problem is not the 3D model. Problem is the name.

That's why I mentioned not to name the aircraft the actual name in the game. Just call it Beeing 474 and E-Bus 830 etc. Maybe ED can make some of these fake names realistic aircraft flyable too, I bet some would want to recreate Airport 77 scenario in DCS because it can. I would love to fly Concordia against Mirage F1.