Click the image for a larger shot..

The Quest for the Holy Grail. The Knights of the Round Table aspired to find the Holy Grail because its attainment would prove their purity, piety and faith. It was unattainable to all save for one knight, Sir Galahad.

Every discipline has it’s own form of the Holy Grail. Be it business, sports, hobbies whatever: every serious pursuit has an ultimate ideal. The Air Combat flight simulation genre is no different.

Right now we are in a period of great creativity in the ACFS arena. Within the next 6 months or so, we will see an influx of some of the most incredible and all encompassing simulations ever dreamt of. The increased and ever increasing power of the PC and its’ peripherals has allowed the programmers to do today what they have been aspiring to for years.

Flying Corps 3d. Click for a full size screen shot... 20K.

I have questioned some truly HARD-CORE flight simulation fanatics. Many of their names and call signs would be familiar to you. I posed the question, "What would make the 'PERFECT' flight sim?" I asked for the top 10 "must have" features in a flight sim. They were ranked from the most important on down. Understand, ALL of the items listed are extremely important to fulfill the quest, so ranking them was very difficult. Really, there are no least important features. But in view of needed compromise due to programming limitations, the higher items on the list take precedence.

I have compiled everyone’s ratings and listed them below. In the end the list exceeded 10 total items, so later in the article I post the entire list. Please realize that this list is by no means exhaustive.

I do need to point out that there is a slight bias in the list, since most of the pilots’ I polled LAN network. As a result these pilots are adamant that LAN NETWORK support is indispensable!

The Top Ten

• 1. Realistic Flight Model
• 2. Dynamic Campaign
• 3. High Artificial Intelligence (AI)
• 4. Network Play
• 5. Realistic Avionics
• 6. Realistic Weapons performance and delivery
• 7. Padlock with situational awareness indicators
• 8. Mission Editing (Solo and Campaign)
• 9. High Quality Graphics
• 10. Wingman Command Structure

So what exactly do these categories mean? I will give explanations and comments from the poll. I will also list the sim, past or present, which in the opinion of those polled comes closest to fulfilling this category. You will notice that 2 sims take all of the honors here … save 1.

REALISTIC FLIGHT MODEL:

Pretty self-explanatory. The modeled aircraft must perform like the real thing. It must give you the "feel" of actually flying. "FEEL" was stated over and over again. It must have roll rates that are dynamic and change with altitude and air speed. It must bleed speed in a turn. It must perform differently at various altitudes in a fashion that conforms to the real characteristics of the aircraft. In short, the flight model must accurately depict all of the actual flight characteristics of the modeled aircraft.

Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

SU27 2.0. Click the image for a larger shot..

DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN:

First of all, a campaign MUST be included in any sim. There must be a method of providing accomplishment and a feeling of "I WON". Even if a Dynamic Campaign is not included, a "CANNED" campaign must be there.

But the elusive Dynamic Campaign is what makes a sim playable for years to come. In the truly dynamic system, no war will ever be the same. This means that different strategies will be needed. Moreover, the effect of your mission loss or failure must play a roll. If you miss the target, the enemy will move into the next sector and you lose an airfield.

Ideally, this includes supply line logistics. If you are tasked to destroy a supply convoy and fail to do so, then your enemy may continue to use high grade smart weapons against you. On the other hand, if you succeed but fail to protect your own supply lines, you may find yourself using dumb bombs instead of laser guided weapons.

In the dynamic or semi-dynamic system, fighters SCRAMBLE from air bases you are approaching. If the system is comprehensive, including integration of a ground war, you may happen across targets of opportunity, such as a column of tanks advancing through a canyon. If you are on a mission for another target you have to make a strategic decision.

This kind of LIVING world is what we need. Many sims have taken shots at various portions of a dynamic campaign, but none have incorporated them all. HIND had enemy foot soldiers scatter when you made a strafing run, EF2000 has the enemy move forward or back depending on the outcome of your mission, but lacked the ground war integration. Many have tried, but none have gone the distance.

A concept that has been bouncing around for years is the "Virtual Battlefield". What better way to run a war than to have a Flight Sim coupled with a Tank sim, which is supporting a "DOOM STYLE" foot soldier game that depicts a MARINE landing from ships run from a Naval sim. The MARINE squad calls for an airstrike and you come in with your F-16 wing to support the Longbow squadron that is laying waste to the bad guys. Especially as the Internet comes of age and Bandwidth increases, think of the massive battles with scores of players that could be possible. Closest sim in this category? EF2000/TACTCOM (SUPER EF)

Click on the picture to see a larger image..from EF2000 v.2

EFFECTIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:

This encompasses a variety of aspects, but some of the key points follow. Wingmen that actually do as they are told, don’t fly into the ground, hit their targets at least once in a while, will break to avoid being killed … you get the picture. We need Wingmen that fly like LAN wingmen do, like real humans. Effective AI also means that the enemy doesn’t make head-ons at every merge, and maybe they bracket you once in a while (I will never forget when I got bracketed for the first time during the SU-27 1.5 beta sessions, I was never so elated at being shot down).

Effective AI also means that ground forces aren’t laid out in neat little rows or squares, and AI aircraft don’t wait until you drop a bomb on the runway to come after you. ESCORTS should not only stay with you (the flight they are SUPPOSED to protect), but actually protect that same flight. Enemy bandits should not follow you over your SAM emplacements (and SAM emplacements that will shoot at them if they do). I could easily go on for days here, but I think you see what we mean. We want AI that thinks like a human that wants to stay alive and win a war. Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

NETWORK PLAY:

This was primarily LAN based in the comments. But there is also the obvious need for Internet play. The sim should have Internet support built in, be tested and ready to go. Once LAN support is built in, Internet support follows nicely. They go hand in hand. As I mentioned earlier, most of the pilots’ poled are LAN fanatics (and unless you have flown in a LAN group, especially with RADIO COMMS, you just can’t understand), so LAN play showed up pretty high. But as was pointed out by many of the guys, Internet support is a force that must be reckoned with. For the sim that comes closest to the mark, none do a good Internet setup yet, so the winner here is based upon the rock solid stability of it’s LAN capabilities. The runner up here, SU-27 Version 1.5, has the impressive feature of being able to enter or re-enter at will, but lacked the stability of EF. If we can get both of these in one sim …

Closest sim in this category? EF2000/TACTCOM (SUPER EF)

REALISTIC AVIONICS:

This category had an amazing following for one sim. All save the lone Back to Bagdad vote went to SU-27. Not only should the avionics function as the real thing, they must also perform like the real thing. Different modes, range adjustment flexibility, detection cone functionality (a feature the winner here lacks). Something that was mentioned by several was RADAR that locks you up while behind a hill -- has got to go! Radar Lock breaks must be modeled (as with the beaming in SU-27). Another feature anomaly that was given the "thumbs down" was the lack of Gyroscopic Effect on RADAR when rolling the aircraft ala. EF2000/TACTCOM.

Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

REALISTIC WEAPONS PERFORMANCE AND DELIVERY:

This was a point of some contention. My general feeling seems to be encompassed by the "sitting on the fencers" as well as the either/or crowd. Right now there are 2 sims that stood out above the rest in this category, but both had some pretty glaring issues to contend with. The weapons must be modeled accurately … not to what the manufacturers of these weapons publish. Thus the major flaw with SU-27. While the parameters of the weapons, and locking ability and the launching sequences seem very well done, the accuracy is ludicrous.

SHILKES are no where near as deadly as they are in SU-27, SAMS are some of the toughest to spoof and the friendly weapons seem to be lemons. While an enemy R73 hits with almost deadly accuracy with a one hit kill (or may as well be dead hit) a commonality, your R73 may never even get close and when it does, a one hit kill is almost unheard of. And while it should really fall under the flight model category, if you are hit, your aircraft should have handling and systems difficulties. I rarely see an enemy aircraft in any sim suffer problems after a hit. They still manage to pull those high G full burner turns like before. Of course, in SU-27 we don’t have the "KLINGON" infrared missiles as in EF2000/TACTCOM. However in EF2, the accuracy ratio seems a bit more realistic. Both of these sims are close, but still have far to go. Accurate flight modeling hit ratios, kill bubbles, and realistic "spoofability" are some of the items that are considered here.

Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

PADLOCK w/SITUATIONAL AWARENESS INDICATORS:

First, let me state that "HAWKEYE VIEW" is NOT a Padlock view. You can argue with me and anyone else in the poll on this one and you will never make any headway. A Padlock view must turn your head in the direction of the bandit, not point an arrow or give you a little pop up window with an aircraft in it. The key to a good Padlock view is to give you enough information to allow you to tell the direction of the bandit from the nose of your aircraft and the attitude of your aircraft at the same time. The limitations of a computer monitor are never so obvious and deadly as in Padlock. (Ed. note: the effects of a VR headset here are quite amazing. Perhaps with the coming release of Forte's hi res model we may finally achieve a new dimension in simulation realism here..)

Since we do not have physical sensations or G forces, or even the quick check look around ability (although a well thought out FLCS/TQS or CH program can compensate for at least the last one), we must be fed data to over come that handicap. Again, 2 sims were the major contenders for this one and SU-27 was nearly unanimous in the polls. Some of the finer points of the SU-27 padlock are:

• no "Linda Blair" 360 degree views, views must be limited not only to the physical limitations of the aircraft but of the human body as well;
• an excellent informational "floating HUD" to help orient you with the world and aircraft … not always totally effective, but a great tool;
• the requirement of being in "visual range" before allowing a Padlock view initiation, not totally perfect, but well modeled.

The one prominent gripe about the EF Padlock was the ability to see "through the cockpit" as when the aircraft are below you. Su-27 will try to "guess" where the bandit will reappear, as would a human, and if it takes too long, you lose the Padlock and must re-aquire.

I can not stress enough the importance of a Padlock that provides accurate and easily discernible Situational Awareness data. It only takes a few seconds in Padlock to get so completely disoriented as to cause a collision with another aircraft or the ground. Some will say that a "HAWKEYE VIEW" solves most of these issues … to a point and at the expense of realism and accuracy. Most of the pilots’ involved were about as adamant about this as they were about "POP UP WINDOWS" vs. "REAL COCKPIT". Real Cockpits and Padlock View win out. Winner by a landslide is …

Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

MISSION EDITING (Solo and Campaign):

The ability to create your own mission is also very high on the list. Experience with "CANNED" missions and dealing with EF’s WARGEN before TACTCOM (you can tell a computer came up with those Waypoints, "Lets fly over EVERY enemy SAM site between us and the target, shall we?") has taught us as well as the software companies that humans must have input when it comes to their own fate, Virtual or Real. There are two very different approaches to this currently, and both are very well done. My personal favorite would be the EF/TACTCOM campaign mission generator, primarily because I am a big fan of Dynamic Campaigns. The ability to plan what type of mission, where to strike, what to take as armament, what ingress and egress route to take, what mix of aircraft to support the mission -- all of these abilities are critical.

The winner of this category was SU-27, but barely. While there is no Dynamic Campaign to build missions for, you can make an entire scenario, good, bad and ugly. During testing of 1.5, we had a huge 24 hour mission built up that included input from 6 people. Static ground forces, air strikes, CAPS, GAI, SAMS, all could be manipulated. The biggest draw back here is that it is static, once it is gone, it’s done. You can not advance and take over bases or cut off supply lines (they don’t exist). FALCON 3.0 was also a contender here, even the venerable GRAND DADDY of flight sims still holds some gifts for us!

Nearly everyone stated that this needs to be in addition to "CANNED" missions. QUICK COMBAT and "CANNED" missions are necessary for those without the inclination to build their own, or for anyone that needs to kill something quick after a bad day at the office.

Closest sim in this category? SU-27 Flanker

HIGH QUALITY GRAPHICS:

This one is a given. Why are graphics so important? Realistic terrain, clouds etc are a passport into virtual reality and suspension of disbelief. One must have the feeling of actually being there.

Equally important, realistic graphics help with situational awareness. For example, in Longbow Flash Point Korea one gets a strong sensation of speed while skimming over terra firma. Glance out the window on the side and you KNOW if you are visible and a good target from that quarter. Duck down when some lucky SAM has a lock on you and glance in the lock direction and know instantly that you are radar masked.

3D graphics are making this a reality for all of the newest sims as well as some of the recent releases in the form of patches. The winner here was chosen even before the release of GRAPHICS +. 3D will only make it better. If you don’t believe it, go look at the screen shots of DiD’s F22: ADF, Spectrum Holobytes FALCON 4, or SSI’s SU-27 Version 2.0.

Closest sim in this category? EF2000/TACTOM (SUPER EF), G+

WINGMAN COMMAND STRUCTURE:

The ranking of command structure in the Top Ten list surprised many of us. Many LAN players answer the question, "How do I tell my wingman to do so and so…" with the standard answer, "I tell him to and he does it." But the non-LAN players make a solid case for the need for this kind of control.

With that in mind, its interesting that this is also the only area that one of the 2 dominant sims did NOT win (as far as the top ten list is concerned at least). While EF2000 was mentioned (as was FALCON 3.0, but no mention of SU-27), the winner was a sim that has few if any of the other qualities that were considered critical and even had several features that were big No – No's. An easy, single key stroke, logically laid out command structure to tell the computer wingies what to do is imperative.

There must also be the flexibility of more than 4 or 5 commands. Bracketing, dragging, breaking high and low, left and right, engaging, disengaging, form up, formation choices, ground attack, target hand off, weapons status report (before they are down to guns only), RADAR sweep, cover me, return to base, scan sector assignment, etc. These and many more are necessary to allow tactical control and have wingmen make a real difference instead of being missile bait.

Without solid wingman control, many basic strategies become impossible. Head-on merges are not the best way to live through an initial contact! For example, standard two on one or two on two doctrine requires the ability to send your wingmen off to bracket on one side (preferably 2 of them while the third remains with you) while you and your wing bracket the other. This greatly increases the likelihood of a kill.

By the same token, to command two of your flight to watch a different sector of the flight path with RADAR gives you better situational awareness. SA is the sister to "lose sight, lose the fight." A sanitize or sector scan command enables this control. If you miss your target, (of course this NEVER happens to the rest of us), the ability to have your wingman take your target out could be crucial in cutting off supply lines or stopping that pesky SAM site from killing any more of your allies.

Also, total and separate control of your wingmen gives the illusion of being an actual Wing Leader instead of just being a cog in the wheel of a computer run war. Think of all the actions you must perform because you can not instruct your wingmen to do so. Now consider how much more involved and better prepared you would feel if you could have your wingmen perform some of those functions, allowing you (the Wing Leader, after all!) to pay more attention to strategic assessment of the unfolding situation. When was the last time you "Called for help" in a hot and heavy furball and hit the wrong key. "Bugging out, sir!" is NOT what I want you to do!

Even the LAN players agree: we sometimes are required to take along some computer run wingmen to fill out a flight. Having more control over their actions would move them up from Bandit Bait, to being strategically useful. If the AI is extremely well executed, a computer controlled wing could become as valuable as a human player. In short, the player needs complete tactical control of wingmen. Commands should be in a logical and easy to access format. The sim that succeeds in this area will add more than most designers have acknowledged to the overall enjoyment and realism of the simulation. The human players will also have a higher success rate, which means more fun!

Closest sim in this category? USNF/USMF/USNF 97

Now the sims that seemed to be the closest look a bit weighted. Here is a quick list of sims that got at least one vote (or an "either/or" vote) in at least one category: EF2000/TACTCOM, SU-27, FALCON 3.0, Flying Corps, Hornet 3.0, USNF et al, Longbow FPK, Back to Bagdad, TOPGUN Fire at Will, F14D, Tornado, AV8B Harrier, iF22, Air Warrior, Warbirds. Also realize that the people polled have between them probably flown every sim ever produced, so we got a pretty good cross section here. Also, as time progresses, sims keep getting better and better, so it is only logical that the newer sims are closer to the Holy Grail than sims of past years.

I also promised a full list of items that came up (many items were obviously mentioned by several of us):

• 1. Realistic Flight Model
• 2. Dynamic Campaign (Interactive World)
• 3. High AI
• 4. Network Play
• 5. Realistic Avionics
• 6. Realistic Weapons performance and delivery
• 7. Padlock with situational awareness indicators
• 8. Mission editing (Solo and campaign)
• 9. High Quality Graphics
• 10. Wingman Command Structure
• 11. Comms/Tactical Briefing (before and after missions)
• 12. Accurate Sounds
• 13. Weather (Realistic Environment, tress etc.)
• 14. Realistic, Multi level Damage Model
• 15. Network Chat
• 16. Modularity/Multi plane/role capability
• 17. Contrails
• 18. Reload/Refuel
• 19. Total Immersion
• 20. User Interface
• 21. Non AWACS/Gods eye view
• 22. "LIVE" Squadron (promotions etc.)
• 23. Packaging/Manual
• 24. Multiple monitor support
• 25. Auto pilot feature to form on leader
• 26. Coordinates (as in JTIDS in EF)
• 27. Multi Mission type, canned, planned, editing
• 28. Recording ability (ala FALCON or SU-27)
• 29. VR helmet support
• 30. Realistic physics modelling

If we look at the coming barrage of simulations in the next 6 to 9 months, we see that many if not most of these items are being incorporated. Between the pending release of LONGBOW 2, F22: ADF/TAW, FALCON 4, SU-27 Version 2.0, F-15 …. etc., we should be in virtual heaven. I do not expect any one of these sims to be the "Holy Grail", but I expect them to help lead the Sir Galahads of Programming teams closer to their goal.

I would like to thank everyone that participated in the survey. Without your help, this article would not have been possible.

Main    Back

© 1997 - 2000 COMBATSIM.COM, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Last Updated August 30th, 1997