I think realistic space combat will probably flying past each other at 1000s of mph in various orbits around a planet - so be ready to aim and shoot quick. Space shuttle traveled at around 17K and I'd guess much of effort in docking maneuvers is to match orbit and speed.

As far as real life space battles - one of the most effective methods is probably just to throw fast moving debris into orbit and it'll rip up anything that hits it. Even tiny things (like metal pellets or gravel) traveling at fast speed can shred even extremely thick armor. It won't take much to destroy you in space.

I think realistic space battles would play out more like submarine combat and less like air combat, especially not like WW2 air combat.

Thing is, WW2 air combat is much more cinematic and easy to relate to for most people.
It's no wonder the Star Wars space fights are based on WW2 movies like Dam Busters and Squadron 633, here's a very funny clip showing the similarities between the Death Star attack and the aforementioned WW2 movies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OZq-tlJTrU


As for Episode VI, in a movie where living teddy bears take down bipedal robots, unrealistic space fights would be a minor concern if realism was an issue.


So my recommendation for realistic 'space' combat in games goes to....Silent Service :)

http://www.gog.com/game/silent_service_12

Not a videogame, and not combat-focused,* but if you're jonesing for some relatively scientifically accurate space adventuring, you might want to check out the board game High Frontier. Be warned, though, the learning curve on this one is pretty steep (though it's not that complicated once you figure out what's going on).

*There is an option to initiate space war with another company and blow up their stuff, but I've never actually seen anyone bother - just trying to complete basic mission objectives is already dangerous enough.

Old Elite Frontier had realistic combat, as PetrusOctavianus mentioned. Might be interesting for you. From what I remember you could accelerate to fast speed in order to travel to a planet from a jumpoint and in this speed dogfight pirate using small thrusts altering your position slightly in the global means but do a dogfight more or less like in normal game.

I've also heard that Independence War had a hardmode which was more realistic, but I don't know how much.

take a look at the X-Series it might got what ure looking for if u ignore the management part

I think "Rogue System" might just fit your bill. It is based around "fighter" level battles but aims to do so like a super detailed study sim (i.e. like the DCS simulations.

Check it out at http://www.roguesystemsim.com/

About the "sound in space", it has been argued that in a realistic space combat you would still hear laser sounds, enemies flying near you etc. because those would be generated by your on-board computer, to give audio clues of what is happening around you. So they would be fake, computer generated, sounds, but they might still be there.

There's of course the option that the computer would just talk to you, like "enemy behind you at approximately 19 o'clock" or something, but maybe simpler audio clues would be better in case there are lots of enemies near you, where the volume and direction of the sound would tell you where the enemies are and from where there is incoming fire. Naturally there would probably be some kind of radar too.

So a bit similar idea how they are apparently adding fake engine sounds to electric cars, just so that pedestrians can hear those "silent killers" approaching.

Anyway, I presume the biggest thing would be that in "real" space combat most of the aiming and such would be fully computer controlled, so there wouldn't necessarily be actual dog fighting where you try to get an enemy to your sights.

Harder and more realistic.



Also, how about the Battlecruiser series? It's not perfectly realistic, obviously, but it is still more realistic than most games.

I remember even the first Wing Commander did have the full three dimensions. Homeworld 1 and 2 are examples for how you must rotate and zoom in and out to get the 3D feeling. Others like Master of Orion or Sins of a Solar Empire are probably more tuned towards 2D, realistic only if you assume a 2D universe.

The game collection here at GOG also has quite some space battle games. You could check the descriptions and screen shoots of those.

Anyway what is realistic space combat? We wouldn't know. But it should be quite dark and quite silent.

It's based on Homeplanet, not Freespace 2, and borrows the "realistic physics" combat from HP.
Is that the series, where you can land on Jupiter?

I don't know, but it sounds quite possible that they just made all planets solid, at least in earlier installments. I never could get into this series though, so my first hand experience with it is limited.

If you mean RTS, then "Homeworld" is the best bar none.
If you mean FPS, then "Descent Freespace" series is one of the best I have played.

Ive played both through, while its been quite some time i did that, the I-War 1 is far more HC than I-War 2. Both are very nice, but i felt I-War 1 had much more interesting mission design (many levels of success and failure), but graphics and interface are unfortunately more rough than I-War 2. Both are very good though.

--

Freespace 1 and 2 are "more unrealistic", but i always thought they captured the feeling of desperate war pretty well. And ofcourse its one of the better space games anyways.

Independence war 2 (haven't played the first one yet) is pretty realistic when it comes to flight physics. I hated it when i first played it because i didn't expect to find myself flying full speed in the opposite direction of where i wanted to go :).

Evochron mercenary has a bit more realistic physics as well, but i haven't played it more than half an hour.

and then there's psygnosis' Lander. It's not actually space but it sure as hell has fricking fucking realistic physics that don't forgive any fuck ups.