Avimimus

Just out of curiosity (and speculatively) ...how hard would a J-11B be to model?

The Su-22 is also very much like the Mig-27... you get more versatility in some areas (although the sensor suite might be a bit worse for most variants). I know! Could you imagine the rush, the adrenaline? Making the choice to engage with an infra-red missile knowing that if your shots fail the enemy can out-turn you? It would be exciting!

Like oh, an F-14? Performance figures are pretty similar (as are their roles). It'd also give the Russians an aircraft that can engage multiple targets at once (and at a date earlier than the Mig-29 could). If it is the Mig-31BM then you'd have a strike fighter capable of carrying a wide range of ordinance as well (technically a larger warload than the Su-24 - up to six KAB-1500s for instance).

I'd rather like being able to select salvo sizes and the release height for cluster bombs.

Well that is something at least :D

My hope too (although I wouldn't mind a Su-22, Su-24, or Mig-27)

Thanks!

From a combat perspective: a slightly newer ECM suite and the R-77, along with twin racks for rockets/bombs. I rather enjoy the rockets.

Mig-31 would be quite neat actually... Any reason for this? ED is largely a Russian company and Russian birds have been neglected by third parties for the most part...

I actually don't like the hyper-detailed systems modelling... I prefer being able to fly a variety of aircraft using HOTAS (without having to remember the breaker switch sequence). I like both, but I really prefer the FC way of doing things. I'm hoping for a Tornado or a Jaguar... and a Su-22 or maybe a Su-24... Nice mud-movers that we're unlikely to get any time soon otherwise. I suspect the F-16 though...

Is it equipped to carry any of the Chinese designed missiles? I'm curious if they'll be added or if they only work on another variant.

Good to know. It is a shame as it reinforces the sense of being left out of history (i.e. many simulations of the Mighty 8th but none of the equally important night bombing campaign or Mediterranean in WWII)... but now I'm just whining I suppose. It does feel kindof weird when what is essentially Canada's main combat aircraft is modelled in such high fidelity and yet somehow Canada still ends up with no aircraft modelled. :) Uh-oh, I can feel an incoherent and largely indefensible rant about the Avro Arrow coming on :D But seriously - thanks for the straight answer.

I hope. We're an ally, not the USN... so not the exact same variant (ours has some other detailed differences such as a lateral high powered lamp for reading the tail-codes on Tu-95s). Just because it is fitted to ours doesn't mean it will be modelled. We could probably have modded it in - but with the cancelling of the Eurofighter Typhoon module... we may not see it in engine for a long time.

Either. I haven't heard of the CRV7-PG being used in service (yet). But it is an interesting rocket. In addition to the high explosive, illumination, and smoke rounds there is a British semi-armour piercing incendiary round for use against buildings, an anti-shipping round, and a cluster round. Of course the real prize would be the WDU-5002/B flechette anti-tank round. They are good rockets, about 41% faster than a Hydra-70 and very accurate (3 mils in ideal conditions). They've been in use on CF-188/CF-18s for years.

Any word on if the CRV-7 is going to be included? For us Canadians...?

I found another solution: There is a second S-24B modelled which allows firing using the "Lctrl+V". If you put the attached file in the following directory it should appear in the load-out screen as the second option: .\Scripts\Database\planes Su-25.lua

I think the last time that worked for firing a salvo was a hack/mod for Flanker 2! I just did a test - by rapidly pulling the trigger I can fire off all 8xS-24 rockets in about 5 seconds... so one can do it manually quite well!

I just noticed it too... the reticle slews to the left (and sometimes down) uncontrollably. I wouldn't mind if it had trouble locking a target (that is realistic)... it is irritating though when it just wanders to its gimbal limit!

The R-27T uses essentially the same seeker as the R-73. I used to fire an R-27R to force the enemy defensive, then launch an R-27T once they engaged afterburner or showed me their tailpipe. It was fairly effective back in 1.5x I used to get kills much more often with the T than the R... the R was mainly for setting up the shot.

There is an interesting analysis from the same time period found in reports looking at the effectiveness of the proposed Yak-45 (This would be for a variant acting as a replacement to the Mig-27). I thought it might be worth a read/translation. Among the findings are that the SPPU gunpods were expected to be quite a bit more effective than conventional strafing and that the S-25 was expected to be more effective against an unarmoured point target than the B8/S-8. From: Авиа Космическое Обозрение. Андрей Юргенсон. Як-45: Штурмовик и истребитель

One thing Sir: Canada is a Backwoods country... just because the majority of the well off population is clustered in a handful of cities with excellent connectivity doesn't change that. Considering that my mother is from a fly-in community, and many of my friends have irregular (or slow and expensive) access I find it extremely insulting to have their experience dismissed entirely. You are the one using the word hick and treating their access to the product as being dismiss-able. Honestly, if this is the case then I think I'm out (and I've been a fan/follower of ED since 1995)!

I recognise that you guys want (and benefit from) copy protection. However, I have two concerns: 1) If I get AV-8B my DCS install will require four (4) DRM systems: - I have to install starforce protected Black Shark (so I can upgrade to Black Shark 2). - I have to install A-10C from steam so that DCS will pick up that I have the license. - I'll have my other DCS modules and their keys (managed directly by ED). - I'll have the new AV-8 system. This is really unwieldy... is there any way we could have a single DRM scheme and be able to move all of our licenses onto that single scheme? 2) How often will it have to connect to the internet? I very much value the ability to run offline. This is important in many parts of Canada as internet connections can be highly unreliable or even non-existent. If regular checks on a reliable/fast connection are required I may opt to not get the module. I've heard it is checking every four days... is there any option to offer an alternative (e.g. DVD or dongle based authentication) to allow it to be run off-line?

Ah, well, I'll donate the price of the gear to charity if I get it. Which is kind-of nice given that I'm currently unemployed.

Can't help but to agree with this! :)

These are from?