PLAAF

Unless you are not Chinese, then there is no cultural difference between you and I. Or at least there shouldn't be. That is correct. The game is for entertainment. Putting an anthem in entertainment is disrespectful just like making the rock and roll version of the anthem. It doesn't matter if it is the first indigenous system. An anthem is used to represent the spirit of an entity, not the first tool it made. It is too trivial. Using your logic, why not use the national anthem? It is the first indigenous aircraft designed by PRC. But just let me remind you, in 2017, the 28th Session of the Standing Committee of the Twelfth National People's Congress reviewed the "National Anthem Law of the People's Republic of China". The law specified the occasions on which the anthem can be played. The 8th article of the law stated that "it shall not be used in or in disguised form for trademarks and commercial advertisements, and shall not be used in inappropriate occasions such as background music in public places etc". To summarise, there is no cultural difference between you and me. It's just that many youngsters nowadays were never educated or taught at home in this matter to show proper respect. I highly doubt that Deka members are ignorant in this matter, so we shall see if they make the anthem into their module.

I remember they once said that MiG-19S would be a part of the MiG-19 module pack. So in that sense, people who paid for MiG-19P paid for S. Yep, you are right. They didn't use as many polygons as other modules in DCS. That's why I am not happy with the MiG-19 module. Not only they used so few polygons, we rarely get updates for this module compared with others. Many buttons are still unmappable and many axis don't work as intended. For example, axis like the light, gunsight won't even move until you move your axis pass 50%. And if you tried to map them onto buttons, hehe, for a single press of that button, it will increase or decrease the volume by a light year, making micro-adjustment impossible. And we only have 1 cycling button for the airbrake, which has 2 positions.

Nope, I disagree. Theme music should be representative of the plane, not the organisation that the plane served in. Also, an anthem is only used for specific events and for specific reasons to represent the entity it was written for. Unless J-8, as a plane can fully represent the PLA, using the PLA anthem would be an insult, and highly inappropriate to be used in a video game. What you are doing here is ....按传统的话来讲叫做“大逆不道”你知道吗？ My suggestion is to use the song called "Please respond!". It was written to commemorate Wang Wei, the PLAAF J-8 pilot who lost his life in defending his nation's sovereignty from US aggression.

Don't know for sure, but judging by the RWR, it is at least the B variant. Because the earlier variant has the same RWR as the PP. Also, I found another one with a different HUD. This may be the later production of the B variant.

Found an HD picture of a J-8 cockpit.

Found some pictures of F-7BG, an export version of J-7E for Bangladesh. The picture above shows the jet carrying the PL-9 missile. Now a while back, I remember reading somewhere or hearing somebody saying that a part of the components in PL-9's seeker was based on Israeli tech and that's why it was never actually exported. Now if Bangladesh can successfully import it from China, it can only mean one of two things. Either what I read wasn't true or the new variant of the PL-9 missile has deviated from the original too far and Israel copyrights can no longer affect the exportation. Now what you see below is a J-7 serving in the airforce of Nigeria. It is a J-7NI, which is a sub-version of the J-7MG. It does not have double delta wings like the J-7E or G. What's interesting here is that it appears recently, China sent them an upgrade package to upgrade their avionics. So now, their cockpit looks very similar to the F-7BG. Let's just hope someday we can get J-7G in DCS as a FF module.

https://www.facebook.com/pakistanidefence/photos/cm-400akg-specially-designed-and-developed-for-destroying-the-enemy-aircraft-car/10152505227602663/?paipv=0&eav=AfYLfWzw8QbNTDMGoq9Gjx8BhgXcqYrhaFwjgEmhx5Mlj1ShzQCN8Jvjtts3cin2cMg&_rdr Why are you asking? Are we going to get those for our module?

Thanks very much. Can you also find other Russian missiles? K-55, R-3, R-13, R-27 series and R-77.

J-8 is a different story since there are still many of them in service. Q-5 on the other hand is no longer in service. Before the introduction of the JF-17 module, Deka even stated in an interview that they are interested to make J-8IIPP and Q-5. See the video below at 12:30. And guess what happened, J-8IIPP was selected as the second module. So it is only logical to assume that Q-5 will be the next. If they are going to make the L variant or even the later ones of Q-5, I swear to god that I will never ever be mean to anybody ever again.............................................................................unless they REALLY deserve it.

CJ-6 is cool. But I have a feeling that the next module of Deka will be the Q-5, which is to me at least, much more attractive than CJ-6. Especially if it is the L variant or anything equal to or later than the III variant. Since all Q-5s are retired, so I doubt Deka will get any fatherly rebuke from the PLA when they ask them for permission to even make the latest Q-5L variant.

It has been nearly a year since the last time we received any fix or update for this module. I heard that we don't even have the "dissymmetry of lift" modelled. That's like a fixed-wing plane without the AoA.

It appears so. What's interesting here is that in some aspects, Magic II isn't even as good as Magic I. Are they trying to downgrade it? Edit: Also, I assume the Fi_rak is the seeker aspect. For all aspect seekers, they get this 3.14152. But if I remember correctly, the pie is 3.14159. Does that mean non of the missiles are true "all aspects"? And there is a chance that we can "notch" them head-on?

Here, for some reason, I couldn't find data on the R-60 series.

It's OK, I have checked again. They have nerfed PL-5 since the last time looked. Maybe this is the standardisation you are talking about. By the way, I just made a list of those missiles' in-game performances. It appears at least in DCS, the PL-8B has the same maneuverability as the AIM-9M, but with much better speed. I couldn't find the data for PL-8A.

That's a bit odd. I always heard that Python III had better maneuverability than AIM-9M. I could be wrong since I didn't research the topic enough. But after checking the performance of the PL-5EII in DCS, I found that it is actually better than AIM-9M. They are mostly identical, except PL-5 has one more second of fueled flight and produces a bit less smoke than AIM-9M, as well as just a touch less drag value. So if PL-8 is only at the same level as an AIM-9L, then I am not fancy getting PL-8. I will stick with my PL-5EII for now. Edit: Nevermind, they have nerfed PL-5EII since the last time I checked. Now it is less capable than AIM-9M.

I really hope they do. Maybe they can get the info and data they needed from ED and complete their mod and turn it into a "full fidelity". The F-4 and F-104 mod looked so promising that it would be a shame not to turn them into official modules.

Can you share a loadout diagram, please? The diagram for the module you are prepared to release, not different variants can be found on the internet. Something like this:

Any chance of making them official DCS modules? If they do, I'd love to purchase them.

Honestly, I have reservations about this picture. As you can see, the resolution is very low and it was not released by official media, but by military enthusiasts. However, because the later T variant didn't have much improvement over this one, so even if this one is not accurate, it won't be a far stretch from the truth.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Hi, @uboats He makes an excellent point. Would you consider what he said, please?

What do you mean? You lost me there. forum account ban? not as realistic as jail? Feel free to use Chinese.

I see. Thanks very much for the info. What about the AIM-7L/M, how are they compared to the AIM-7F in terms of range?

So, in your opinion, how well does it compare to things like R-24 or Super 530F or the AIM-7F?

Don't worry, we will make up for your trouble. Like always, each of us will buy 3 copies from you. One for self-use, one for keeping as a part of our collection and one for spreading as a religion. 建议大家都买3份，一份自用，一份作收藏，一份用来传教。 Please reconsider this. Without the Datalink, it just wouldn't be as realistic. Please keep everything that is in real life as much as you can.