F-2

I posted a bit on the development of the JL-10 used in the J-8F for those interested.

Try a FOIA with the USAF ADB199135 The Su-27 4/5/1995 NATIONAL AIR INTELLIGENCE CENTER WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH 160 pages I have a request for a 34 page Mig-29m document and a Mig-25 manual. I also know the names of some documentation related to the Mig-23, 25, and possibly 31.

It doesn’t technically hold true for 20 and 25. 25 was the first C in 1984 and predated GE engines. 20 was used retroactively for F-16A sold to Taiwan in the 90s. Unlike other MLU aircraft these where new build aircraft and where structurally more similarly to a Block 32 but with an F-16A small tail.

someone posted this a while ago, thought it interesting.

https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/145422665?utm_id=0 very detailed article on the JL-10 and JL-10a, which I “think” is used on the J-8F. Would be good for either a future version or a refined AI.

https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/129695-f-35-news-multimedia-discussion-thread-2?p=3021418&page=137 Apparently the F3R AESA uses the same modes as the previous PESA with the new modes and advanced scanning algorithms to come in F4. Interesting, another possibility meteor carrier.

That mach 3.5 speed is near ASRAAM territory. PL-8 will be a menace

That’s really interesting! By chance do you have the r550 II numbers?

I’m talking IRL mind you. Currently different missiles in DCS are on different API and being standardized. I’m not sure if PL-5eII is better than AIM-9m in real life, maybe it is but I wouldn’t use dcs as a source, at least not until it’s all standardized. To be clear I do think PL-8 is better then AIM-9L/M I just think it’s constitutes a relatively marginal difference, same with Magic II.

AWST 7/4/83 Flight international mostly about Python 4 but with a bit on 3

From what reading I’ve done on it and Python III it seems the best analog is the Magic II. Python could be slaved to radar and supposedly had superior maneuverability to AIM-9L. Ultimately these missiles are in the same class and from what I gather constitute marginal differences. That said I think PL-8 should be a little better albeit heavier then Aim-9L.

This is a really good idea! With how detailed some aircraft like black shark are getting this could be very fun. Forza had a similar non VR feature that I always wanted for aircraft These cares are 500k-1m tris, similar to newer dcs modules. Ace combat 7 has a near identical feature for four aircraft (not a sim so this is ok?) I extracted the models of these four aircraft and they’re on the low end of FC3 in terms of poly (100-125k) so a similar feature in DCS could be quite nice.

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001SPIE.4369..178P/abstract White paper on OSF behind paywall, but might be of use if a project gets off the ground. For F2 standard on.

Range between AIM-7F and AIM-7M should be near identical, it’s mostly the seeker that’s different.

Less range then AIM-7F but with better look down capability and better at getting maneuvering targets close to it. better range and look down then Super 530f but slower, also probably similarly more agile. R-24 similar speed but PL-11 should have better range and maneuverability. Both are inverse monopulse, I think PL-11 is better in real life but I think they will have similar guidance for dcs purposes

The original is like an AIM-7E but with an inverse monopulse seeker, like Aim-7m. It’s a lot like skyflash BUT all fins can articulate independently and as such it’s supposedly much more maneuverable.

Hawt

I have this evaluation by South Africa and the air staff requirements released by their justic department. https://www.justice.gov.za/comm-sdpp/hearings/witness-statements/ws-JohanFerreira-Statement-p166-341.pdf https://www.justice.gov.za/comm-sdpp/hearings/witness-statements/ws-Brigadier-General-John-William-Bayne.pdf Saudi evaluation https://books.google.com/books?id=zkEiEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA223&dq=mirage+2000+turn+rate&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjA5IvGmtv5AhVxGVkFHRd0DwU4ChDoAXoECAMQAw#v=onepage&q=mirage 2000 turn rate&f=false I don’t know enough about the Mirage to know what any of this implies, but I hope someone finds it useful/interesting.

Thanks for letting us know homie

Venezuelan F-16a with Python 4 would make an outstanding redfor aircraft as well as represent Israeli aircraft from around 1990.

There was a SU-27SM pilot a while ago who claimed any platform that could fire a R-77 could fire a R-77-1 without modification. So in theory both the Mig-29S and J-11 should be able too regardless if they ever have.

This doesn’t really seem to bother most people. There is already an excellent selection of Cold War aircraft in DCS and flaming cliffs 3. If people want to take advantage of them great, if they don’t see what’s going to change their mind that isn’t in the game today. Most people go into DCS with the expectation it’s not totally realistic but it’s the closest they will ever get to actually flying a military jet they like. Personally I don’t see a correlation between the age of an aircraft and its completeness. The mirage 2000 in a 80s airplane in a 90s configuration and the JF-17 a 2000s aircraft are some of the most complete aircraft in game, while other aircraft the on the surface seem like they would be easier, the Mig-21, F-5 linger in incompleteness for years.

Similar roles, different dimensions, internals, etc. the details are all different. The Chinese further developed the J-8 beyond what the Soviets did with the Su-15.

Apparently Python 4 was in service in 1990 or earlier. AWST 6/1990

https://books.google.com/books?id=4Ig-AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA23&dq=asraam+bgt+"consortium"&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjK4Niciaf9AhUAFFkFHe4cDQIQ6AF6BAgEEAM#v=onepage&q=asraam bgt "consortium"&f=false apparently the L/I uses the seeker developed for the 80s incarceration of the ASRAAM which is exciting!