Wyvern

That may have to do with the glass on the cockpit being slightly tinted

^

From what I've been told, yes.

Except the pictures you show have different missiles on them. The shape of the head is different between the RVV-AE, and the missile carried on the J-11A in the pictues. Plus the Writing seems to be different. At last, you cant see whether it is an J-11A or J-11B in the 2nd picture.

Basically what's in the title, video attached, can make a Trk, but i think its simple enough to reproduce: put a plane at Contrail altitude, look at it, zoom in and out in F1 view. The contrails start to disappear and appear at certain FOV. Digital Combat Simulator 2024-05-25 09-23-19.mp4 In this case it is an E-3, at 35k ft, less than 20NM away

I am not breaking a single rule by telling you to let people talk about a topic. because the developent of the JF-17 (and J-8) is more important.

just turn 90° and drop chaff. At close range, turn away and dive. Phoenixes are a joke. Not really... I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. (yes I do have 2k hours with the Su-27/J-11A in DCS)

heh... I like that reply

That is not a J-15. The J-15 has a completely different cockpit, system, and loadout. They cant just add a different cockpit and call it a day with some fantasy "j-15" The PL-15 mod is completely unrealistic and based on a guess. That would also be more complicated than it seems, and wouldnt be worth the time. To the AMRAAM, yeah no.. the only people that are really complaining about the AIM-120, are the ones that dont know how to fight it. I mean, it honestly just sounds like you got shot in growling sidewider, and are angry now, that since 2009, you still havent learned how to fight AIM-120s properly. They are a good idea, even if they are a slightly missed opportunity. Yes, maybe there is more interesting aircraft, but this will bring more people towards cold war era combat, which is generally the direction that DCS is going in currently, as there simply is more avaiable info. Not to mention that Flaming Cliffs was not supposed to recieve any updates at all. Give it time, they just recently decided to expand on flaming cliffs.

As far as I know, this is not true anymore, the J-11A is being handled by ED by now. There will be a reason why it is that way. There were actual plans for an upgraded J-11A, which had to be paused for an uncertain time, due to multiple complications, and the focus shifting onto the JF-17. Then why are you here? This is a forum, nobody forces you to "waste time" on here. Let people talk if they want to talk.

What? Do you have a source for that? I'd love to see how that is true.

A thing you can do (what I do to have a more stable takeoff) Once you rotate and get off the ground, push the stick forward for a fraction of a second (as if youre counter steering in a car) If done right, you should have lower AoA after take off, and a (very) slightly faster acceleration Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

That's because the plane is heavy. Under those conditions. 60% fuel would be a normal fuel load, while 100% fule is comparable to an F-16 or F-18 with extra Fuel tanks. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

i have converted most of the Su-27 Skins to the J-11A in the past, I still need to update them, but I will let you know once i did that!

Interestingly, there also is this:

Yes you can, we tried. It works surprisingly well actually

okay sorry to be rude, but I dont have much patience today. Can you please try to properly read the post? Nobody said anything about Air to Ground combat. yes, the JF-17 the most modern aircraft in DCS, as it is a 2005-2008 model. When doing AIR TO AIR, with an AIR TO AIR loadout, the J-11A will outperform the JF-17. The message i sent was an reply to him saying the JF-17 will outperform the J-11A, in the SPECIFIC CONTEXT of AIr to Air combat with the SD-10/PL-12. Meanwhile youre just talking about something else. Nobody here ever said the J-11A can do better AG. We were simply talking about the Air-to-Air capabilites, SPECIFICALLY comparing their performance when carrying the PL-12/SD-10.

I wasnt trying to prove that the JF-17 is bad, its good in its own roles, I was just trying to show that the J-11A indeed can outperform a JF-17 with that specific loadout, as an answer to schmitdfire's comment. The Jeff will still beat the Flanler in any other role other than Air-Air Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

As F-2 said, there is evidence that there is PL-12 equipped J-11As, along with (as Ive recently seen) retrofitted Chinese MAWS systems. I will say that I havent seen the Chinese carry R-27ET along with the PL-12, which (in GS) is an absolutely deadly combo if you know what youre doing. I feel like there should be a proper investigation into that matter. The Info and the actual Op Manuals for the Su-27SK are publicly available, however the only ones that I could find were in Russian and Spanish. There was an english one, but its only a google translated version of the Russian manual. As for the performance, youre simply wrong. The SD-10/PL-12 is a larger missile than the AIM-120C, meaning it will profit a lot from high altitude-high energy launches. Therefore, since the J-11A has more engine power and a larger wing surface, it can reach an higher altitude, while remaining in stable flight. yes you can get an JF-17 to 35k+ ft, but the single RD-93 engine that the JF-17 has, is not powerful enough to keep you that high with good speed. Meanwhile you can stay at up to 45k with the J-11A and the same loadout (4x SD-10/PL-12 + 2x PL-8/R-73) as that would be a rather light load for the J-11A. A big reason for that is the raw power that the AL-31F has, compared to the RD-93, along with the fact that the J-11A has two of them. The following numbers factor in Pylon weight, thrust in AB (as you would use to get a good missile off) and a similar loadout. For the colors: Loadout, Weight, Thrust The JF-17 with 4xSD-10 + 2xPL-5 + 2x1.100L Fuel + Full internal fuel, will come in around 12388kg (27310lbs) with 84.4kN (19000lbf). The J-11A with 4xPL-12 + 2xPL-8 + full internal fuel will come in around 21526kg (47456lbs) with 247.2kN (55200lbf). Now of course, we have consider that the Flanker has a much higher weight, meaning we have to do some math. Im not a physicist, nor a mathematician, so correct me if im wrong. After taking the Thrust of the JF-17 and dividing it by its weight, (84400N/12388kg) I came out to 6.8N After taking the Thrust of the J-11A and dividing it by its weight, (247200N/21526kg) i came out to 11.8N That means the engines on J-11A put out 74% more thrust to move its weight, Compared to the JF-17. This also explains how the J-11A can get up to around M2.2, while the Jeff barely scratches 1.6. Along with the larger Wing Surface, it just gives the SD-10/PL-12 a much better launch than the JF-17 could provide. Generally that makes me wonder why Pakistan and China decided to equip it with the RD-93, instead of the AL-31F, which alone has about 50% more power than the RD-93. I heard that Russia Lied to them about the performance characteristics, but thats an entirely different topic.

Use the Stick Override. thats because irl, the plane doesnt just let you properly pull 9g, Its no special mode or paddle switch like the F-18. All you do is pull harder on the stick, to pull through the limiter. It just adds a lot of resistance, similar to how FFB sticks work. it cant really be simulated in DCS, at least on most sticks. The reason you cant pull 9G, is because it irl would slightly bend/damage your airframe. Meaning that in DCS you have to learn to balance your pull, to not pull too hard with the override. Its not realistic, but neither is anything about the DCS Su-27 except from maybe its looks.... somewhat...

Do you have any sources for that? The A/A functionality was removed from the pod, as the pod doesn't actually have AA capabilities irl Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

I will be honest, this is probably the smallest issue the Su-27 has Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Eh, not really. Its a cockpit simulator, more than its a flight sim.

I mean... the Su-27 is not a modern aircraft really. It is almost 40 years old. from what I have found, the gear actually doesnt have a safety like that.