DarkFire

The question is, do all the actual fleet Su-33's have the illuminated light or not? Whatever the answer to that question is, I'd prefer DCS to follow suit.

Apparently this is accurate to the real Su-33. No, I don't think it makes much sense either, but if that's true then so be it.

Looks pretty much like what we have now in DCS. Maybe the smoke could dissipate a tiny bit slower, but otherwise it appears to be reasonably realistic.

The -33 is heavier but has the canards, so I'd expect it to have slightly less T:W & shouldn't have the same insane top speed that the DCS Su-27 has, but the -33 should have slightly better low speed / high alpha controllability & performance. In terms of weapons employment the Su-33 in reality has a better EOS system and has a geographical bombing system that the -27 doesn't. Not sure if we'll see those improvements in game though. You also get an extra 2 hard points on the -33 which makes it a better multi-role aircraft than the -27.

Yep, Stuge is a damned good pilot, probably one of the best.

Agree 100%. The systems modelling may only be at FC3 levels, but the Su-27 and F-15C have some of, if not the most advanced flight models of any DCS aircraft.

Yes, that probably means we have options for 1) release of matched pairs, 2) release of all similar weapons simultaneously and 3) release all but with the set release interval. I guess tactically this would make sense: release in matched pairs to avoid asymmetric trim, release all for a one-and-done type attack, or finally release all for a one-and-done but with a release interval to attack an area target e.g. a road convoy.

Gone, at least in the -27 and -33. The last time I did any air to mud the salvo selector didn't appear to do anything in the 27, though admittedly that was a couple of versions ago now. I'd be happy if the system was simply set to dropping matched pairs for the Su-27, unless of course there's supposed to be a salvo selector that functions like the one in the Su-25. I can see the benefit to having a more detailed system for the Su-33 which will hopefully come with the PFM.

I guess in reality a pilot would have desired altitudes & times marked on their knee board notebook as a backup reference.

Ooh, cool! Will definitely be giving this a go!

Somewhere in the options menu (sorry I don't have the game loaded up at the moment) there's an options that's titled something like "show mini HUD". I think this may be what you're seeing and if so it can be disabled.

Outstanding post! Thanks for your efforts calculating & writing that! As an aside, this sort of thing is precisely why I love being a member of the DCS community :thumbup: On subject: your calculations more or less confirmed what I thought might be happening: that the loop was possible due to good timing (deliberate or accidental) and T:W. Again, great post. Wish we had more posts of this quality and fewer 'I think it's wrong because... reasons' posts.

Frostie, any idea what your weight was at the time? Starting the loop at 150Kts is really slow, but could be possible if your T:W was high enough at the time. Burner or mil thrust?

Read my posting history and tell me again how I'm an Eagle fan boy. FYI I have 3K hours in the Su-27 over the history of DCS and probably 1.5 hours in the Eagle. But whatever, I'm done here. Believe what you want to believe. :dunno:

Go watch Wag's videos on the relatively recent updates to the F-15 FM. Clearly explains that ED had actual F-15C pilots make some recommendations, some of which were rather ironically about the high-AOA behaviour. But cool, don't believe it. Compare the performance of the DCS F-15C to published charts for the actual thing. They're very similar. VERY similar. Personally that's good enough for me to believe that it's realistic, but YMMV I guess :glare:

Here we go again... :yawn: For what it's worth the DCS F-15C flight model has been signed off by actual Eagle pilots. That suggests to me that it's an accurate representation of how the real thing behaves and handles. Edited to add: if we really must go in to yet another comparison between the F-15C and Su-27, then even under ideal conditions the difference in STR between the two is very small, something of the order of 1-2 degrees per second in favour of the Su-27 IIRC. The reason it's so dangerous in a WVR fight is not all to do with the ITR / STR capability but is that combined with the off-axis capability of the R-73 and the HMS. Final edit: until we get things like the EF-2000 and maybe the F-18, the WVR opponent I have the most respect for when piloting my Su-27 is the F-15C.

I want it to be realistic. No idea if the current situation is realistic since I've never seen a real SAM battery in action.

Ah, my bad, of course it has. I'd forgotten about the Viggen missile.

It'd be nice to have a real anti-ship capability, i.e. beyond that given by the A-10 and Su-25, but the Su-33 was never capable of carrying the Kh-41. As Probad said, the closest it ever got was a mockup Kh-41 mounted under an Su-33 for a static display at an airshow. We should certainly get this with the F-18 which should be able to carry Harpoons, but on the Russian side I guess the nearest thing would be a Tu-22M3.

Even if not initially, ED and members here have a great history of fixing them so that they do. I wouldn't be worried about the long-term playability.

The Su-27 already has a helmet mounted sight (5 key IIRC). Don't know if the F-15C version that's modelled in DCS has one in real life or not.

This. I'm also waiting for the official release, but the -33 is likely to have better control under high-AOA conditions and exactly as Sweep said, likely better control during edge-of-envelope turning maneuvers. Conversely the -33 is a bit heavier than the -27 so the T:W ration will likely be less favourable at any given weight. I'd expect the -33 to feel significantly more like a truck at high all-up weights but perhaps more nimble at low weight.

Just to be clear, are we all testing this on 1.5.7 or 2.1.x?

Ah you're right, apparently they plan to purchase 170 of them with deliveries starting next year. Makes sense.

I would imagine that the RVV-SD is part of the intended armament for the PAK-FA when it enters service, and will doubtless be backwards compatible with more advanced versions of the Su-27 platform such as the Su-27SM, Su-30SM, Su-35 etc. Slightly off topic, I wonder if the VKS intends to replace all their Su-27S with the -SM and -35, with additional squadrons of the PAK-FA? Also slightly surprised that the VKS apparently decided not to purchase a smaller fighter to compliment it such as the "MiG-35", in a similar F-15 / F-16 or Su-27 / MiG-29 mixture.