DarkFire

Very interesting, thanks for posting this. I'd imagine that the relatively light loads for everything other than operational missions also reduces wear on the tyres, landing gear etc. decreasing the need for expensive maintenance. On the subject of the R-77, the best information I've been able to find suggests that while the VKS (and possibly the Russian Navy) bought some R-77's the actual number in the inventory is tiny. I'm guessing the Russian ministry of defence is happy to wait and use existing R-27R / ER types until the K-77M becomes available for the 'Su-57'. I haven't read anywhere that the Su-33 is capable of using the R-77 so that might be a payload used for an airshow displaying what might be possible for a customer willing to buy upgraded avionics. Not sure the market for naval aircraft is large enough to support exported Su-33's but who knows. Maybe the Chinese will want them for their new carrier designs.

Thanks, I know what you mean. I spent quite a few hours trawling the net trying to find a documented description of what circuit was used with the Kuznetsov. Ultimately I decided the information simply isn't available. Not entirely surprising but definitely frustrating.

This is probably where the radar creates a 'track file', possibly in a similar way to the track files created by radars in western aircraft. Interesting. I wonder if this is a half-way-house between what western radar types describe as range-while-search and track-while-scan, only with the limitation that the track file generated by the N-01 doesn't update sufficiently to allow for missile launch, which requires single-target-track. As an aside, is there an English translation of the manual available on line somewhere?

Like every aircraft the Su-33 has advantages and disadvantages. It's heavier than the Su-27 so has a marginally lower T/W ratio. That being said it also has canards which the Su-27 doesn't and is notably steadier at high AOA, potentially giving you slightly better ultimate nose authority for a gun kill or R-73 shot. That being said, it's heavier so bleeding significant amounts of energy in a high-G, high-AOA manoeuvre carries more risk than it does in the Su-27. Ultimately the Su-33 is more of a multi-role fighter than the Su-27, even though the -27 can carry air to ground ordnance. The DCS Su-33 is also notably missing things like the SVP-24 bombing system which supposedly gives it significantly enhanced accuracy with non-guided bombs. Exactly what upgrades the Russian navy Su-33's have received is unclear but it could be argued that they're much closer to being a navalized Su-27SM than the baseline Su-27S that we have in DCS.

That was a beautiful landing :thumbup: The Su-33 carrier pattern has been discussed before in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213582 It was postulated, based on the very little available information, that the MiG-29K might use a pattern similar to the F/A-18C but that the Su-33 might use a larger pattern. Ultimately though there isn't enough open source information available to be sure either way. It's also possible that our Su-33 is missing a carrier landing HUD mode though this is again conjecture. Either way, if it works then use it :)

Nice, thanks.

Last night my cat chewed through the cable for my track clip pro. Yes, really. Have to say the cable for the TCP is the thinnest, cheapest, nastiest peripheral cable I've ever seen which probably contributed to how easily Her Majesty chewed through it :disgust: Looks like the actual track clip pros are out of stock everywhere. Does anyone know of a good quality alternative? My TrackIR 5 camera still works perfectly so any replacement will need to work with the camera.

Excellent! This is probably the only aircraft that will prise me out of the cockpit of my Su-27.

NATO aircraft? Yes, I'd be surprised if we don't get some sort of F-15C in the fullness of time. Russian aircraft? Probably not, due both to the classification of aircraft still in use with the VKS and also an economic argument - it appears that the majority of private citizens who are customers of ED favour western aircraft types, therefore not justifying the cost of developing full fidelity modern Russian aircraft. Personally I'd love to have a DCS: Su-27SM but I understand that sadly this will probably never happen.

The stand-alone F-15C and Su-27 are identical to the FC3 aircraft, you don't need both. Did you get them as part of a free tryout or similar?

That's really useful information, thanks for posting this :thumbup:

If I've read it correctly the actual Su-27S has an actual Ekran system. Not sure if it features an ejection advisory warning but the system is there so it may do. The DCS Su-27S doesn't feature the Ekran system so won't give audio advisory suggestions.

Nice! Shows that a $X00 HOTAS setup isn't strictly required to have fun & do well in the game :thumbup:

I'd recommend keeping the R-73's and further reducing fuel to compensate. In terms of raw performance, in this case maximum instantaneous and sustained turn rates, the Su-27 enjoys a small advantage over the F-15C. Additionally the ability to turn off the AOA/G limiter (hold the W key, the limiter is off while the key is held down), or for the really brave flying in direct control mode (press "S", not recommended until you're *extremely* familiar with how the Flanker behaves) gives you a significant advantage in nose authority. This combined with the off-boresight capability of the R-73 and the helmet mounted sight gives you a very significant advantage in a close WVR fight. The R-27R / ER are also particularly susceptible to spoofing by chaff (in-game, accurate data on real world use is nearly impossible to find) makes the R-73 even more valuable. My normal weapons load for a "mission" (as opposed to a known WVR arena-type fight) is 4 x R-27ER, 2 x R-27ET and 4 x R-73. Occasionally I'll sacrifice two of the R-73s for the ECM pods, they do have their uses. For a short range interception or scramble type mission 4 x R-27ER and 4 x R-73 with a significantly reduced fuel load - usually ~40% or under in this scenario. You're absolutely right though that reducing all-up weight has a significant impact on how agile the Flanker can be.

Good effort :thumbup: The Su-27 can be a real challenge to learn and is hardly the most friendly aircraft to new DCS pilots, but it's seriously satisfying when it all comes together. The only suggestion I'd make is to consider throttling back to mil thrust once you've launched a 27. That way if the missile misses and you end up in a WVR situation you'll be closer to corner speed rather than being quite a bit above it.

Hmm strange, sounds like the maximum aircraft weight is set incorrectly so to compensate for adding weapons fuel is being removed. Does this happen in a particular mission? All missions? Try firing up an empty, fresh mission in the editor and see if it does the same thing. If it does, that would suggest that the maximum aircraft weight is set incorrectly in a lua file somewhere. Try disabling any mods if you have any installed. If that also doesn't work then try repairing your DCS world installation. If it only happens in a particular mission then sounds like there's an issue with that particular mission.

Mods that include new aircraft usually go here: C:\...\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\(name of new mod) Not sure about the DeGaulle mod as I'm not familiar with it. With missions, you have a choice. If you want them to appear as missions for a specific aircraft then put them here: C:\...\DCS World\Mods\Aircraft\(relevant aircraft name)\Missions\Single\ If you want a mission to appear as a user mission then put it here: C:\Users\(you)\Saved Games\DCS\Missions\ These file locations work similarly for downloaded campaigns. Hope this helps.

The HDD on the MiG-29A/B/S is only a HUD repeater. It does not have the same function as the HDD in the Su-27 and therefore should only be a HUD repeater in the game.

I'm hoping with the new ATC coding we'll get the option of full METAR reporting. That way everyone will be accommodated - QFE for VKS & RAF, QNH for our USAF & USN friends. I'm vaguely amazed that NATO didn't standardize on one pressure reading standard.

I'm guessing the mud hen is the closest we'll get to a DCS level Eagle.

Welcome to DCS! Sounds like your home rig will be perfect for running DCS in VR or on a flat screen. In terms of learning DCS aircraft, expect the process to be fairly similar to learning an actual new aircraft in terms of time taken, reading manuals etc. just without the hours required for certification :) This forum is one of the best game forums on the net in terms of signal to noise ration so don't be afraid to ask questions, no matter how basic. We've all been there staring at a screen, manual open on our lap, wondering where the hell the start switch is :smilewink: Happy flying :pilotfly:

My intro to what would become DCS was Su-27 Squadron Commanders Edition in late '96 / early '97. Great game for the time. Still have the CD & manual floating around somewhere. It's amazing to see how far 'the game' has come since then. Very much looking forwards to future developments!

I agree about using equipment, though I wouldn't go quite that far in terms of SA. The SPo-15 can be surprisingly helpful in terms of estimating distance to emitting threats though you need to transpose between displayed signal strength & estimated distance in your head based on anticipated threat type. Like most things in the Su-27, it can be surprisingly capable but isn't in any way 'new pilot' friendly and places additional work load on the pilot.

Real Su-27S: it's possible to overcome / override the AOA/G limited by applying extra force (9Kg IIRC) to the stick. DCS Su-27S: It's possible to disable the AOA/G limiter by holding down the wheel brake key. Possible but not advised - under the vast majority of configurations and speeds the limiter will save you no matter what stick input you make, however with the limiter disengaged it's perfectly possible to overload and break the airframe, usually manifesting as a loss of one or both wings. Once you have an intuitive feel for how the aircraft behaves it's advantageous under certain conditions to disable the limiter to, for example, get your nose around for a gun kill or to momentarily get within launch parameters for your R-73. Outside of that, best left engaged.

On the Stennis deck, yes strange things happen with the physics & damage. Best to stick to the Kuznetsov.