Weta43

Also, if you have any mods remove them ALL before testing

Even if you don't think about it, everything in the universe is either a de Havilland Mosquito FB VI, or not a de Haviland Mosquito FB VI. Everything in the universe being either a de Havilland Mosquito FB VI, or not a de Haviland Mosquito FB VI is one of the universes immutable truths

My guess would be - yes, eventually it brought up somewhere near if not fully at the SC level. They've said they'll be bringing the ground based ATC up to something like par with the carrier, and I seem to remember them saying they were testing that years ago. Presumably it's all modular shared code, so if the ATC is generally improved, are they really going to keep maintaining the old code just to have a very basic carrier ATC for the free carrier ?

?

Same

If, as has been suggested, it's DCS F-15C to finish the teen series, and then the teen series is finished, I wonder where they go with fast movers after that ? Seems like they've hitched their wagon to a 'Blue' tractor, but it doesn't sound like the F-4's high on the list (they started it then dropped it), so where to after all the sexy US fighters are built ? {Does make you wonder though - If we've got the Mi-8 (derivatives of which are still in service) and are about to get the Mi-24P (Derivatives of which are still in service), how strong can the prohibition on developing modern Russian aircraft be ? The Su-27S is no more in service than the Mi-24P (in that 'yes' the airframes are, but everything inside them has been modernised and replaced. There won't be any paper map systems fitted to Mi-24 in Syria at the moment, and I don't expect there's any original N001 radars in the remaining Su-27SM that are in service now [certainly not the SM2/SM3/Su-35S] ).}

"This will be a highly detailed and complex aircraft representing a huge milestone" As has been noted, Milestone is an interesting word. You've either got somewhere, or you're starting a new journey. So it's either got to integrate all the existing technologies into a single package, or break some new ground. Their newest technologies seem to be side by side 2 seat MP integration (coming to a Huey/Mi-8 near you), new FLIR tech, ground radar. Maybe AI for a WSO F-111 / Su-24 ? (Su-34 ? )

For it to be 'brain melting' it has to be something that we all think can't be done - which means it can't be something they've already said they intend to do - like the AH-1 or AH-64, or the F-4 or the F-15C. Those aren't 'brain melting', they're 'Oh good, I've been looking forward to that' No, most of what's been mentioned doesn't even toast the mind. They have to be something we think won't get done - Su-27SM, Mig-29K those would slightly melt my mind. or, following on from the Ka-50E.D. a M.A.C. Su-57, that would be mind bending... (Though I'm crossing my fingers and toes [odd number of] for an Su-27SM or an Su-25SM)

Seems you're fairly sure about what you think about it (& maybe E.D.), just missing the courage of your convictions to say it straight up. Re - is it worht it ? It may not be as much coding as the F/A-18, but it's probably more the Yak, given how much of it is for new technology being developed from scratch but less 'obvious' because it is going into base items like ATC, briefing room, elevators, CA controls etc. It will definately add to the immersion for those that are into carrier ops, but if you don't care for the things it brings there's a simple answer.

today

Paper map ?

Me ? I was taking the P*ss

A la ... the Black Shark Wish List... Yes, but plainly the Russians intended to develop the UTG into a 2 seater SEAD aircraft, & at that point they would have put in a RWR, weapons, an active IR defense system. In fact, the lack of evidence for any of these things ever having happened almost guarantees that somewhere in a dark shed in Russia is an Su-25UTG that was intended to be the successor to the Su-33, and has all the capabilities of that aircraft except afterburners.

Slightly OT - or maybe not.. Haven't quite got to this level yet.

Start in mid air ? ;-)

Su-27 N001: So the N001 is in large part a scaled up version of the N019 from the Mig-29, using the same processor and a scaled up version of the antenna. The N019 antenna limits are :

There's already a 4 page long thread on exactly this topic: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=261087&page=4 The outcome of which seems to be that with the existing carrier if you fly the ball in an F-18 you catch the three wire, in an F-14 you have to fly half a ball high. That would have been a better place to ask the question, E.D. are as likely to answer the question there as anywhere.

It’s a great module, and you’ll get the cockpit/model/lighting fixes free regardless of whether you buy BS3 or not. The 3rd edition has some systems added the real aircraft never had so that people can use it as it was never intended to be used... If you’re happy with having only systems actually fitted, and flying it within the circumstances it would actually have been used in, no reason not to get it now. Also - it’s fine with a twist stick - the only tricky thing is the AP, so depress the trimmer, change attitude, let the aircraft stabilise THEN release the trimmer. Edit, why you’d like it more than the Huey is that it’s easier to fly, easier to land, easier to hover, faster, tougher, has better weapons, has a targeting pod and has stand-off capabilities... And GPS and a real auto pilot :-)

So crazy they won't do a full version of this... It's all steam guages and 60's technology - there can't be anything classified left in the version we have that's not already modelled as its capabilities would be, and even with the FC3 version there isn't that much functionality you'd be adding: What's missing is the system modelling and the clickable interface, not sensor or weapons functionality, or the fact that when you try to move the laser designator after it's stabilised the gyro lets go till you drop it again.

:) Of course - What am I thinking ? Why would the US need help with anything technological ? Slightly off topic, but did you ever read the story of the Bell X1 ? (The first manned airplane to exceed the speed of sound in level flight) The US Govt was backing Bell on a project to develop a supersonic aircraft, but Bell couldn't solve the problem of the loss of tail plane authority as the aircraft approached M1. The British were also working on a M1 aircraft, and had come up with the idea of the all moving tail plane, which solved the problem. The US Govt knew the British were working on the problem and so approached the UK Govt and requested that there be an exchange of information - the British would brief the US on their progress, supply their plans, and the US would provide access to their work & the rocket motor that they intended to use to power it (on the subject of US rocket technology - ever heard of 'Operation paperclip' ? The foundation of the team that got the US to the moon ?). The UK gave the briefing, handed over the research on all moving tail planes, the US said thankyou, and reneged on the deal. So you could say the US' superior technological knowhow allowed them to develop the first manned supersonic aircraft. Or, if you were feeling less generous, you might say that the US stole the technology to allow supersonic flight from the Brits, that Germans scientists built the motor to power it to supersonic speed, & Bell assembled the parts & the US took the credit... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1

Which is what I was referring to above, and why the aircrafts' layouts are so similar. L.M. appear to have entered into what was initially a hush-hush partnership with Yak to gain access to the Russian company's work on this technology, then ported that work to the F-35.

Track ?

They got rid of the harriers to curry favour with the US by buying F-35.

if You think about why the hook eye distance is bigger for the F-14, and what you already know the physical factors that are modelled, you probably have your answer ...

You think ? Because to me, if you account for a bit of tarting up to account for reduced radar signature, they look like they came off the same drawing board 15 years apart.