Kaktus29

to people who are horrified about the blades of the engine showing and the air intake.. look, russian engineers know this okei.. its not like they haven thought of this..but the new engine they are developing for the Pak-Fa is needed after that they will design the plane with proper stealth intakes.. look at the first Su-27 prototype.. you will cry and throw up a little bit.. but its okei..its prototype.. most of the work needed to be done is in the engine part and passive systems.. and this engine is already powerful enough to give the pak-fa supercruise, its just not wise to do it with this engine for its not built for this purpose.. engine is really strong and good, but it might be used for the Su-35 in the future..while Pak-Fa gets new engine that will give him that 1.4-1.6 supercruise.. with the new intakes of course..

just a question.. has nobody thought of this or is it very hard to implement .. the thing i am thinking is data-links for the missiles.. imagine 2 vs 2 scenario.. what has been described here on this forum is known, the problems, the notching etc.. imagine flying with your wingman 5 miles in front of you.. while the enemy keeps close formation.. now, if you have data-link for radar info and scanning.. the first plane (your team) would fire a missile or be fired upon by the enemy, because he is engaged defensive its hard for him to maintain lock right?).. so here comes the data-link situation.. being closer to the 2 enemies the first plane is in great location to lob missiles but sadly much harder to guide them because he is on the defensive.. while me being behind him have more time and thus can guide his missiles over data-link.. would in this situation be very lethal for the enemy? what do you think would happen.. IF of course a big IF this scneario is technical possibility.. i never heard of this, just thinking out loud.. is there some big problem with data-link for missiles or was this already tried but failed because of this or that.. ? anybody knows? ..

i agree with you marcos .. F-35 symbolises the decline in professionalism in the military, in the industry in politics.. the degradation can be seen as military industrial complex shows no anxiety as problems mount for it knows how the game is played.. the more problems there are the more money will be thrown into their pockets to rescue the project.. they know that f-35 is TOO BIG TO FAIL like the banks who messed up the economy, like the criminals running them.. they are all too big to fail, or too big to jail.. one way or another they are too big )) .. F-35 looks like a project that will ram the US economy to the ground.. not really, but it is a prima balerina in this role..its the pride of the corruption, the showcase of how not to do things.. i think such processes will only accelerate in the future.. US is caught in a quagmire of epic proportions.. putting themselves in a position where they are basically in war with every nation of the world (apart israel of course, may god love israel and we all bow down to israel).. in such a position it seems only superior force can fight the ever increasing number of barbarians at the gates.. this reminds me of germany in 2WW.. their Tiger tanks were much more superior than Russian T-34.. better armour, better firepower, better penetration for the gun, better range of the gun... but the tank was ahead of its time, to complex, to heavy, to hard to maintain, to difficult to produce in great numbers.. in the end it was the wrong choice to build.. US is going down the path of the paranoid one.. until they declare bankruptcy of course..

@marcos.. do you know how and what will UK navy pilots fly onboard the french carrier? There was this proposal of sharing the french carriers with britz.. so, we've got french carrier, with rafale's and incoming JSF?.. are the british navy JSF built for a ramp carrier or catapult via steam or magnetic pull carrier deck? .. if latter, how will they launch from french carrier? .. what a mess)) .. The italians, are they going to replace their navy fighter with JSF also?.. they must have them for ramp then..meaning less range, less ammo for the fighter.. to some extent i can see why JSF is one cluster$$$ of a programme ..

@exorcet... AMG-65 all optical,infra, all modes detect the target from the time of the launch till it hits.. i think this savvy looking cruise missile f-35 is firing i hopefully offering better ranges than 15 miles.. and if it is much longer ranges, i would hope over 50-70 miles, then yes, you will not be hitting a moving target.. a static yes, moving no.. moving yes IF you are tracking the target as it moves and slave the missile until missile's own guidence and tracking system kicks in (infra,optical, radar whatever.. ) ..

how does the radar of F-35 detect decoys? SA-6 and the likes have amazingly good decoys made from rubber that would be even easier to fake the real thing when compared to the radar echo return of the old radars (even though it makes the same echo for a decoy as well) .. What i'm saying is, this isn't some magic solution where F-35 will fly a little bit, and radar screen will go RED and show you the position of all SAMs)) lol.. i remember how NATO hit over 90% of SAMs over Yugoslavia only to be proven most of them were cheap decoys.. of course NATO claims it doesn't matter, decoy or not it must be destroyed, and i agree, but since Yugoslavia didn't have any modern systems or modern airforce of have any of those in any balanced numbers to oppose the numerical superior enemy i think decoys on equal battle field make this tactic a dud.. As soon as F-35 opens the bays, as soon as it fires 1 cruise missile it will be detected by passive systems, and active systems that are beyond the reach of the F-35.. This system of the F-35 doesn't show is there need for slaving the missile or is it a fire-and-forget thing? if its fire and forget then its only good for non-mobile targets and is very limited, if it slaves it, it makes sense since F-35 can SEE the actual movement of the system and guide the missile to the new location..but that makes him more vulnerable to detection and counterattack.. i think many people think only US can make radars that are LPI or magnetic-radio emissions of the plane that nobody can detect, but of course vice-versa is possible for usa))lol.. btw, the decoy Sam costs about 5.000 USD, the missile this guy is firing about 500.000 ..do the math..

yeah, i didn't see that mistake of mine, .. when i was typing i was thinking threaD and usually i don't make the mistake like this.. thank for letting me know it.. wow, threat?)) yeah, fixed it up now..

Would just like to see a thread where you can help me out fill it with free available documentaries of aircraft in general and especially military.. i give the one i like the most, a russian documentary of creation of Su-27 ..its really very detailed and explains allot about systems, aerodynamics, and other elements that are needed in order to create a superb air superiority fighter. It has 4 parts, so just search for the other parts, its the same title just change the 1 to 2, then 3 etc.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5VXttYF1A enjoy the show !

@daniel m .. i do think balance has allot to deal with this.. lets say on one side you have 100 Su-27, and on the other side -your side- you have 2 F-15C .. so, .. will you play this mission? why not, balance has no weight as you said?? ) .. Balance should be somehow "integrated" in the template or mission generator..then MP players can decide how to use the "resources" as they see fit.. For instance if team RED needs to attack then this is what is at your disposal (2xSA-6, 3-SA-8, 4-SU-27, 2-KA-50, 20-T-80) .. and team BLUE (something along those line that i wrote for team RED. So then you have a challenge.. a game, ..of course, it would be nice for the offensive team to have a little bit more firepower since usually this is how offence starts-with more firepower than defence, otherwise we are talking suicide ..kamikaze japanese style.. Offence in real life always needs to be at least 3:1 ration in order to succeed .. (3:1 doesn't refer to actual number but sum of all power, for instance F-22 has enough power to battle lets say 4 fighters, so the ratio to be the offensive power and maintain this 3:1 ratio would be in nominal terms 4 F-22 vs. 1 Su-27..but because F-22 is more powerful the number is actually 1 F22 vs. 1 Mig-29 for instance(this would be 3:1 ratio for the Raptor in favor of the raptors).. But nobody wants to fight real life scenarios since nobody wants to loose)) If we play vs. AI this sucks, if we play vs. humans we have to make balanced scenarios.. US vs. Taliban is not balanced for instance.. its not fun, not engaging in simulation or game terms, .. Germany vs. France would be very balanced, actually it would be more of a stalemate where any advantage that would come would have to come with tactics, strategy..not brute power.. I think an AI calculator needs to be added before a MP begins.. so it correctly assigns the forces to each team.. and an AI calculator that counts the "damage" afterwards and proclaims victory.. for instance if 1 Raptor would be destroyed while destroying in the process 6 Su-27 this would be tactical victory for the Su-27 team since 6*30million is still lower than 1 F-22.. or the mission is to protect Tank convoy and you end up loosing 4 A-10's while the tank convoy consisted 10 tanks (4 * A-10 is more money than 10 tanks x 5 million).. and the calculator for map victory..if the team actually achieves their goal(preventing the opposite team to advance on ground or Enabling their own team to advance etc..)..

i agree with the Greece and the Mediterranean sea theatre .. Greece with its difficult economic situation could be put into game perspective that let's say in the future 2015-onwards, Greece goes out of EU, because of that Greece decides to side with East, being close to Orthodox Russia it naturally bonds with them, and China seeing this as opportunity to gain warm water naval base takes Greece under its wing so it helps her financially, .. All this doesn't sit well with Uncle Sam who plans retaliation for "un-democratic moves by Greece" .. to this, Greece responds it is a sovereign state and can do what it wants and its not breaking any international agreement.. NATO threatens to block Russian access through Bosporus as punishment for building a naval base in Greece.. and we have ourselves a Russia+China+Greece(maybe even Serbia) vs. Turkey,Germany,UK,USA .. you have ground war,air war, naval war.. you name it.. This is for "in to the future theater")... for past theaters yes, Vietnam is good, Egypt vs. Israel maybe, .. but historic theaters are kinda lame cuz we know what happens, we know who has the upper hand so you feel a little bit.. hmm, how should i say.. you know like you know the future so whats the point in fighting)) .. Every time i look at mission builder i pass, for simple reason, if i create the enemy, know how many SAMs it has, WHERE, how many planes, ships etc.. and waypoints too, ... its hard to pretend i don't know this when i run the mission.. it is not good for playing the game.. Same is with historic campaigns.. playing as US in vietnam.. to do what? we all know US had superior number of planes, bombs, technology so what do you do .. drop bombs from B-52 ..boring.. or playing as vietnam pilot fighting in mig-15,17 against f-4 and in campaign wise being out-numbered, outgunned..its a loosing war, even if you win a battle here and there.. I like the "potential conflicts" theater and more "balanced forces" to make it more challenging.. when i think about Germany vs. France everybody agrees that there would be no easy and clear winner in this one .. same goes for UK vs. France.. Somebody mentioned a potential "US civil war" scenario... yes that is interesting, .. also, the part of China invading is lame, it will never happen -unless US is like 100 years backward in technology ..and even then i don't think so,since china had the chance to "invade" Africa back in the 12th century when europe hardly had navy capable of passing the Mediterranean sea ..and instead when chinese looked at technological backwardness of somalia, ethiopia they returned home instead of colonizing.. in the event of US civil war i think more realistically what would happen is, EU would get involved on the side of the Federalist of USA(the one who fights the States who wish to secede away ) .. Also, EU would fight because of fear of US dismemberment and chaos that follows and endangers thousands of nukes that US has .. it would be like PAkistanX10000 worse.. so to secure the nukes EU would pick the federalistas .. The secessionist would be overwhelmed and maybe later in the war IF the secessionist gain some control of the western coast China could help the secessionist forces .. This is my view on any possible civil war in US .. The map would be amazing though, US is very varied and has beautiful landscape, .. from east to coast.. but we are forgetting something.. the map would be too huge. what we see today in georgia map is something like New York State.. imagine trying to do US map.. or god forbid Russia.. Computers must get at least 1000 times faster, better to go through the workload needed to operate a simulation this big..

the problem with Vietnam and the biggest one is the MAP, how do you map it without killing the frame rates.. we are talking about a jungle environment, where there are millions of trees, big, small, bushy, not so bushy, rivers, .. i think it would be a disaster to try to model any realistic map, .. ..something simplified yes, but then, we are talking arcade map, that looses the appeal of ground forces battling it out, and chopper action since if the map is crap chopper missions loose their lustre.. I do agree, that totally realistic flight modules are much better than something half-done like it is with modern fighters today. ... so completely realistic DCS phantom or DCS mig-21, mig-17,19, would be awesome since you are dealing with a plane that is simulated to the last turbine blade correctly.. and missiles don't play the biggest part so we are dealing with pilot abilities, tactics, etc..

oh yeah i agree with a 2 releases per year.. this is actually quite allot .. since it takes 2-3 months to really get into the certain module, than enjoy the hell of it the rest of the 4-6 months.. and before you know it, the next one come out.. man, this will be amazing..

okei guys.. now we can all ask ourselves.. when do you think this modules will start coming out.. when do you want to come out(of course today if possible)) lol, .. and when do you expect them realistically, and when do you think they will actually come.. i of course would enjoy them ASAP, but realistically i think about 7-10 months, would not like it if i needed to wait for 12-16 months although would wait no problem because i love it, and its definitely worth it .. i mean, the whole package of all planes, choppers .. i think about 24-30 months.. so, 2015 january , i think all those modules will be out.. which means awesome stuff.. don't know if its better to release them one at a time, or fire many in quick succession .. hmm.. fox 1-then wait, then fire fox 2.. or just fire a salvo ? .. what it better? .. money wise, what do you think would make the most impact in sales? ..

i'm not sure its soo easy as you say, i mean air-to-air is about putting pixels on the radar that represents planes etc.. air-to-ground is pretty much painting the whole ground, clutter, .. there are bridges, roads, railways, railway carts, buildings, ..etc.. all this in the right and correct way as it is in game world in the ground as it is.. this i think is a bit more cpu intensive than air-to-air where there is no clutter, ..empty air and whatever stands out from the air-metal formations flying and moving up and down.. i remember the F-15 jane's simulation..actually it was the F-15E strike eagle.. and they did a nice air-to-ground radar, you could get nice picture of the objects 100 km away.. and even realistic "black spots" if there was a valley or other natural blocking object through which radar couldn't get to "paint it" ..

i guess this whole new packages coming will be very huuuge for one simple reason-A/G radar capabilities.. i hope ED makes it without big bugs.. how will they do this technique i don't know, i figure it was difficult for it was one of the things ED avoided as much as they could.. do they just use map-template and change the colours, visibility etc. as you use your radar on the plane or totally new mechanism.. what is more CPU efficient.. wow.. whatever the case, congrats to have obviously overcome this obstacle..and we look forward to some multi-role planes who can conduct air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. Considering the fact they mentioned the predator in the video, i figure the missions could be long one, like 6-10 hours.. if so, wouldn't it be great to have the option to "punch in" and out of the missions as you have time available while the "game" would still run in the "background" .. i mean, if the mission is lets say complex and it involves many things to be done over longer period of time (longer than 1 dogfight or missile exchange that happens in today's mp) , wouldn't it be nice to have this option.. like, you would have the C&C centers-awacs, or battle commander view or whatever.. where you can manage your forces and you will see the enemy only as your planes, ground forces make contact or use their ground radar's to "mark" certain enemy elements.. and thus having the info to even plan an attack in the first place.. and if you have no time, no problem, just punch out.. the opening will be taken by some other player waiting in line.. of course, the nuances need to be polished by you get the general gist ..

@teapot .. trying to paint me anti-west will not work, as i have stated many times a simple fact that Silent Eagle (the most up-to-date F-15) is more than able to fight anything out there at the moment, and have stated also F-22 has no equals .. i don't have a bias towards REALITY such as a modern fighter that is up-to-date(and Su-27SM certainly belongs to this category) has a serious electronic advantage and radar advantage vs. the original basic F-15C from the 90s.. for you to be this "bias" or whatever you mentioned means you are the one biased.. sorry if i "hurt" your feelings because of stating facts.. for you to say those are not facts is like saying intel processor i7 is not better then Celeron from the 2002 because i don't provide you with the "link" to prove my words )) lol.. sorry, i cannot provide link for logic.. you are on your own there.. have a nice day old chap..

that is a good point sobak.. we don't know what version of f-15c will be modelled.. i guess that depends on the good USA of F .. if they could give some info that could at least make some semblance of sense about the newer version of F-15 (at least 2000's onward versions) it would be great.. but i doubt it.. On the other hand, modelling the F-15C from the 90's would mean much higher fidelity simulation of the plane.. hmm..

i know about the upgrades.. you do realise that ED can't upgrade the F-15 like the USAF does... they make a simulation of a certain model in this case the original C model from the 90's .. why are people so upset to hear that technology from the 90's is not the same as technology from the 2005? ... again, i'm not claiming todays up to date f-15 which would be silent eagle with stealth characteristics is not able to stand on its own..i'm talking about the model that is simulated and that is one hell of an old plane compared to SM standard flanker.. i have no problem admiting when airplane is old and technologically obsolete.. like saying mig-21 can compare with f-16.. but when somebody criticizes the western planes in the same field vice-versa you go up in air )) lol.. whats next.. you will say f-4 phantom can fight su-27sm ?) will that make you happy.. jesus.. people are really jumpy today..

again, F-22, eurofighter all that is non-sense since most of the data is top secret.. i think it shouldn't belong to the DCS but to FC or other projects.. About F-15C, ..again, we are talking about C model, which is OLD model and cannot compare with 4++ generation fighters .. AT ALL.. You mistaken the F-15C with D or other improved and UP-TO-DATE versions.. of course the up-to-date version of F-15 can be more than an equal to even Eurofighter.. but it cannot be SUPERIOR anymore. .there is no such thing as superiority with fighting jets that are your peers.. that is why nations such as China, Russia are developing the 5th generation to be at least a peer (even if not totally equal to F-22) because if you are fighting a plane 1 generation ahead of you its no competition anymore.. So, to compare F-15C from the 90's with a plane from the 2007 is absurd .. Again, the missile matters not, because the platform is old.. its like firing Amraam from Mig-21 against F-15C )) who do you think would win? ..F-15C without a doubt.. cuz F-15C would find out the Mig-21 sooner, launch his missile sooner cuz it would lock on him sooner and destroy him sooner.. who cares about the missile.. of course missile is important.. but the platform is even more.. What i'm saying is there is no superiority for the F-15C model at all compared to the Su-27SM, or god forbid the Eurofighter.. and this is what USAF wants when engaging an enemy-SUPERIORITY.. this is simulation here, which means we are stuck with what can be reasonably guess and simulated-and 5th generation do not apply.. This actually gives you the picture of why USAF started developing the 5th generation fighter in the first place..to make distance from the Sukhois 3-4 gen. fighters.. since if this is not made, you are fighting a battle that can SWING anyway.. and this is not good if your strategy is based on superiority and dominance of the skies.. about the missiles again, look Su-27SM armed with SARH missiles is more than able to destroy 8 targets at the same time, target them, launch, and track them and destroy them.. all without ACTIVE seeker head of the R77 or Amraam equivalent .. why?cuz of the much more advanced radar than what F-15C model uses.. put that with ECM suite, burn through range, and you have yourself a big problem flying the F-15 vs. Su27SM.. and rightfully so, anything less would be unbelievably stupid to do in a simulation which would not reflect reality..

of course it continued with the upgrades, just as the Su-27 did.. but we are talking about the original F-15 C-version C as in C.. not D, or C+, or C+++ ..etc Su-27 in Lomac etc.. is actually the original Su-27 that barely had a functioning radar.. yet was pitted against a C version of F-15 that is much greatly improved in electronic warfare and detection than the original Su-27 .. so, finally we get some balance re-adjustment.. There is a reason why the USAF made the F-22, the Sukhois and Eurofighters improved to the point that F-15 is no more superior to them, but at best equal and at worst inferior .. USAF always follows the doctrine of superiority which means having at least half a generation better equipment than the opponent.. so they stopped with improving the F-15 and went with the F-22 .. since F-22 will not be simulated in DCS (it can't be by a large margin because of the top secret technologies involved) we are going to have an environment where Russian jets finally show their prowess and rightfully so..

the biggest news is of course the Su-27SM .. i mean we are talking about 4+ generation fighter... and if this plays out right this will be a game changer as it should be.. people talk about what will be the difference, R-77 is used in some servers already. ..yeah on Su-27.. there is a huge difference in Su-27 and Su-27SM .. its like comparing F-15A( the basic model from the 70's with the F-15D) .. there is no chance for the F-15C in BVR in my view.. F-15C is from the 90's.. so the tables will be changed indeed.. i hope that doesn't scare the western fans of using F-15 and doing "easy kills" ..but if simulated properly the Su-27SM should be able to "see and lock and maintain lock much easier than F-15C) .. the missiles never were the most important aspect of BVR and other fights.. its all about electronics, detection, ECM suite etc.. and Su-27SM is at least half a generation ahead of the F-15C model if not 1 generation .. This will be sweet for the russian fans.. and i can already hear the grumbling of the western fans)) lol.. hei not fair.. how come he locks me before i can.. oh man, the Irbis radar here we come )) .. What i would rather like to see is much more controlled servers with independent people who will "manage" the conflict.. like, you have points, and you can spend this point on hardware, (buying planes, missiles, rockets, choppers, AWACS, ships etc..) then you spend them and position them as you as the commander thinks this is wise.. so, no knowledge of the enemy composition whatsoever .. one team is RED another BLUE (Red needs to take a strategic point of the BLUE, BLUE needs to defend it) ..there is time limit to achieve this (4-6 hours ) and off you go.. Than you can do all kind of tactics like buying lots of SAMs and thus rendering the Air superiority missions of the enemy void and null (since the enemy will have many fighters with valuable points spent on air-to-air missiles instead of SEAD) .. thus making the mission less efficient, ..) And some sort of system where your peers grade you on your commander ability..if you managed to do good, you get good reviews and become more "visible" on the MP server where you can be picked by other teams etc.. what do you think? ..

well, it should give you some time -meaning range before SAM burns through the jamming.. without the ECM you would be targeted at distance 100km for instance and with jammer you should be targeted at distance 80km ..thus giving you closer range so you can fire your weapons etc.. but if there is no difference then yeah, it sucks.. whats the point in wasting a pylon ..

this is not about "agreeing" which plane is better... etc.. we are talking about how ED will construct its simulation.. if they will go in the position of Iran theater (WEST vs. Iran) or something similair in those lines then we are not talking simulations, but more of a propaganda.. we have more than enough of those from pentagon coming every year out-BF,MoH,CoD, etc.. ED should stick to known data and from same timeline.. which means F-15 A--not C, but A, since Su-27 is the very original with the very bad radar.. and no Amraam since back in the 1980 there was no Amraam.. and all of a sudden there is balance. ... to me its obvious what is happening.. ED is appeasing the children of the west who like to blow stuff up without thinking.. in that case.. just cancel all russian jets, replace them with Mig-15 drones and voila.. the crowds will be happy..

"situation is dire" ..wtf is that supposed to mean.. is Russia the next country to be "liberated" by western tomahawks.. is this what this forum has become.. this is sick.. dude, get your fascist crap out of here.. Russia is not a totalitarian regime that arrests their citizens, tortures them, holds them indefinitely in prison, and even assassinate them with drones..this is what US does. Its OFFICIAL policy as of LATE.. yet, you dare to say life in Russia is DIRE!! .. the hypocrisy.. the stupidity.. and the treachery.. that ED would allow such nonsense to be spewed by ignoramuses like you..

Fallacy of Weak Analogy. Whatever difference there might be between Russia and Iran is still orders of magnitude less than between Iran and a non-existent country with polar bears. -so you are saying under scenario of Russia vs. Iran?)) this is your iran theater?)) that is much less likely than Germany vs. UK war.. talk about ludicrous idea )) lol.. i was reffering to WEST vs. Iran.. and yes the analogy of mine holds true.. and that is F-22 dropping bombs on baby seals in the north pole.. but you and many like you prove me right when i say you in fact desire such "combat and fight".. it makes you feel superior and you actually like the feeling of being such a great pilot when you manage to destroy an opponent who cannot fight back.. Thats why i said EU theater.. who would fight in there? Read my "A new theater" thread, i describe it .. and considering the collapsing EU economy not to mention the US one i think this is much more likely to happen than Russia invading Iran )) .. lol.. EU is becoming more of a fascist organization than anything out there, we basically have Germany the super-state dictating to periphery.. this will not hold on for long.. the cracks are seen .. and yes, if one tries to make interesting, challenging game of "EQUALS" ..then EU theater is great )) but as i said, you proved me right when you want fight with somebody who is under heavy sanctions and fighter jets from the 70's.. while you fly with raptor )) .. DCS is going to become an arcade with people like you.. you are like children really.. but then again, i can't blame DCS, .. look at BF3.. how much money they made, and they are faaar from simulating anything..