foxbat155

You right, search antennas block unit spins with a speed of 80 revolutions per minute, this gives 360 degrees swept every 0.75 seconds ( 60:80=.75 ). Of course when the target is on the radar level, return signal is given by both antennas and then the position of the target symbol on the screen should be refreshed every 0.35 sec. My mistake.

Su-17/22M4 was fully multitasking variant, there is no specified versions like M4R or M4P, aircrafts were wired for all equipment, only depending on tasks, pod with recce or SEAD equipment can be hang under fuselage or wings and some panels inside cockpit need to be changed. Here we go, photo of Soviet and East German aircrafts with KKR pod, under front part of fuselage you can see (red arrow) antennas which were used for programming SEAD missile's guindance head before launch. Of course aircraft cannot use KKR pod and SEAD pod at the same time. Su-17M4 from first serial aircraft was able use TV guided weapon and had TV monitor fiited in the cockpit, export Su-22M4 had simmilar capability from 30th production series, before that in place of monitor was mounted a dummy panel. Warsaw Pact countries were training nuclear attack very often with use of IAB-500 imitation bomb. 17/22M4 never carried RN-24 nuke, only RN-28 on the beginning and after her withdrawn from use in mid 80's there were RN-40 and RN-42. Every Su-22M4 was able drop a nuclear bomb, place of service wasn't important, aircraft had weapon computer with several modes, toss mode can be used for any type of free fall bombs not only nuclear one, everything what is needed is a input of ballistic values into computer memory. Only special type of equipment required for A bomb were special "nuclear" BD3-56FHM pylons, rest of weapon system is standard for all types of bombs.

Don't be offended only because MiG-17F didn't had R-3S missiles. This is still great aircraft, just achieve good result will be a bit harder, more training, more tacticts, more thinking. Source of my knowledge? Books, manuals, photographs and ability to critical thinking. We living in times were you can find a lot of content on the internet but unfortunately many of those is just a rubbish. If you cannot find info confirmation in the form of photo evidence, that means most likely info is fake. You don't have to trust me, you can dig on your own. Long story short, I have not seen any manual which says about missiles, no russian/english language book mention about that, there is no photo which are able prove that. Only exception are those few Cuban MiG-17 sans suffixe.

Well, looks like you have to choose sources more carefully. First of all, "new Soviet MiG-17" didn't exist in 1964 because production of this aircraft was stopped generally in USSR in 1957 (altough in 1960 was produced extra 40 aircrafts for special order, 38 MiG-17F and 2 MiG-17PF, 1958 - 0, 1959 - 0) , from half of 1955 in production was exclusivelly F variant and her derivatives (PF, PFU ). In 1952 works were started over fighter-bomber variant, there was at least 5 prototypes with different pylons and weapons layout. Finaly 170 aircrafts was produced as quite simple variant with additional pylon located between main landing gear and external fuel tank station: This variant didn't had dedicated name. Later in late 60's idea of fighter-bomber MiG-17 back. In 1969 prototype was built but due of few mishaps she conduct first flight in 1972. Aircraft got modified BD3-60-21 pylons borrowed from MiG-21, about 150 MiG-17/MiG-17F aircrafts were rebuld to this standard. Official name in VVS documents was MiG-17AS, no matter on which variant based on, 17 or 17F: Now look on the Cuban aircraft. Do you see differences? Conclusion is very simple, Cubans got used aircrafts from Soviet Union, and those aircrafts were rebuilt into fighter-bomber variant locally. It is rather certain they got Soviet help in that matter, firstly because they didn't had own aircraft production/modification experience, second Cuban solution is very ressemble to one of Soviet fighter-bomber prototypes, only pylons were moved more outward from the axis of the aircraft: From modified aircrafts, Cubans were adapted few of them to use R-3S missiles, how many? Hard to say but looks like no more like 10 aircrafts were modified, Soviet aircrafts wasn't able use them. I think, source of most confiusions is a fact that with the time all fighter-bomber variants were start called AS in many books. Other thing, many people believe that Soviet production aircrafts, Chinese aircrafts, or Polish, Czech production are the same, but unfortunately is not. In module we will have MiG-17F and those aircrafts never had any AAM. DCS is a simulation game, developers choosed one variant with all cons and pros. Demanding some never existed frankensteins is wrong.

Nope, we will get MiG-17F and this variant never had any AAM missiles, Cuban aircrafts were MiG-17 sans suffixe, they couldn't have AS variant because this machine...... didn't exist in 1964. AS was created in half of 70's and there is no proof that was exported anyware outside USRR. AS wasn't "from factory", all of them were rebuilt old aircrafts from survived MiG-17 or MiG-17F. Here you can see all possible external stores variants for AS wariant: About R-3S, only part which was reverse engieneered was IR seeker, construction is almost identical with only increased field of view, rest is almost completely different, engine size and fuel, rollerons different construction, rollerons bloking system which don't exist in original AIM, completely new gas generator, front rudders control system had different layout, 4 impact fuses added (no on AIM), Soviet missile is longer about 4 cm. Original R-3 missile which was exact copy of original AIM-9B was produced only in low number for test, first real serial variant was improved R-3S (K-13A). Of course without Sidewinder R-3S could never materialized but cannot be called reverse engieenered due amount of changes and massive improve of capabilites. "Inspired by" or "based on" is a proper claim.

I have bad news for you. 99,9% MiG-17/MiG-17F never had ability to carry R-3S missile. Only few locally modified cuban MiG-17 sans suffixe were equipped with those. Other thing is that R-3S in not reverse copy of AIM-9B Sidewinder, this is independent Soviet construction based on ideas borrowed from Sidewinder.

Cubans had of course R-3S missiles, they didn't had access to anything else, but those missiles weren't standard feature, they did this modification locally only on a few aircrafts. Another thing is that the module is about MiG-17F ( afterburner), Cubans had MiG-17 "without letter" variant (no afterburner).

In my humble opinion, if we wanna still call DCS a flight simulator, we should stick to historical realism. In reality MiG-17 didn't had R-3S, but of course module developers can hang under wings whatever they wish.

Sorry my friend, but MiG-17 didn't had any AAM's (except few cuban aircrafts modified locally), MiG-17AS was a middle 70's idea so she never saw any war including Vietnam war, if you will check one of my previous posts you will find drawing with all external stores types available for this variant.

Of course every aircraft have some limitations, in case of MiG-17 limitations are so small that can be ignored in some conditions, 1,03 Ma is a limit during normal service, peace time, because of increased flatter over that speed and decreased elevator efficiency, during war this limit is secondary, during dive on max. trust without afterburner aircraft is no able to cross speed of sound, so from this point of view pilot have no limitations in aircraft's handling during dive.

Well, actually this is very simple, some engines have compressor/turbine revolutions speed limitations, some aircrafts have speed limit during diving, so in MiG-17 you don't have to worry about the engine and aircraft itself during the dive.

I'm entirely sure this info is not true or in best case is some misunderstanding. All MiG-17 without letter didn't had PPK system during production, some of them got this system during overhauls, so why 15bis would get this and then further MiG-17 not?. Probably MiG-15bis had use as a PPK's testbed and this gave info about it. Manuals dated 1953/54 says nothing about PPK system, and this publishing date is after MiG-15 production end in USSR (1952).

Please be aware, that wasn't my intention to lecture you. I agree that many sources give misleading information, many names/designation are confusing. I spent a lot of time on reading books, manuals, studing photos, in order to gain knowledge about those aircrafts and I know how easy people can lost, I lost myself many times... For those who interested with, from MiG company leaflet about AS package:

Again: Lim-5M (50 aircrafts built)--> rebuilt into Lim-6bis, series 1/2/3, Lim-6 (60 aircrafts built)--> rebuilt into Lim-6bis, series 4, Lim-5P (129 aircrafts built)--> survived aircrafts were rebuilt into Lim-6M (42 aircrafts rebuilt) or Lim-6MR (12 aircrafts rebuilt). Lim-5M have NOTHING to do with Lim-6M. Here photo of Lim-5M, conformal tanks on the wings, double main undercarriage wheels. Yes, "AS" was a rework package for MiG-17 "without letter" and MiG-17F, after those works both variants were called MiG-17AS. Only A-G ordnance on the new pylons. Sorry for that :). No point argue, I spent life on study all those things.

1. Lim-5 was a frontline fighter, but Lim-5M not, this was a dedicated light attack aircraft with secondary fighter capability due to much worse flight performance, 2, 3. Nothing was oposite, in early 70's commanders of communists PolAF decided that Lim-5P interceptors are already obsolete, but because aircrafts were quite young and in good condition they decided to rebuild them to Lim-6bis standard, those aircrafts were called after that rework Lim-6M, part of Lim-6M got AFA-39 camera in external underfuselage pod, those were called Lim-6MR, there is no difference in armor between polish MiG-17 variants, all of them had SPO-2, only early production Lim-5 had SRO-1, all rest SRO-2. Lim-5M's were rebuild to Lim-6bis standard as a series 1 and 2 and 3 (aircrafts with bort number start from digit 1 or 2 or 3), Lim-6's were rebuild as a series 4, new production aircrafts as a series 5 and 6, Briefly: Lim-5--> Lim-5M--> Lim-6bis series 1/2/3 Lim-6--> Lim-6bis series 4 Lim-5P--> Lim-6M or Lim-6MR 4. Nope, AS was a attack variant with added two pylons borrowed from MiG-21 and able to carry UB-16 pods, S-24 FFAR's and bombs, but NEVER any AA missiles, AS was created in half 70's, WP pact members had own attack variants already in service for over 10 years...... 5. I didn't said those are the same aircrafts, I just said 17 borrow a lot from 15, like whole front part of fuselage, undercarriage, control system, many electrical and pneumatical systems, almost all electronics, about 90 percent of cockpit equipment, whole catapult chair on the beginning, etc.