ShadowFrost

+1

Yeah, Ill come to the defense of Kuqomba as well. He has access to chinese forums/text/whatever that not everyone else does... where some of the Deka team communicates. I can't say for the recent posts, but everything previously has been very accurate. But I also imagine this situation is still developing so things may change.

Nice write up, your guides have been super useful in the past.

As far as I could tell, its for the Chinese market primarily, and I think it will only allow you to purchase a day early. Not play a day early. But I could be wrong.

I think 100 & 200 are just generic numbers. What he is trying to say, as far as I can tell, is to explain economics and basic business practice. Hes giving an example of how a lower price point can sell more and generate more revenue than a higher price point that sells less. It is in Deka's interest to price the module at the equilibrium point, where the price in combination with total sales will equal the most revenue possible. And I personally think, 69$ is a good choice given its competition. Whether it actually was the right choice, I imagine only Deka will know in a few months time.

JF-17 price 69.99$ until end of year supposedly. https://www.bilibili.com/read/cv4051559?share_source=qq&share_medium=iphone&bbid=bd3bda8f61da08344750d27b8f326e23&ts=1574837329

I believe he meant similar in terms of price, but not pre-order. On December 4th it will be available for purchase and download as there is no pre-purchase period.

Well I think its going to be covered more on its own the next week or etc. This was just a casual update. Probably allows Deka to gather some nice photos, their cold and dark video and present it in a nice way next week (or sometime) in a good manner. But thats just speculation on my part.

I dont know if its off the table per say, I think they expressed interest in doing it if it became available later on. But they're focused on A- the EA payload and then some slight expansions of that currently. But it likely all depends if they can get data and what not.

Do tell me where the links are here. Edit- And I have no problem ending the conversation here, as I can agree, we aren't getting anywhere.

Well that's exactly why we want you to provide sources, because your words are not facts, even if they come from facts. To have any credibility one must provide sources. Because otherwise, there is no way for any of us to know how credible your information is. So if you can, please provide. Edit- Grammar

You act like it has to be in PAK for them to have data on it. If im quite honest, thats quite a weird stance IMO. They've gone to China before to get data on stuff they needed, I wouldn't see how its any different in this case. And for the earlier case, yes those were in testing, but you made a blanket statement that JF-17 could not carry them, which I disproved (Edit- along with many others). Now, maybe PAK didn't have in inventory at the time, but your statement was not refined enough to reflect that stipulation if that makes sense. And below, a post from their Facebook, showing they're not only getting their information from just Pakistan.

They've LIED to us... :thumbup: "More is always better than less"

Those were my sources as you said the JF-17 couldn't carry PL-12 (SD-10). Maybe PAK just got it in inventory recently, but its been developed/planned for the last 9 years easily.

Yeah, if it was well documented I'm sure they had a look at it. But as I mentioned earlier, it may have been out of their ability. As DCS has never had anything like it, there likely isn't the ability for them to make it happen until ED adjusts the core of DCS. I'm afraid they would likely run into API limitations in this regard. But that is only speculation from me.

I've also seen mentions of this along with setting way-points for the missile to go to and then go active. While very curious about it, and would love to have it. I'm not sure A- how true these systems are. B- If DCS could use these systems without an overhaul. Maybe the AWACS guidance would work without too much trouble, but I think (Yes I) that guiding to a way-point may pose problems currently for DCS with A2A missiles. But I could be wrong. But the original post's question is a rumor of the JF-17's capability that I have seen before. So who knows.

Yeah I can give the picture, just not sure if the source is allowed in ED forums or not. The picture below or above? is supposedly a PL-15 on a JF-17, I'm not extremely knowledgeable, but on first glance its not a PL-12 as far as I can tell. But at the same time, the image isn't the greatest quality. Additionally, there isn't any other evidence with this photo. (Additional photos) So it could be faked or etc. I can't say, just the rumor that has been going on, is that they did test PL-12 with block II. So do take with a grain of salt. Edit- And by no means am I saying we should get the PL-15 in DCS if it was able to be equipped on block II reliably. (IE the testing trials were true, and it did work well with BLK II) I don't think it has a place in DCS and far too little is known about it. I was just mentioning earlier, that it was believed that it was "supposedly" trialed due to PAK concerns with PL-12. Nothing more, nothing less.

AFAIK, the PL-15 was equipped for testing on the block II. I think testing was to see whether it was capable to work with the current radar as PAK wanted to expedite delivery of the PL-15 due to performance concerns of PL-12. Not sure if the PL-15 was determined to be capable of working with block II or not. Planned for block III. A quick google search will result in images of the JF-17 carrying, not sure if I could post those links here or I would.

Yeah Im thinking the same, apparently LD-10 range isn't very far. So a loadout with C802 and that pod wouldn't be a bad idea for maximum range SEAD. A little more work, but more effective hopefully. I think i'll likely only use LD-10s for self defense scenarios, (IE Sam overhaul, or servers with scripts) that have sams turn on right underneath you instead of being on all the time like is the normal currently. I know with the F-16, the HTS pod gives a indicator on the hud that points you in the right direction (azimuth) but not a precise range. I wonder if the JF-17 will work in a similar way or not.

I wonder if that's in operational service anywhere, or just recently produced. :smilewink:

Well to be fair, the JF-17 was planned ages ago.... (At least relative to when it was produced) Interesting though.

Would you like to provide more information to what you say? Yeah, 2012/2013 was the first time SD-10 was spotted on JF-17's carried by PAK. They don't exactly post information related to their complete testing process so its hard to know exactly when the SD-10 was operationally ready. What year are you saying the SD-10 became operational? Because a few posts back you seemed to give the impression that it was only very recently. Im not saying its been there operationally ready the entire time, but that its been there for several years. But even then, its been known about for a while, on the aircraft since at least 2013, theres no way its some missile out of the blue that Deka wouldn't have information on to model it. And I imagine they wouldn't model it if they didn't have the data. If it was the PL-15 I completely understand the argument. But A- the SD-10 (PL-12) has been around for a while. B- its been tested/operationally used of the JF-17 for years. Earliest pictures I found were 2012/2013. I understand if you can't find the source for your interview recently referenced, but please going forward provide sources. As when you make a claim like "1) SD-10 (PL-12) never carried on JF-17 7) Yes, Pakistani airforce has these missiles ordered. But they haven't arrived yet .." That are easily counter-able, you lose credibility. Now if your saying the SD-10 wasn't operationally ready and only been testing from 2012/2013. That's possible, but I would want to see evidence. If your also saying that the missiles were not in inventory in large enough numbers that is also fine, but to those of us reading, those come off as blanket statements. Where when a decent google search provides images to the contrary, its important to provide evidence to your side. I'm not saying everything I've posted is correct, I try to be fact based with what is available to me. Which means if you have information that contradicts what I share/cite please provide it as I understand sources can have a degree of inaccuracy. And I will concede, after reading my post, it should have been planned to equip SD-10, not "has been equipped" as the earliest sources I've seen of the SD-10 on a PAF aircraft are from late 2012/2013.

I think they need to release a demo for us to test it personally :)

Like blind dates?:thumbup: :megalol:

Not an official response, but I've heard rumors of ED's QA program (I think F-14, could be wrong) taking just around a month provided nothing goes wrong. Deka sent it off to ED the 13th (last sunday). So while October is looking slim, we all should be flying it relatively soon. Only side note is, if there is some issue that does come up, it will take an undetermined amount of time longer. So its not too far away, but theres no telling just yet exactly how "far" that is.