mattebubben

The Mig-27K with the Kaira-1 Optical TV system would be pretty capable though if maby harder to operate. (Its very similar to the Kaira-24 used by the Su-24M but its made to be operate to be operated by the pilot during flight and pilot reports indicate that it was a handful to use effectively for a pilot that was not very skilled at the task and it was one of the reasons why usually only the best and most experienced Mig-27 pilots went to the Mig-27K where as others flew the other Mig-27 variants that used a similar Klen Laser Targeting system as the Su-25A that easier to operate) And there is still a significant difference between the Su-24 and the Su-17 or Mig-27 as the Su-24 is both larger and slower and less nimble as well as being Two crew only. So while the Su-24 would be a very capable aircraft its still pretty different from the Su-17 and Mig27 in employment etc and i would rather have a Su-17 or Mig-27 as i prefer a smaller single seat aircraft =).

Nice! Looking forward to it. And we appreciate the work put into this =) and have a good trip.

Guys i dont think there is any reason to revive this thread =P. Since im pretty sure they have already made their choices on this matter. (Since the initial F1 variant had already been chosen to be the F1CE and im sure they have already decided the other parts internally)

The Gripen took over the Strike role. In fact the First Gripens to enter service Took over the AJ/AJS 37s role when it came to Strike / Anti-Ship work where as the fighter JA 37 kept on going for a few more years until it to was replaced as more Gripens where Delivered. (The JA 37 could have stayed in server for several more years as it was still up to date when it came to weapons/Radar etc so it was still a capable air-air platform but it was retired earlier due to a reduction in the size of the airforce.) And the Reason that the Recce Viggens (SH and SF 37) were kept in service longer was due to a delay in the Gripen Recce pod but once those pods were in service those variants were also retired. The JAS 39A was well suited for the Strike role and carried the Same BK90,RBS15 and AGM 65 (RB75/75T) as the AJS 37 had before it but with the addition of LGBs and a targeting pod as well as an internal gun and vastly more advanced systems etc.

I Wish the Mi-8 could use the 57mm rockets by default =P since they are one of the most common (if not the most common) weapons you see carried on the MI-8.

Well the Viggen in general was retired in 2005. But the AJ/AJS left service between 98-00. (With the JA 37 Fighter variant leaving service in 2004 and SF/SH Recce variants and the SK 37E Two Seater / Jamming aircraft leaving service in 2005) So it would not have carried any of the later RBS variants. So the first RBS 15F or maby the RBS 15F Mk II are what we are getting (i would lean towards the Mk 1 RBS 15F since its what we KNOW for sure the AJS 37 carried and there is not much difference between them anyway) But the MK III with the Air-Ground abilities entered service several years after the AJS 37 left service so it will most likely not be an option. (Especially since while Production / Testing of the RBS MK III might have started in 2004 service entry and the Air-Launched variant took several years more).

Just make sure you try him out on Flight sims while he is young to get him in deep. My father stuck me with Janes F-15 and Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator 1 when i was 5. And look at me today... a complete Flight Sim / Aviation Geek.

If there is anything in particular you need translated id be more then happy to help.

For me it kind depends. I would be overjoyed for either. And if a dev decided to make a Mig-23 and a Mig-27 that would be amazing. But my choice between a Mig-27 and Su-17 (22) would depend on the exact variant. a Mig-27K would be a nice edition and pretty capable. But a Su-17M4 With both TV and Sead and TV Compatability would also be a very capable aircraft (The Mig-27K would still have an advantage due to its onboard Optical system where as the 17M4 would have to rely on the seeker head of a weapon to get a picture). But ive always like the Su-17/22 more =P and it was also the more popular of the two with it gaining massive export success and also being more numerous in Soviet service. (For me this is a major advantage as it would fit in more scenarios as well as fit on both Blue and Red side but thats just me and it has no impact on capabilities / performance) When one compare the two they each have some advantages over the other but in general they are very comparable and i would be very happy to see either one in DCS.

The Viggen is my baby and its beautiful. All other Babies are ugly. But mine is Beautiful ^^. Yes the Lines of the Viggen are not the most beautiful. But if you have ever seen it in action you have to agree that in its entirety its sexy, the lines it has together with the pure brutal power it exudes makes it sexy. But when it comes to aircraft looks everybody has their own tastes. For example i cant understand those that find the Blackburn Buccaneer or Panavia tornado good looking / sexy just like others cant understand my feelings on the Viggen. Hell i dont even find the F-16 good looking (and i know im in a minority on that ^^). But for me the Viggen is a beauty (Especially with the Right Paintscheme and from the right angles). Im just saddened that the only viggen flying was left in the Metal/Silver finish instead of painting it in the Green Camo that it belongs in ^^.

As a Swede and a Viggen lover i here by nominate you a honorary Swede. Anybody who sees the beauty of the Viggen (The Sexiest bird ever to float in the sky in my opinion ^^) is worthy to be a honorary Swede ^^.

Razbam has both the A-7 and the A-6 under development. But yea a Super Etendard could be interesting.

Will depend on how close to the ground the target is (and how close it is to you) and what filters you are using. But the radar should not be worse in Air-Air then the radar on the Mig-21Bis is in someways (and it should probably be better at low altitude then the Mig-21s radar as its radar pretty much blanks out at lower altitudes). But two important things to take into account are the following. First. The Swedish doctrine for the Attack Viggens (AJ and AJS) were to fly at low altitudes during combat missions (with only the pop up before attack being higher) so the standard flight altitude would tend to be between 20-100m during the majority of a combat mission so any hostile aircraft would have to be either above or at the same altitude. And second the AJ 37 was not a fighter its an attack aircraft with some air-air capabilities and able to do secondary fighter missions if needed and fighters are busy else where those types of missions would generally have been limited to attacking Helicopters or unescorted bombers / Transports but primarily the Air-Air capabilities are for self defence. Its also very likely that "skill" will take a part in seeing low altitude aircraft (if you were to be above aircraft looking down with the radar) since they are still likely to have an effect on the radar screen its just a matter of recognising what is displayed. The AJS 37s radar/computer does not see something and then convert it into the icon of an aircraft to your radar display (Like the other Radar equipped aircraft in DCS atm) it simply shows you if there is something within the search area. If the backdrop is a clear sky it will show clearly as the only things the radar is impacting on are those aircraft so they will show up as blips on an empty radar display but if the aircraft in question has ground as a backdrop the pilot will have to try and tell apart what is an aircraft and what is simply part of the ground return (Filters should help slightly with this procedure). So it should still be possible to be used against low flying target it just depends on the exact ranges / altitudes as well if the pilot is able to read what the display is showing him. But it also remains to be seen exactly how the Air-Ground search radar will work in game terms (how well the game is able to simulate everything).

Tactical Instruction for 1982 is my vote as well. As that would be very interesting and might also be useful.

Ive Recently been getting back into the A-10A and ive been trying to use the CBU-87s but im finding no matter what i try the Bomblets constantly fall far short of Calculated point of Impact (when using CCIP) unless i drop them from below 200-250 Feet. If i try to drop at altitudes above that they always fall short. Am i doing something wrong or is it simply bugged =P.

The RBS 15F carried by the Viggen has no Air-Ground Functionality, And you dont give it a impact point for Anti-ship work you tell it to fly to an area and search for targets using its oboard seeker once it gets to a certain spot. The Latest RBS 15 variants the RBS 15 MK III (for Land/Ship based) and RBS-15F ER have Land attack Capabilities but im not sure how they work and im 100% sure that that capability is not present for the RBS 15F we are getting for the AJS 37. And could you please clarify your Question about the Maverick =P. By Maverick T do you mean the RB 75T (with AGM-65 Seeker / Body but with a heavy 140Kg penetrating blast-fragmentation warhead much like some later US AGM 65 Variants). And if that is the case then the RB 75T was fully used on the AJ and AJS 37 Viggen =P (Side by side with the Normal RB 75) and i doubt it would need any modifications to be used as it use the same seeker and guidance units etc as the AGM 65A/RB 75 did. The RB 75T with its heavy warhead was to be used against Bunkers,Bridges landing craft and in general tougher targets where the heavier penetrating warhead was needed. With the Normal RB 75 (AGM 65A) with its Shaped Charge warhead being used against vehicles etc.

Thanks for the Response and great news =). That was pretty much exactly the options i was hoping for.

Yes i know about that Picture. But a Video is allot different then a picture as it directly shows it working in game where as a picture (that is not even a part of a cockpit) does not tell people as much. But either way its a Race right now between the A-4E the AJS 37 and the F/A-18C on who gets to the public first. My hope is for the AJS 37.

Thanks on the Update Ragnar. Just another question. Will you include multiple BK 90s for the different Submunition Options?. (One Using MJ1s and one Using MJ2s for example) Since i very much hope we get Both Submunition Options as they are very different in their performance / effect. (The MJ1 Submunition is a 4Kg Air-Bursting Submunition for use against Soft targets where as the MJ2 Submunition is a 18Kg Anti-Tank Submunition)

Well its designed to be able to be F&F using GPS Coordinates to let it use its max effective range and maintain high accuracy. But i dont know if you could easily designate targets for it in flight or if you had to insert GPS Coordinates (either Inflight or if it was only possible on the ground)

there is already an A-4E on the way. In fact they released a video yesterday on the Air-Ground Radar. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2927380&postcount=68

The Primary duty for the AJS 37 radar when it comes for Air-Ground was Terrain Mapping and searching for ships. It is not able to (reliably) see and find Small Ground targets (tanks etc) ive heard mention that some pilots that were expert at reading the radar could sometimes spot smaller objects like vehicles an Structures on it (depending on alot of factors like terrain,Backdrop and the angle between the aircraft and the target etc) but it was not something it was designed to do or effective at. One has to remember that its a radar developed in the 1960s (and entering service in 1970). So it was very capable for its time but its lacking compared to more modern Air-Ground Radars. But it works very well for the purposes it was designed for. The radar also has Ranging modes (Both Air-Air and Air-Ground modes) as well as a very basic Air-Air Search mode (Basically the same type of scan as the Air-Ground Scan but pointed Forward/Upwards and it will pick up aircraft with a clear sky as backdrop).

the AJS 37 might still be the first released module to have it. But the A-4E showed it first =P. Though it sadly does not really matter if one has worked on something for a long time and was the first to make it. The first to display it to the public is usually the one who gets the credit =P not the one who discovered it first but only worked behind closed doors.

Not directly Viggen Related. But the up coming Free A-4E Mod released a video yesterday of its Air-Ground Radar functioning. So sadly the Viggen will no longer be the first aircraft to show the air-ground radar capabilities =(.

The Mirage F1CE in Spanish service never Carried the Super 530 though, only the Older 1960s R.530 (because they never bought the Super 530F) and after that missile was retired it also only carried Aim-9s. The only F1 Spain used that carried Super 530s (AFAIK) were the 12 surplus F1Es (F1EDA) acquired from Qatar in the early 90s (These were delivered together with atleast 50 Super 530F missiles). Though the F1CE might also have been capable of carrying Super 530s (even if like the EE it never did). But yea i agree that i would also be ok With it getting super 530s if the EE was capable of using them (even if it did not use them in service) since it would allow it to represent F1Es of other nations. And since the EE used the Cyrano IVM radar that was standard amongst most F1Es so the Radar atleast would be Super 530 Capable.