mattebubben

Ok thanks for Clarification Prowler =). And keep up the amazing work.

If my memory is correct the there should be AP-Frag warheads for the Rockets as well and not just HE(GP). And while the 120kg bomb is the only bomb carried by the Viggen it should be available in both Low drag (normal) and high drag configs (if i remember correctly).

Q1 =A I will most likely get it maby not on day one (Depends on the money i have at the time and if there are any other modules i want more at the time) but i will get it for sure. Q2 The base harrier we are getting will not be equipped with a Radar (though they have said we might get a radar equipped AV-8B+ Later onces the radar functionality comes) but the first/primary AV-8B we are getting will not have a radar. Q3 = B. Far more interested in the AV-8B since it will bring some new capabilities and will be a interesting little attack aircraft where as im personally not that interested in trainers. Q4 =A. It will be a interested and unique aircraft and will probably be very usefull sure it wont be as fast as a F/A-18 or as rugged as the A-10 and it will have a far smaller weaponsload then either but i think it will be a very interested and effective aircraft none the less. Q5 They are working on both aircraft at the same time (as well as a number of others) Since not all Razbam members are working on a single aircraft and many (if not most) devs have areas they are specialized on within the development of an aircraft/module and once they are done with what they are specialized at they move on to another aircraft since they might not be able to contribute any more to the current aircraft (at that stage) and no point in having them sit idle when they can work on something else. So there are many projects worked on at the same time without really slowing them down all that much.

I thought you guys were doing the AV-8B NA (as the first with the + to possibly follow when the Ground radar arrives) and not the Base AV-8B.

Thank you for the correction. And this also shows the Dangers of going by Wikipedia (could not find that many other sources on the Mig-23) This is the Quote from Wiki that got me so sidetracked. "MiG-23bis("Flogger-G") Similar to the MiG-23P except the IRST was restored and the cumbersome radar scope was eliminated because all of the information it provided could be displayed on the new head-up display (HUD)." And the Mig-23Bis is shown as one of the first Second Gen Mig-23s (after the Mig-23P and to my knowledge there was a Mig-23Bis it just never entered large scale production / use) so my guess from that was that earlier aircraft used the Cumbersome radar display mentioned. But thank you for getting me straightened out. I knew Mig-23s used a HUD that displayed radar data i was just mistaken in what variants had it.

A Simple A-4 is on the way from Hoggit already. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=159823

Probably depends on what is ment with early. In my mind the Basic Su-24 or the Su-24M would be the most likely (since post 2000 upgrades like the Su-24M2 would be less likely as they are more classified) And either could be called an early version by todays standard (with the Base Su-24 entering service in 1974 and the Su-24M in 1983) So an early (as in not the latest) version i think would be the most likely then its just a matter if they go with the Earliest (Su-24) or the slightly later but far more capable variant (Su-24M) Personally i would hope for a Su-24M since its FAR more capable in all areas and most of the capabilities we thinking of when we think of the Su-24 are from the Su-24M and not the base version (Laser/Optical system allowing to self laze,The ability to use TV guided weapons, and most of the weapons it uses like the KH-25 and KH-29 etc).

I very much doubt two devs will do the same aircraft at the same time (Even if they made slightly different variants). Since while it might be possible in theory i doubt it. But if Avio Stops work on their F1 then sure but until then i dont think Razbam will do a F1 (in the nearby future).

The Mirage F1 is already being worked on by Aviodev. They have a Thread on the Forum and some pictures for it.

ohh?. I was simply going by the sources ive been able to find (Including Wiki etc) and they had led me to believe that the first generation Mig-23s (M,MF etc) still used a radar display and that the Bis was the first that ditched the radar display. If i was incorrect then i acknowledge that, i was simply going by the sources / info i had been able to find. Do you know of any Sources in ENG with correct information? since i would be very interested in knowing more about the Mig-23 (as its an aircraft that i like).

Yea same here. a Su-17M4/22M4 or a Mig-23 ML/MLA or MLD would be amazing. Su-17M3/22M3 would also be very nice. Older variants of the Mig-23 would still be nice and interesting just less amazing. For example a Mig-23MF would be nice but it would not be as nice/interesting as something like a Mig-23ML would be since the MF did not have a Hud and used a separate radar display where as the later mig-23s like the Bis,ML,MLA and MLD had a Hud with the radar info displayed on the HUD like was done on the Mig-29 and Su-27. (And the ML,MLA and MLD were just overall superior to the MF on all fronts with better Radars weapons engines and being lighter and more maneuverable etc)

Lightly used Mig-21s in mint condition! Now on sale for just 19.99$ (Transport cost and spare parts not included in price)

Ive had a problem at times that the rocket pods stopped working after i had launched both my aim-9s.

dont really understand what you mean right here =P. What do you mean with missiles do not engage in the sun? Do you mean that the missile seekers dont lock on the sun?

Well we have the F-14s true rival being made. The Backfire!!! (Tu-22M) Since it was pretty much what the F-14 was supposed to counter (since the primary mission of the F-14 was fleet defense and the Tu-22 was the fastest and most powerful of the soviet anti-ship aircraft).

Well the ussr had BVR capable aircraft before the Mig-23. For example the Su-15 predates the Mig-23 by several years (The Su-15 entered service in 1965) and it could (maby)be considered BVR capable. The Su-11 used the same missile as the Su-15 and entered service one year before the Su-15 so its also potentially BVR capable (it depends how you judge whats BVR or not) And the Mig-25 entered service at around the same time. with the Mig-25P and Mig-23SM entering service the same year (1971) (the pre production Mig-23SM being the first Mig-23 variant with the new BVR/R-23 capable radar) but only 80 or so Mig-23SM aircraft were made so its not untill 1972 with Mig-23M that there was a Mig-23 that was being mass produced and it was BVR/R-23 capable etc. Im unsure if the Missiles of the Su-11/Su-15 are truly BVR missiles but the missiles of the Mig-25 is without BVR so either way the Mig-23 was not the First BVR capable eastern combat aircraft even if it was just by a narrow margin ^^. But maby more significantly the Mig-23 was the first eastern fighter with Look Down Shoot down capability (Starting with the Mig-23M). And yea the Mig-23 (MF,ML/MLA or MLD) is near the top of my wishlist as well =). (Together with a Su-17/22 and Mig-27).

Sweden counted on holding for much more then 3-4 days during that time period. (Weeks and Months not days) 3-4 days is a more modern estimate with the state our military has been in for the last few years. Its not the estimate for the cold war when the Swedish armed forces was at its largest. During the cold war Sweden would have been able to hold out for a much longer time (and perhaps even being able to repulse a possible naval invasion outright). But in a modern scenario (today) Sweden would not have Hundreds of thousands of soldiers available to fight of a possible invasion. Today we would most likely not have more then 50,000 or probably significantly less if the attack was a surprise. (without a month or more to try to prepare the defenses) Thats why todays scenario would be no more then 3-4 days since our military is alot smaller while and possible invasion would not be that much smaller then it would have been during the cold war. (and our airforce is also smaller and less ready today then it was during the cold war as well as the coastal defenses being more or less completely gone). But then again its pretty much the same with most of West European nations our Militaries almost vanished after the cold war.

I doubt it would be possible without significant modifications done to the aircraft (in the way or pylons / wiring etc). Since the F-5E (we have) is not even capable of carrying the Aim-9L/M Let alone the Aim-9X so i doubt it could carry the IRIS-T. And the Iris-T is not just plug and play with any aircraft that can use the Aim-9. It can be made to be carried by most Aim-9 capable aircraft (especially those that can carry the later Aim-9M/Aim-9X generations of Aim-9) but it cant carry them out of the box. Any new weapon type will usually need changes. In hardware in software or in both. So while it would probably not be impossible to arm a F-5E with the IRST it would certainly be ALOT more work then simply mounting it on the pylons and off you go.

Well you can always ditch the Chaff for the extra flares. 30 flares deployed one at a time should be enough.

... He means you cant effectively use the Brakes of the F-5E using the Keybinds... And if you dont have a pedals with toe brakes then you have to use a Wheel Brake key bind... And thats pretty hard to do atm since as soon as you touch the button the wheels lock up and you start skidding all over the place as well as not slowing down quickly enough.

The problem is that without toe breaks it becomes very hard to break in the F-5E. The smallest activation of the breaks will lock the wheels and cause it to start skidding. Thus making it difficult to control and to keep straight. I have rudder Pedals but they are VKB pedals without Toe breaks. And this problem forces me to pretty much 100% rely on the breaking chute.

It was probably something that could had been done (Since the AJS 37 already had the same unused stations that the Boy 401 was attached to on the JA 37) But it was probably considered that it was not needed and that such a modification would have been an Unnecessary expense. And they would still have had to keep the Pod that the AJS 37 already used since it had other uses that a smaller chaff dispenser could not fulfill. And giving up 1 pylon was not considered any significant problem. Especially since it was usually only 1 aircraft in each flight that would carry the Chaff/flare pod.

It was not. The only Pod the AJS 37 can carry will take up one of the wing Pylons. The JA37 got some different countermassure devices in the Late 80s and 90s but the AJS 37 never got any of those (to my knowledge atleast). I guess they could add them in the game as a potential modification but i would be against that.

Interesting read =). And it also strengthened my Belief that the Aim-9P in DCS is very much under performing. Since several times he said the Aim-9P had high maneuverability etc. And this is very much not the case with the 1.5.4 state of the Aim-9P/P4 where its at Aim-9B levels of performance when it comes to maneuverability (and over all) But then again hopefully that was fixed in the latest 2.0.3 update so it should be there in this Friday update. Since the Aim-9P was not a bad missile (it was not the best missile for long but it was not a bad missile either). And will also be interesting to play around with not caging the missile in the next update. Since ATM with the bugged Seeker Lock FOV uncaging the seeker is more or less required to maintain any lock for more then a fraction of a second.

If people whine now about Devs making aircraft like the F-5E,Mig-21 or the different trainer aircraft Imagine if some of the Devs decided to module Experimental aircraft with no combat capability what so ever xD.