bies

IIRC GE required slightly more room even though the main diameter was the same, it would require airframe modification. And its intakes may, or may not, have sufficient flow for the mass-pushing GE engines. F-14 may possibly not have sufficient flow in some regimes for the GE engines, but i'm not sure. F-16 required new, bigger intake to utilize GE engine to the fullest. Oh, BTW, such modified F-15C coupled with GE engines would have empty Thrust to Weight above 2:1 and in combat configuration (50% fuel, 8 AAM, gun ammo) ~1.5:1 It would have higher T/W than any fighter in history, including F-22...

Full fidelity MiG-29 may be an impulse to take care about them.

Okay, Buddy. Whatever you say...

Oh this F-15 Eagle firing Sparrow! I hope we will get Cold War 1985 MSIP II F-15 as well, as a variant of just announced 2005 F-15C MSIP II.

I understand your frustration, but no, it's not the same. Not even close. And i'm not even an enthusiast of F-35 in DCS, being as sceptical as many other guys. F-35 and J-20 documantation availability is on a completely different level. J-20 is like F-22 - Chinese exclusive totally classified air superiority fighter, and more then a decade more recent, in a completely closed country. So good luck. And even F-22 in DCS at this moment would be impossible. (contrarly to export highly open F-35) And just ask yourself - would flying and fighting in 100% made up J-20 where nothing, avionics, weapons, cockpit, HOTAS, performance, sensors etc. - not even remotely resembling real jet?

"D" AMRAAM truck wariant may be a imposible to model in reasonably realistic way due to common datalink with Gripen. And it wouldn't fit the timeframe anyway. But 1980s Cold War JA-37C with Skyflash missiles and its ultimate sniper-gun would be great! Counterpart to all 1980s modules like MiG-29 9.12, Tornado IDS, F-14A/B, A-6E, MiG-21bis, Su-17M, A-7E, Mi-24P, Mirage F.1, Bo-105, Gazelle L etc. Perfect for Cold War Gone Hot over Kola Peninsula and declassified for highly realistic simulation.

Yes, having ONLY 2005+ variant would be a gatekeeping 20 years of F-15C service. With all the real life fighting.

As other guys said, a flayable one would be completely fictional fairy tale, having nothing in common with the real one except dor the external 3d model. Everything would be totally made up, avionics, weapons, performance, logic, HOTAS. Not even close in terms of realism to old simplified Flamming Cliffs F-15 and MiG-29. J-20 has nothing to do with mass produced, by open producer, by open nation, publically presented dozens of times F-35.

4 confirmed kills over Balkans? I knew about two MiG-29 from 24 March 1999.

MiG-23 in the USSR didn't have any capabilitities in 1960s. In summer of 1970 the first initial MiG-23S has started "state evaluation program" - still with tiny and dated MiG-21 radar and with severly limited maneuverability and insufficient structural integrity of wing sweep pivot and structural fuel tank nr.2 - causeng many fatal accidents and dozens of non-fatal crashes after which max G-loads have been reduced to 3,5G. The first MiG-23 variant ready to combat was MiG-23M (23-11M) from 1974. It still had weaker engine, some structural problems, underwhelming radar and many other problems, but it could be used in combat. During 1982 Lebanon War Syria had ~25 MiG-23MS and ~30 MiG-23MF. MiG-23MF based on Soviet improved MiG-23M from 1977 (Israeli F-15A 1975), it already had RP-23 Sapfir 23D radar and weapon system, R-60 close range missiles and R-23R/T missiles.

The closest ever were was Syria-Israel 1982 Lebanon War, where Syrian Soviet-made integrated air defence coupled with GCI and Soviet-built interceptors fought US-made fighters used to defeat both ground air defence and military aviation. Both sides used doctrine and tactics from respectively the USSR and the U.S. and older versions of their fighters; Israeli F-15A and F-16A when USAF used F-15C and F-16C, and Syrians MiG-23MF, Su-22M and MiG-21bis, when USST used MiG-23ML. Plus Soviet SA-2, SA-3, SA-6, SA-8, Soviet radars and electronic warfare, Soviet training and Soviet advicers and technicians directly in Syrian military. Western elastic doctrine and fighters with SA and electronic warfare prevailed in a spectacular way, despite Syrian Soviet fighters and ground air defence having numerical superiority.

So F-117, but i thought FlyingIron is making this one as they've shown quite some progres, 3d model, cockpit, wrote about spending money to obtain all the necessery documentation. Or maybe F-111. But it was retired around 1996, after the Cold War ended. Not much presence in Balkans, except for some Ravens.

Cold War F-16A, especially early like e.g. Block 10 “small tail” would be fantastic in DCS. All dick no balls! Pure dogfighter, all about close air combat, close CCIP manual aimed bombing etc.! Not all about staring on display inside a display and remembering some long procedures to program standoff weapon. And far more nimble then our digital heavy Block 50CJ. BTW: F-16A Block 10 scored overwhelming majority of RL F-16 air kills in the biggest air battle since Korea, over Bekaa Valley.

4. Make a small additional number of sales with both variants - without investing more money, just disabling a few things in existing one. To be fair sales will increase even if only a bit when both versions are present, and they won't spend any significant amount of money by just disabling few elements in earlier variant, not modeling anything new.

F-15C used -220 since mid 1980s.

Generally considered as even more restrictive then Russian one. You won't even find Indian manuals to much older aircrafts or weapon sytems.

Does it mean F-15A and F-15C had the same wing with the same structural strenght?

True, F-14 was expensive, they were just saving the airframes, it has peacetime +6.5G, wartime +7.5G, transient over-G +8G. With MiG-23 crashes I wrote it from memory, i may be wrong, there were so many MiG-23 fatal accidents on MiG-23, especially on earlier models, they were limiting max G many times, sometimes even as early as +3,5G, for 23S +5G. 23M was briefly cleared to +7 in 1977, but they've found cracks and reduced it again in years 1977-1980 etc.

Or going to Page 1; FlyingIron Simulations already made a big part of graphic/model work, elements of the avionics and they stated one time they've invested lots of money to obtain all the documentation and data needed for full fidelity F-117 simulations. Next they went silent, focused on A-7E. Not announcing "two ahead" may be their policy as well, not to let the hype boil ~2 years before the release. I doubt they would invest so much money, resourses, manhours and then scraped it, just like that. Especially they're making modules for MSFS and X-Plane as well, which obvioulsy wouldn't give a justice or use the full potential of milatary aircraft without the military context, but they would still release it for at lest some revenue. So i expect they may release it just after the A-7E. And both machines has some things in common, speding up the work. Plus F-117 may be work on slowly already under the hood.

Yes, things were going fast during the Cold War. A cold, but still like a war. F-15A production started 1974, 1976 became fully operational and in strenght in Europe, 1979 production of both F-15C and F-16A started. F-15A went to second-grade units, air defence, National Air Guard. 1942 Zero was the best carrier fighter of the world. 1943 despite modernization lost its edge. 1944 it became hopelessly outdated. True, but pilot's opinion about "increasing the limit" wasn't particularly enthusiastic. The increase itself and 1979 MiG-23MLA was the motivated by 1979 9G F-15C and F-16A. Interviews with WarPac and Soviet pilots later on - aircraft like the F-15 was nerly full envelope 9G, F-16 was full envelope 9G plus care free, MiG-29 had some holes in the envelope you needed to remember, regarding subsonic/transsonic/supersonic speeds, assymetrical turn, amount of fuel and missiles, Su-27 has significantly more of them, especially fuel and missiles under the wings, but speeds as well, when MiG-23 was full of them, different for different speeds, different wing swept angle, different weights, missiles. Even the speed was to be closely monitored as MiG-23 would just accelerate, and MiG-23 accelerated faster then MiG-29 and much faster then Su-27, to the poin it would melt or destroy the engine or desintegrate. Fascinating machine. And when later variants like ML/MLA had properly reinforced construction, the earlier one were often a death traps for the pilots accidentially exceeding the limits. Including Colonel Vladimir Ilyushin, son of the famous Soviet aircraft designer Sergei Ilyushin. Or Lieutenant General Anatoly Surzhikov, Deputy Commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces (!) who died in a crash of MiG-23M when he tried to increase dwindling morale of MiG-23 pilots after series of deadly accidents...

Impossible in practice, even the siplest things like when you just select the gun, or rockets or bombs CCIP computer is automatically engaged. You're obliged to know MFD functions and logic to even manage the weapon, automatic trim systems is permanently active and many, many more. You just can't. "Artificially restricting yourself" is ruining the immersion. --- And it's worth remembering that in any simulator, or a game, or a movie, immersion is EVERYTHING, it's what makes it enjoyable at all. Without immersion, you would constantly think you're just pointlessly looking at some idiotic set of pixels in front of you like some moron, and it would give you absolutely zero joy. The only real reason such thing as computer games, or flight simulators, or movies are enjoyable AT ALL is immersion. Without it, man wouldn't be able to enjoy it even a for minute; it would feel like 100% pointless and empty waste of time. That's why immersion is so important , that's why e.g. people are so amazed by VR despite it's higher requirement and price, becuase it help you immerse more, because that's how the human brain works.

No aircrafts, no money, not cost-effective missile, relatively big drag and poor energy retention (200mm vs. 178mm for AMRAAM) due to dated bigger, heavier microelectronics etc.

Yes, full fidelity analog A-10A from Cold War and Desert Storm (pre-LASTE modernization) would be awesome with Fulda Gap and Iraq maps. No boring, hard to remeber, electronic procedures and standoff weapon - but just pure adrenaline, piloting skills and fun, flying between the trees, manually aiming guns, rockets, dumb bombs, Mavericks when dodging Soviet AAA, Cold War Gone Hot! One of many A-10A rquests, with cool video:

R-77 wasn't even introduced to the Russian military in 1990s and produced only for export to India and China as RVV-AE. It was considered by the Russians as low reliability and limited capability coupled with high cost. For Russian Air Force R-77 entered serial production only in 2015. It was R-77-1. Later on in 2022 R-77-2 has been introduced.

Is' very much possible.