Alfa

Someone once said that "the Su-27 carries its external fuel internally" :) .

IIRC it was actually a Spanish placard, but same difference :) . In fairness though, they(ED) have said all along that they were going to model a US version and kept saying not to pay attention to the cockpit details of early screenshots.

Ok no problem :) Yeah and I believe they have a higher load capacity too. Yeah I guess :) . But while such a "spamraam" loadout is perfectly possible, I doubt that such a use was the intention behind the dual assembly - I suspect it had more to do with providing a reasonable "self escort" capability, while conserving as many stations as possible for A/G ordinance/mission pods - i.e. for loadout flexibility.

Good point about the AIM-120C/warhead(I just used the weight of the AIM-120B). But the SUU-79? :) . AFAIK the "legacy" Hornets use two different variants of the SUU-63: - SUU-63/A (273 lbs)for the A/B - SUU-63A/A (310 lbs) for the C/D Isn't the SUU-79(and SUU-80) strictly for the Super Hornet? Well if you want to go that route :D . I think we both got some of the weights a little wrong. According to the NATOPs, the following racks/launchers are compatible with the "legacy" hornets ; two versions of the BRU-32; - BRU-32/A - 76 lbs - BRU-32A/A - 76 lbs three versions of the LAU-115 - LAU-115/A (compatible only with two LAU-7s/AIM-9) - 52 lbs - LAU-115A/A (compatible with two LAU-7s/AIM-9s or two LAU-127s with AIM-9s/AIM-120s) - 59 lbs - LAU-115C/A (compatible with two LAU-7s/AIM-9 or two LAU-127 with AIM-9s/AIM-120s) - 97 lbs LAU-127A/A - 95 lbs But anyway, the point was that a complete dual AMRAAM assembly is pretty heavy(and draggy), so as neofightr said, going into the merge with a full load of four is probably not a good idea :) .

Yeah I guess :)

1x BRU-32 (76 lbs) 1x LAU-115C (120 lbs) 2x LAU-127(2x 87 = 174 lbs) 2x AIM-120(2x 335 = 670 lbs) 76 + 120 + 174 + 670 = 1040 lbs

RD-33MK engine(MiG-29K):

AFAIK "slats" are also known as "leading edge slotted flaps", but I could be wrong :) . Anyway, all I meant was really just the presence of LE devices without specifying the exact type, but I realise that this was what bbrz was talking about and that my use of the term "slats" was incorrect in regards to the LE devices on the Su-27. Thanks for the explanation :) . I am not very familiar with the terminology of aerodynamics and didn't know the specific meaning of "critical AOA". I did :D - just a side remark in regards to the wing design of the Su-27 in contrast to that of the Su-33 :)

Quick search came up with this: http://www.atpforum.eu/forum/technical-subjects/-081-principles-of-flight-a/14192-leading-edge-flaps Not the Su-27, but here is a description from the Luftwaffe MiG-29 flight manual concerning the function of LEF: "With the flaps in the position UP, the LEF operate automatically as a function of AOA and airspeed. When the AOA increases to 8.7 degrees or above and the airspeed is below M0.8, the LEF extend automatically. The LEF retract when the AOA decreases to 7 degrees or airspeed increases above M0.8. The exact Mach number is dependant on the switching point of the Mach sensor installed." Sounds to me that "increasing critical AOA" is exactly what they do?

Leading Edge Flaps(LEFs) is the same thing as "slats" and yes the Su-27 has them :) It doesn't have separate trailing edge flaps and ailerons - the functions of those are combined in single devices known as "flaperons". The initial T-10 design you were referring to was never put into service - it was a pre-production design that was abandoned because it didn't meet the performance specifications set out for the aircraft. Subsequently the aircraft was completely re-designed and assigned the factory designation T-10S, under which it entered service as the Su-27 in 1983-84. This is also the reason why the "baseline" Su-27 got the NATO designation "FLANKER B"("FLANKER A" had been assigned to the abandoned initial design). The "baseline" Su-27 was produced in two sub-variants; the Su-27P for the PVO(air defence forces) and the Su-27S for the VVS(airforce) - the designation suffixes are rarely used though and the difference between them basically boils down to the former having no air-to-ground capability. So the Su-27 version in DCS is the Su-27S(T-10S).

No - just the RVV-AE and the new RVV-SD.

You are welcome :)

RVV-SD is the export designation - R-77-1 is the domestic name for the same missile(like R-77 vs RVV-AE) :) . Apart from that you are right - lots of nonsense and variants that might have been suggested at one point, but never materialised(IR, passive radar and ramjet powered variants).

Aside from the JHMCS and AIM-9X that you mentioned, other post-production upgrades comprise the AMPCD(an LCD based replacement for the MPCD), ATFLIR and OFP 13C(software upgrade) to name some. Figuring out the "native" Lot 20 capabilities is a little more tricky, as these are an accumulation of upgrades performed throughout the production years - I have attached a summary of the F-18C evolution from Lot 12 to the last production config(Lot 21) .

I doubt you will have much luck with that suggestion, but if the purpose is just to fix the most glaring shortcomings then I don't quite understand your priorities :) As far as I can tell what annoys people the most is the lack of navigation info - here it should be possible to employ the navigation panel for the most basic function of displaying the currently selected waypoint by activating the three top button-lamps for the purpose. Yes no arguments there. Yes but since the LEFs are operated as an automatic function of the FCS with no manual control, its hardly the most pressing issue :) Yes that would be nice to have working. Yes because this has a practical function as it provides a quick visual reference to tell whether the gear is up or down - but at least there is the indication on the mech system's panel. Yes but none of these really matter with the current level of modelling(SFM and simple system) of the aircraft. Definitely for the full complexity, but as mentioned at the top, it should be possible to provide at least the most pressing information(currently selected waypoint) by simple means. Heh no, but I doubt we will see that addressed anytime soon - functionality aside, the -29S(in your screenshot) doesn't even have the right gauge :).

They are not buttons, but the "pins" actuated by the AB release paddles. There are stops on the throttle rail preventing the handles from being moved into idle as well as AB regime - the paddle switches at front(in the photo) unlock the AB stops, while there are two smaller paddles at the back of the handles for idle unlock.

You are welcome :)

You don't need the Buno # to figure out what year the aircraft was built - the Lot # tells you that. A Lot denotes the number of aircraft built within one fiscal year - in the case of the DCS version, its a Lot 20, which in turn means that it was built in FY 98. A fiscal year doesn't follow the calendar year, but runs from the last quarter of the previous year to 30 sept. in the current one - i.e. FY98 = 1 oct. 1997 to 30 sept. 1998. With the Buno # you can further figure out when approx. within the FY a particular airframe was built - from screenshots of the DCS Hornet cockpit, you can see that the Buno # is 165407, which makes it the second last airframe of the Lot and thus must be from the fall of 1998 :) . Mind you, the DCS version might have been built in 1998, but it has upgrades(AMPCD, JHMCS and ATFLIR) that date to around 2004-2005.

Ok thanks that pretty much settles it then :) No but no one suggested that the Russians would have supplied language customised cockpits - the LSK could have done that themselves(just as Luftwaffe did later). Anyway, they do now - e.g. the MiG-29K/KUBs supplied to the Indian navy :) . No I agree. It is not and there is no reason to speculate :) . If you read the Luftwaffe manual for the MiG-29G/MiG-29GT, you can see that warning system has English on warning lamps and the Ekran, but is accompanied by voice warnings in German. I have attached an example from the manual concerning warning for engine over-speed. Indeed. I doubt it.

Indeed! :)

Very nicely done Pougatchev! That brought back some memories from the good ol' days :)

No problem :) . It can be used for practically anything, but I think you are right that navigation(displaying the moving color map) would be the primary function.

AMPCD = Advanced Multi Purpose Color Display I know, but it does not have less functionality than the previous one :) . The AMPCD was designed as a direct "plug-in replacement" for the MPCD and AFAIK there isn't any difference in terms of functionality, but is all about providing higher image resolution(through use of LCD tech instead of CRT) .

MPCD = Multi Purpose Color Display ;)

Correct. They are illuminated - the text caption(in this case numbers) are illuminated in red(see attachment). I agree :)