Alfa
-
Posts
4989 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Alfa
-
-
DeathAngel,
You wrote:
*ahem*I'm still wondering:
High resolution skins for the Flankers?
More countries? China (Su-27), India (Su-30), Etiopia (Su-27), Vietnam (Su-27), Japan (F-15C)
Python 4 AAM for israeli F-16 and F-15?
I assumed you were asking whether these things are implemented in the upcoming 1.1 release ;) . If so the answers are:
1). In Lock-on 1.1...( ;) ), there is currently only one skin set of 2048 x 2048 in size - the rest(for both the Su-27 and Su-33) are still only 512 x 512 in size.....I dont know if this will change for the final release version.
2). No new countries have been added in Lock-on 1.1.
3). The Isreali Python missile is not modelled in Lock-on 1.1....I thought your the question concerned this :) . I am not disputing that the missile exists in "real life" :)
-
Hi Eric,
Go to your forum "Profile", scroll down the page till you come to the line "Board Style" and select "Subsilver" from the list ;)
Cheers,
- Jens.
-
Re: Overcast work around
Hi guys,To the beta testers, has overcast been changed to compensate for this in 1.1? or is it not a major issue amongst most people.
Hi,
Well it is a major issue for me with my current PC configuration, and I believe it is for alot of other people too :) .
Unfortunately this has not been resolved for Lock-on 1.1 - I raised the issue, but it seems that the overcast feature is hardcoded and requires a complete re-design to solve the problem.
Hopefully this issue will be addressed in the next project.
-
Hello Horatiu :)
The barrels can only be moved the vertical plane - to aim them horizontally you need to move the aircraft ;)
-
Hi,
On the Su-25T, the SPPU-22 gunpods can be aimed manually(in vertical plane) by elevating the barrels - the cockpit indication of this is a simple aiming retricle on the HUD moving accordingly.
However, they can also be aimed automatically via the Shkval system - i.e. the target is locked via the Shkval TV - then the laser designator is switched on and the gun aiming retricle is automatically alligned with the target by "slaving" the barrel elevation to the the laser beam :)
-
I see a problem coming.
In the sim the Su-27 family is modeled as it currently stands without AR missiles. Yet, the Ka-50 which will probably never see series production will be modeled as a major combat helicopter.
Are not the Lomac campaigns set in alternate histories? In such a history would the Ka-50 see production and/or the Su-27/33 see upgrade?
Is it realistic? Which is less a Su-27 with the R-77 or the Ka-50?
Or is the solution the modeling of the Su-35?
That is actually an interesting point :)
My personal opinion on this, is that I can live with a platform that exists only in a few units being modelled for the sim.....as long as it is modelled accurately! :) .
Some of the most capable and interesting Russian aircraft and helicopters designs only exist in single digit numbers and arent currently in service - not because they arent fully developed, but simply because the collapse of the Soviet Union meant that there were no funds available to put them into full scale production/service.
Taking your example, I would have no problem with the Su-35 being included in the sim if it is possible to acquire all the information on its systems required for modelling them...and to find the necessary funds to develop them.
This would be a case of simulating a rare but interesting aircraft.
I would However, have a big problem with an Su-35 representation that would give us an accurate Su-35 external model, but the current Su-27 cockpit and systems functionality to go with it.....just "slinging" some Kh-29s, Kh-31s and R-77s on it without any consideration as to how exactly it is supposed to deploy them.
That would have nothing to do with simulation.
There is no alternate universe in Lock-on - the KA-50 exists in real life, its systems are documented and can be modelled accurately.
There exists no Su-33 version with R-77 support - not even in prototype form. So how can it be simulated?. An Su-27 version(Su-27SM) with R-77 support exists(a single prototype), but this has a very different cockpit setup + radar functionality and modelling it would be a case of introducing a new aircraft type to the sim......not just putting R-77s on the current one :) .
Just my 2 cents worth :)
-
Hi,
No the MER doesnt look like the real thing, and no it hasent been improved.....yet. :)
Which is why the Su-27 and Su-33 wont be equipped with this in 1.1 either.....exactly because of that ;) .
The Su-27 will be able to carry unguided air-to-ground ordinance though :)
-
Yes, if only ED upgrade the currently model Su-27S to SM or SK so it`d be realistic. No if they don`t :wink:
Just a little note.....
The Su-27SK is the same as the Su-27S - the added "K" in the suffix only denotes that it is for export - hence the reason why the Su-27 version operated by e.g. by China is designated "Su-27SK" :) .
Both the Su-27S and Su-27SK have the "baseline" N001 radar....no R-77 support.
The Su-27SM is a Russian upgrade of the Su-27S and includes an upgraded radar called "N001VE", which incorporates air-to-ground modes and support for active radar guided missiles....including the R-77. This radar was also fitted to the Su-27UBM(upgrade of the Su-27UB combat trainer), the Su-30KN(upgrade to the Su-30 interceptor) and the Chinese Su-30MKK two-seat multirole fighter.
Sorry for the nitpicking 8)
-
Thankfully the majority has so far voted against putting the R-77 and R-27AE back on the Su-27/33.
I agree with Octav - the current flyable Su-27 versions(Su-27 and Su-33) have the "baseline" N001 "Miech" radar which doesnt support the R-77, so these aircraft should not be made compatible with the R-77 in the sim.
-
2 Alfa
Excuse, always thought that MiG-29K, it is the same 9-13.
About MiG-29М/CM I know.
Hehe...no problem Andrey :) . The MiG-29K is in fact more advanced than the MiG-29M(9-15) in the sense that it has all the features of this +
- retractable IFR probe(MiG-29M doesnt have this)
- can carry UPAZ refuelling pack
- has automatic carrier landing system
....and ofcourse has an arrestor hook instead of a brake chute.
I have a question, use of rockets from series Kh-xx on MiG-29K, start-up of them can do{make} itself, for it{him} is necessary special POD as "Sapsan"? Or it{he} has built-in the device of target designator.No external pods are necessary for the deployment of Kh-xx missiles :)
- Kh-31A and Kh-35 anti-ship missiles are targeted via N010 "Zhuk" radar air-to-surface modes.
- Kh-31P and Kh-25MP anti-radar missiles are targeted via L-150/SPO-32 "Pastel" radar warning system(RWS).
- Kh-29L, Kh-29T, Kh-25ML and KAB-500kr air-to-ground guided missiles and bombs are targeted via the OLS-M optronic system - this includes a TV camera and a combined laser rangefinder/designator.
Initial target search is done via the ground mapping modes of the N010 "Zhuk" radar - after which targets are designated for optically guided missiles and bombs via TV camera and laser designator of the OLS-M optronic system. :)
-
Hi Andrey,
Ok now I understand what you wrote.....but Andrey - the MiG-29K is a navalised MiG-29M! :D
This means:
* quardruplex fly-by-wire flight control system
* NIIR-N010 "Zhuk" multimode radar
* OLS-M optronic system(with TV)
* L-150 "Pastel" RWS
* 8 underwing pylons(+ 1 centerline) - 4500 kg of external stores can be carried:
* R-27RE
* R-27R
* R-77
* R-73
* Kh-35
* Kh-31A
* Kh-31P
* Kh-29L
* Kh-29T
* KAB-500kr
- 4500 kg of internal fuel capacity( thats about a ton more than the MiG-29S ;) )
- In-flight refuelling capable(retractable IFR-probe)
- tanker capability(with UPAZ refuelling pack)
- carrier capability
The MiG-29K is a more capable aircraft than the MiG-29S on every single aspect you can think of......except the one you mentioned as the only advantage :lol: ....
...the MiG-29K is not lighter than the MiG-29S - it is heavier :)
Max TOW= 22400 kg
....but has more powerful engines(RD-33K) to compensate.
-
Hi Britglider,
Sorry mate, but you are about as wrong as you can be! ;)
The MiG-29K was developed in the late eighties. Initial flight testing of the MiG-29K, Su-33 and Su-25UTG was conducted at the NITKA naval research & development facility - the place where an entire land based replica of an aviation cruiser deck is established......this facility is located on the Crimean peninsula and is the airfield named "Saki" in Lock-on :)
The Admiral Kuznetsov(and all other aviation cruisers) was built at the Nikolayev South shipyard located in the Black Sea city of Nikolayev(as the name of the yard indicates), and sea trials were conducted in the Black Sea.
The first landings by Su-33 and MiG-29K prototypes on the Admiral Kuznetsov took place on November 1st 1989.....in the Black Sea :) . This was the beginning of an extensive testing program which went on for almost two years.....in 1990 the second and final MiG-29K production prototype(bort # 312) joined the tests.
These "trapping" tests continiued into 1991, after which both the Su-33 and MiG-29K were certified for production and ordered by the Soviet ministry of defence.....but then came the collapse of the SU and, as you know, the suspension of most of the carrier program.
MiG-29K(9-31) is very much in line with both the time frame and theatre of Lock-on!. :)
I suppose you are refering to the MiG-29K(9-41) and MiG-29KUB(9-47) ordered by the Indian navy......these versions are only being developed as we speak, and though the basic concept is the same, they are new variants and not the same as the 1990 MiG-29K(9-31).
.....and lots of MFD'sThe 1990 MiG-29K is a navalised MiG-29M and it had a cockpit with two monochrome CRT displays. The 2008 MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB ordered by India will have two large colour LCD displays and another two smaller "auxillary" CRT displays. :)
-
Hi,
Андрей_Андреевич,
Sorry but I dont understand - can you clarify your opinion?
-
Hi Leonardo,
Good to see you here :D
Yes I think it is fair to say that most people would appreciate high res skins for the Su-27/30/33 :) .
-
*ahem*
I'm still wondering:
High resolution skins for the Flankers?
More countries? China (Su-27), India (Su-30), Etiopia (Su-27), Vietnam (Su-27), Japan (F-15C)
Python 4 AAM for israeli F-16 and F-15?
Flanker skins: last I looked, there was only one high resolution(2048x2048) Flanker(Su-27) skin.
Countries: DeathAngelBR......the Lock-on region is in the Black Sea :wink: . India - and especially China, Vietnam and Japan are very much situated in East Asia, while Ethopia is in East Africa....how likely would you say it is to see Ethopian Su-27s flying around over the Crimean Peninsula? :lol:
Isreali missiles: No there are no Pythons for the Israelis.....only Cobras for the Russians and Ukrainians :P (sorry )
-
Avimimus,
The Su-39 has been seen on airshows with the R-77 because it is fully compatible with this weapon ;)
Nothing strange about that :)
-
....BTW forgot to mention...
Mimes wrote:* will hopefully be bought by India so it will be "in service"
India already did buy the MiG-29K :D
They have placed an order for 12 x single seat MiG-29K(9-41) and 4 x two-seat MiG-29KUB(9-47) combat trainer variants - to be delivered in 2008.
They will, along with a number of Ka-28(ASW) and Ka-31(EAW) helicopters, be operated from the converted Admiral Gorshkov....which they bought as well :)
....and yes this time around it is official ;)
-
Hi Mimes,
Great to see another MiG-29K nutcase around here.....that makes at least two of us :lol:
However, I would agree with SUBS17, that if it was to happen, it should be done properly and as part of a larger naval oriented title :) . I personally don't believe in "dumping" a new flyable naval multirole fighter into the current naval environment in Lock-on.....regardless of whether the aircraft in question is a MiG-29K or an F/A-18C(..or both :twisted: ).
And by "naval environment", I am not referring to the geographical location(Black Sea), but to the current level to which naval warfare is represented - number and types of naval vessels, modelling fidelity of their onboard systems, weaponry, countermeasures, AI routines etc - all of which are in need of a "major overhaul" :)
For Lock-on a huge effort was made on the terrain, land warfare aspect, and introduction of two flyable dedicated CAS aircraft(A-10 and Su-25). The upcoming Su-25T add-on and the announced Ka-50 follow-on will take full advantage of the fantastically detailed terrain and take the CAS aspect a step further. What I like the most about the upcoming Lock-on 1.1 add-on, is the attention to detail and accuracy/realism in everything from flight models and damage modelling to radar- and weapons control systems.
When I said that I didn't think the MiG-29K should have been removed from the sim for Lock-on, I meant as an AI entry.....and code-wise it wasn't ;) ....it is still there and could be "resurrected" quite easily if a Lock-on standard MiG-29K 3D model was available.
However, the flyable MiG-29K as it was represented in Flanker 2.5, cockpit and system wise, was pretty far from the real thing and a proper representation of this (awesome)fighter as a flyable entity would require a *major* development effort along the lines of a flyable Hornet(very similar system wise). So a "cut and paste job", as you call it, of the MiG-29K player FM from Flanker 2.5 would not be a good idea.
I have no idea about what plans ED has for future projects, but one could hope that a naval oriented project figures high on their list - one that would bring the naval aspect as such up to level with the current land warfare ditto....and then introduce a couple of naval multirole fighters along with it :) .
-JJ.
-
On arms Naval Forces of the Russian Federation are not present Mig-29K.
...or Su-39, Su-34 or Su-30 ;)
The MiG-29K should IMO never have been taken out of the sim :(
-
.....if only 8)
-
Thank, and what range altitude at Kh-31, "from" and "up to"? What maximal altitude???
Hi,
I am not sure I understood your question properly, but the following is stated for the Kh-31 versions(both -P and -A):
Maximum launch altitude: 15.000 m
Minimum launch altitude: 500 m
Maximum range(app.): 110 km
Minimum launch range: 15 km
-JJ.
-
2 Alfa
I think there is no reason to tweak something killing the authentity.
I agree :)
-
I think there is a problem with the Su-37 model - after scraping the runway with the nozzles, during takeoff, both of them were bent 20 degrees upwards, and they were using that as their vectoring point - I had to push the stick fully forwards, to keep the nozzles pointing straight back - is this normal/reallistic?
LOL...
Good one Octavian :lol:
-
Have the brakes of the Su-25 been improved? Is it me, or is it difficult to stop on the runway? Also, when you deploy the chute, it seems to have little effect ... I would have thougt it would have slowed the a/c dramtically.
James
Hi James,
The wheel brake of the Su-25 and Su-25T are quite "weak" on the real aircraft and have nowhere near the effect that you find on the MiG-29 or Su-27.
So increasing the effect of the Su-25/Su-25T wheel brake in the sim would not be an improvement in regards to realism.
Perhaps Yo-yo can elaborate further on this?
Poll - Active radar missiles for Su-27
in Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 1 & 2
Posted
Hi all,
Yes thats correct Skywall :) .
Some Russian radar info:
"One" is right that only a minor modification to the N001 radar would be required (along the lines of the N019M of the MiG-29S) in order to make the Su-27 capable of deploying the R-77. However, such an upgrade has not been made to the N001 radar of any existing Su-27 versions.
The N001 radar which did recieve an upgrade making it capable of deploying the R-77 missile is, as earlier mentioned, the "N001VE" radar, which was installed in the following upgraded Su-27 versions:
- Su-27SM (one prototype exists) - a multirole upgrade to Russian Su-27S single seater.
- Su-27UBM (one prototype exists) - a multirole upgrade to Russian Su-27UB two-seat combat trainer.
- Su-30KN (one prototype exists) - a multirole upgrade to Russian Su-30(Su-27PU) two-seat interceptor(very similar to Su-27UBM).
......as well as in the Chinese Su-30MKK two-seat multirole fighter(very simlar to Su-30KN).
The "N001VE" is NIIP´s analogue to NIIR´s "N019MP" radar, which was installed in the:
- MiG-29SM (9-13SM) - an earlier multirole upgraded MiG-29S(9-13/9-13S)
- MiG-29SMT (9-17) - multirole upgrade for MiG-29(9-12) and MiG-29S(9-13/9-13S)
Both the NIIP-N001VE and NIIR-N019MP incorporates air-to-ground mapping modes and are, in addition to the R-77, capable of supporting the Kh-31A antiship missile.
The whole idea behind these radars is the ability to upgrade a regular Su-27 or MiG-29 into an actual multirole fighter by upgrading the existing radar - retaining as many components of these as possible.
It is a cost-effective alternative to replacing the existing radar entirely with new and more advanced actual multimode radar such as the NIIR-N010M "Zhuk-M"(for the MiG-29) , NIIR-N010M "Zhuk-MS" and NIIP-N011M "Bars"(for the Su-27).....or building brand new actual multirole variants such as the Su-35(with N011M "bars") and MiG-29M(with N010M Zhuk-M).
In addition to the ground mapping modes of the N001VE radar, modelling the Su-27SM, Su-27UBM or Su-30KN would also require the entire cockpit environment to be re-designed - these upgraded Flanker variants have cockpit instrumentation similar to that of the MiG-29SMT - i.e. including several large LCDs with radically different multi coloured display symbology for which I suspect obtaining proper documentation will be very difficult indeed.
Bottom line is, as mentioned earlier, that modelling an R-77 capable Su-27 realistically cannot be done simply by putting R-77s on the existing Lock-on Su-27 version. It would be a case introducing an entirely new Su-27 variant (Su-27SM) to the sim....and one just as difficult to obtain documentation on and involve similar complexity as for the MiG-29SMT.
Assigning R-77s to the Su-27 in Lock-on is the most simple mod you can do - so IMHO people who feel this omission of realism is justifiable should make this mod themselves and set up servers for which this is allowed.
.... and stop asking Eagle Dynamics to ruin the sim for people who takes the word "simulation" seriously ;)
Cheers,
- JJ.