jojyrocks

Yeah, nice vid!...but, they need to show that in India's carrier, live tests being conducted on a moving carrier. More videos of it. Also India has issues with logistics, and they at present has too many weapons, planes of different nations. It is going to tank their economy. If they buy the SH, they need to buy extra on their specific weapons as well. The reason why India sticks to Mig 29K is one, the logistics they have with the IAF Mig 29s and the rest of all Russian jets and Helo weapons inventory...they all overhaul at the HAL overhaul centre, both Indian Navy and IAF. Rafale got some logistic ease with their Mirage 2000 series on loadout to some degree. The poor crashes are due to overhauling issues and the lack of QC there. Their problem, and some are known due to corruption cases. India ranks number 1 as foreign user in crashes of Russian jets. Other Russian inventory users nations do not have the number of such crashes like India does. During some of US sanctions, at one point, India had plenty of crashes with their Sea harriers. They simply could not improvise like the Iranians does with their F-14 and F-4. The problem is the overhauling and some hidden corruptions in getting spares. Ultimately, the cheapest option all around is the Mig 29 series with their current economy hurdle along with the recently updated Mig 29SMT of IAF. The logistics is the thing here. SH is good, but, they'd need to buy extra on US specific weapons and several other updations on setting it up. It is going to cost more for them, a whole lot. But we'll see, rest depends on how strongly the lobby works. India is kinda easy to lobby. Out of the US jets, SH is the cheapest. So, Mig 29K isnt going to get retired anytime soon. So no module on that unless FC3....which won't happen.

Its basic configuration resembles an enlargement of the delta-winged J-7 (based from Mig 21), utilizes two Liyang (LMC) Wopen-7A turbojet engines, and features a maximum speed of Mach 2.2. The twin-engined J-8 competed with rival Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group's single turbofan engine, canard-delta J-9 project and ultimately emerged as the victor largely due to the existing availability of the former's MiG-21 based powerplant and proven layout, while the J-9 project was cancelled in 1980 due to difficulty in creating a suitably powerful engine. (Source: wiki) So, the J-8, if you see their initial versions was like a MiG 21 with an enlarged nose.... The J-8II series appear quite different from the original J-8, with a new forward fuselage, intake ramps with splitter plates and nose structure more reminiscent of the F-4 Phantom II or Sukhoi Su-15 to house a new, more powerful radar. The whole design was based of from the Mig 21 series and the J-7 series.

Just marketing terms at present. So until we see it actually doing a ski Jump. It is all just marketing. Even Rafale is said to be able to do it...as Dassault had been saying. But so far, no vids or pics of them ever doing a ski jump. So, ultimately, until that happens. India is stuck with the Mig series. Russia knows it too... If SH or the Rafale ever did a Ski jump from these Ski jump carriers, then they'll definitely show it to media. This will be an achievement as well. That large drooping flaps on the Mig 35 shows it had been designed with carrier ops in mind as well. Also Russians do not have a carrier anymore, till 2022.

Seeing the LARGE flaps of the Mig 35 that looks oddly similar to Mig 29K...I can see the Mig 35 is also being worked on as an alternative to an upgraded Mig 35 modded to carrier ops. Since the Indian Navy at present only has Ski jump carriers. They'd stick with the Russians. Mig 29K is going to stay with the Indian Navy for a loooong time. They are not known for fast replacements. They still use Mig 21 and Jaguars. They take a long time to replace and update their inventory. It is also noted that they are also trying to find a home grown solution born out of their Tejas series experience, but that also seems to be cancelled for Navy and on low rate production for IAF. There is no video evidence of Rafale or the Rhino doing Ski Jump take off. Also finally, their plans for a CATOBAR carrier is shelved for now. The thing is Tejas was a learning experience for them, and now they are moving towards Tejas MK2 (MWF) with option to cancel production of Mk1 series halfway depending on progress of MWF. Rest depends on how the foreign lobbys handle their latest MMRCA 2 venture and the economy to handle the purchase.

Safe to say a Flyable B-52 is out of the question...it seems too classified, being a strategic bomber and a very complicated one to model and work on. In the end...if worked on, it will have to pay out and that means, more sales with a hefty price tag. SP players won't be able to finish their mission, if the AI is bad. So, only MP players would find this module fitting and it only fits the coordinated mission formats, yes, we need long range maps too. Not a lot of MP players with solid connections. So...it would much better to hope for a Updated AI modeled B-52 than a flyable one.

Since DEKA did hint they had this PTSD issue doing big screen MFD equipped planes and they do need a break from that. Also the Su-30 series is pretty much well known that it is the most awaited plane, but at the same time Chinese would need some permission from Russia on this. Also H-6 Bomber....is a complicated one, and it is risky to develop it with current DCS maps. Also it would only have much more big purchase in MP users at most. It is a niche class...being a bomber and would need a good AI to work well on SP. So not much enjoyable if AI is not good for SP users. So ultimately this complicated 4 seat bomber and to model all that, it is going to have to pay out. There aren't a lot of MP users with all having solid connections. We already have a rough idea on how a NEW module would take X amount years to develop and to be out of EA. This bomber is going to take a lot more than that and has to pay out for all that tough development and modeling on that. So, with all this above, Realistically, I can only see DEKA trying out, or going for the following planes. 1. J-8ii being the Chinese specialty; heavily modeled after the Mig 21. Looks like it has higher landing speed than the Mig 21...it is going to be lovely flying it. 2. J-7 late variants; is also doable and has some GOOD difference from the current Mig 21bis we have. 3. Q-5 Fantan. The above said 3 of them has good secondary capabilities of A2G on for the first 2 and A2A for the 3rd. Also, all are having cannons for any emergency engagements. It gives us choices of being multipurpose. If a miracle...we might just see a watered down Su-30 with some sensitive features omitted. Pretty sure all in ED also knows just how hyped the Full fidelity Flanker is. An FF flanker that can at least somewhat toe in with the current Blueforce jets...especially since they all have AMRAAM advantage of fire and forget.

True, yes. A discount would be good.

If there is too much difference. Yes. For example; If the module is a British F-4 versions with their different Rolls Royce engines. Now I am not sure of the commonality element with comparing F-4E to that of Naval J versions.

Most of the buyers would be hardcore purist flyers that spend more time at co-ordinated multiplayer setup, meaning, only dedicated online players would be the buyers of flyable Tanker planes, Cargo and AWACS etc etc. So in the end, mostly the takers would be players who are more into multiplayer ranked and co-ordianted team based buyers. Its mostly useless for those who sim in Singleplayer. I mean, at Singleplayer, I just do not see the appeal of flying a Tanker, operating a boom, AWACS and Cargo flying waypoints, orbit circles and stuck with needing a real well oiled AI for missions to work like clockwork for the supposed mission to function. We do not have a good AI at present. Rest all depends on how ED and other potential developers sees this as a feasible option in terms of sales and development COSTS to make a module vs who all would buy it. The multiplayer folks or SP people. Its not going to be cheap if such a module does come into fruition. They gotta model multiple engines, crew and lots of buttons plus its functions and how long does each of the current modules take to develop? 4-5 years?

It looks like only during Syrian civil war time around 2015 did they officially STARTED to buy and equip R-77. They never adopted the base version, mostly gave it for exports as maybe slightly degraded or modded RVV-AE. They only adopted the R-77-1 and decided to finally start use it more after that Su-24 shootdown by Turkey. Until then, Russia was not probably expecting air to air combat much. After the shootdown of Su-24 they've finally decided to officially adopt the R-77 as standard and slowly phase out the R-27 SARH types. That incident was Russia's wakeup call to start updating their forces to some degree.

The thing is, NONE of the DCS jets are bug free. There is no such thing called a bug free game or sim these days. Almost all sims and games will have SOME bugs that are just always never fixed. As for creating modules, the most successful so far, having full support with SP campaigns being churned out are F-18, its also unpolished. Just don't expect perfection module. Most modules take extreme work and long time to finish and to reach somewhat stable position...that being said, one also needs to work on the module that is cash cow or would get the most sales...meaning, not niche groups satisfaction modules. Heatblur's only hit module seems to be the Tomcat, as always getting most sales. That Topgun fame jet. Maybe the team that does the Viggen is too small or some might have left...well, we won't know the exact reason why the Viggen is only having small minor updates.

Only VERY FEW purists would love it and its a only niche group that loves just flying circles and waypoints...enjoying the scenery. But the majority do not, maybe for MP, yeah. But SP. I do not see what is the big interest or fancy in flying waypoints, circles and refueling X amount of planes, reporting contacts as an AWACS flyer and those work only good in MP and satisfying feel of support. For developments to happen, one needs some bit of profit on sales in accordance with their development costs. Passion can only go so much, there is a limit to things. Lets say, If the Devs gave a choice between F-4 Phantom and and E-2 Hawkeye ( most of the vocal ones for E-2 Hawkeye will be multiplayer people who likes co-ordinated play), the most votes would go to the much awaited Phantom. The Phantom is pretty much multi role of that era and most would vote Phantom and if you want to fly scenery, one can do that in Phantom too. Also If its A-6 vs E-2, vote would go to A-6. If the vote is for A-6E/B/C etc vs KA-6...vote would still go to A-6E. The most votes and sales would be for the F-4 Phantom series and the A-6E. Not E-2 and KA-6 much. Only a few would like E-2 and KA-6, primarily for MP. I can understand your passion, as Commercial pilot and maybe that is why you are so interested in E-2 and tankers planes doing support roles...just flying waypoints and circuit. Support roles as of present are not that good in the current static Campaigns of SP. In MP, support role is pretty good, perfect fit for you. Now ED has already stated their stance, it would up to the 3rd party devs to take up the decision to do or not to do a support centric plane in DCS. So...are you not interested in the A-6? I mean, if it does get the full go ahead of development as a full module...

Yes it is satisfying to win against the strongest and the most technologically advanced. That said...there aren't campaigns on SP (Not MP) from the axis perspective much. I wonder how those Gulf war Iraqi force faced against the mighty coalition with good C4ISTAR assets and still managed some kills? One of the reasons why F-15 has peerless record and Mig 29s not much. Russia has only officially made the R-77 series standard for their service from 2015 and onwards. They are phasing out the R-27 SARH types...Till 2015, they did not see the urgent need to equip themselves as it was cost prohibitive for them seeing as they aren't expecting air to air war much. So...Russia entered late, while only providing the R-77 for export from its induction dates. Most Russian aircrafts now started to carry a mix of R-77 and R-27 (mostly IR versions). The ability of the most latest version of AMRAAM is speculative as we do not know its effects much other than shooting mostly poorly equipped nations planes. Its also been on the record that the AIM-9X latest somehow missed trying to shoot down a Syrian Su-22 and had to be finished off by an AMRAAM. R-77 has yet to see combat...I doubt it would ever. But Both R-77 and AMRAAM are fire and forget and that is the key advantage. So comparing R-77 and AMRAAM is speculative on the grounds of combat experience as the former has yet to even see combat. What we really wanted was one of those Mig 29 9.13. But what ED could get hold of was the Mig 29A 9.12 citing security issues and so on. So ultimately we'll have to settle with that. I am OK with that as well. Finally a full fidelity redforce! At least it fit good in late 80s and early 90s timeline. Hope it comes with a campaigns as well coz we're sorely lacking redforce campaigns.

We can settle for the updated AI 3D models of F-4E...by the time Mirage F.1 and the Mig 23 becomes a reality, the F-4E could at least get an updated 3D model. Its at least present in the AI roadmap. For most of the middle east theatre we have now, we've almost the remaining modules we have are pretty good fit.

Yup. My bad.

Nope...you misunderstood what I was stressing at.... I said...better or improved survivability chance compared with the Mig 29A. I know most of the current Mig 29 users barring the Indian air force and the RuAF...most of them do not have proper C4ISTAR assets like AWACS or even much data-link ability, and they are purely under GCI data-linking dependency. I am quoting the current map nation users, like Syria and Iran. I am not overestimating the performance abilities of the R-77. Just capitalizing on its fire and FORGET ability like the US AIM 120 which is its counterpart. I doubt we'd see the Balkans map...or any euro centric. ED has issues getting clearance with modern Ru planes like Mig 29K which is still in service with both RuAF and Indian air force. The most we can hope is for a Mig 29S...It would be a miracle if we even get that LOL

Doesn't matter... The whole topic was always about the feasibility of the Mig 29A which ED plans to do...which is mostly fit in late 80s and early 90s theaters. And to be somewhat of rough challenge threat to Blueforce in general timeline terms, the Mig 29, whichever early version of Mig 29 that can carry the R-77 can have a much better survivable and combat chance than the A version. This is what I had been originally stressing at...as a whole.

Presumably? In wiki it shows...MiG-29S (Product 9.13). Now I am confused... So we don't actually know what FC3 Mig 29 carries the R-77. Well...this is the version that we're hoping for and that is what I was quoting at. The one that can fire the R-77 and that was what I was originally stressing at.

So...what about the FC3 Mig 29S? Isn't it able to fire R-77? So what is that based of? 9.13?

You are not making sense at all...Mig 29 cannot fire ARH missiles?! What?! You basically confirmed Mig 29S that is 9.13 can fire the ARH missile ( Active radar homing) by already stating it can fire R-77 and that makes it a fire and forget weapon just like AMRAAM. R-77 is the Russian counterpart to the American AIM 120. R-77 is fire and forget just like the AIM 120. So I do not know what you are trying to say now... Again, I have to stress each and every word... The key ability we want is a fire and forget air to air missile and Mig 29S has it. That is what I have been stressing.

Syrians did use Mig 29A during 1989 and two were reportedly shot down by the F-15C of IAF for reasons unknown. At those times they did not have the SM versions. So....it can be playable. Now I am not sure of the shootdown incident... The Syrian government had acquired around 48 of the Mig 29 series fighter jets, a mix of single-seat MiG-29A fighters and two-seat MiG-29UB trainers, from the Soviet Union in the late 80s, with them formally entering service around 1989... 1. We already have Syria map and Israeli F-15C 2. We can have a hypothetical campaign or a based on Campaign during the late 80s or 90s... 3. DCS ED is already possibly doing a 9.12 A version and Syrians first Mig 29 were of the A version. Iranians as well use the A versions

Maybe so... But since we already have Persian Gulf and Syria Maps...we could play hypothetical Middle east wars. I mean, there is Iranian air force, Syrian air force.

I believe they are aware of it and they did already say they have no interest in century series planes...pretty much roughly stating no interest in Cold war era planes. What I think it is...it is that ED would focus on other developments full swing like DCS engine, features, comms, AI 3D models etc etc.. Yes...we certainly do have plenty of nice modern blueforce planes and well supported SP campaigns at least more focus and story driven on them....including the FC3 F-15. There is not much Redforce story driven good voiceover dialogues etc campaigns. I hope to see some focus on Redforce...

Chance of survival is considerably increased with it as both the R-77 and the AIM 120 share one common ability and that is fire and forget, we do not need to stay on target painting the said target with radar till our missile hits it. Some survival chance is considerably increased...we can focus on evasion after we had fired the missile with R-77...as in avoiding the missile...at least that way we do not waste a missile. In the case of R-27 R and its various. We have to stay on target and when the targets wingman fires at us, we'll have to focus on evasion and that means one missile wasted from us. Mig 29S is CONSIDERABLE improvement and increased chance of survival...but reality is we're getting a Mig 29A and thus we'll just have to settle for early timeline of the 90s fight, like gulf war era where USAF still used Sparrows. We already have plenty of modern blueforce planes and blueforce campaigns. Not much campaigns on Redforce...at least those story driven types. Even FC3 F-15C has quality story driven campaigns. Same cannot be said for Redforce....

Ah...yes, my mistake. What about the MK...supposed commercial version of the M version that was on export. So since DEKA listed on the table here (on their pondering on which module to do) about the MKK...then is at least the MK possible to hope for? Then again...realistic hope is only for the Chinese J-11 or the Su-27SK....workload is less...