Max1mus

I second that when there is no excellent GCI managing the fight. Which there never is, even in MP.

The accurate RWR that can tell between say a tomcat and an F-15 doesnt matter at all, right? Makes no difference whatsoever. Neither does the much better radar that has an actual tactical display. I dont think youve flown either aircraft in DCS that youre talking about here. Ah yes, that must be why the Su-30MKI was being referred to as being superior to US 4th gens. The russians putting better radars and RWRs on the Su-27SM in 2003 was also related to the war on terror? Probably same as MiG-31 being upgraded to BM with a bunch of new missiles on it in 2007. Or MiG-29K in 2009. Or many new SAM systems. Very important assets for destroying Jihadist positions i see.

ED could offer a modern low fidelity variant of MiG-29 as an added bonus if you buy the full fidelity flying coffin A variant. But they say "We do not plan to add any more low fidelity modules" because "we have evolved since then". This means they could but dont want to. It hurts their personal feelings to give Redfor in DCS something to fight back with.

MiG-29A will not be used in Multiplayer, pointless against AIM-120, 9X and Link16. If youre lucky, some masochists will try it like people try the Mirage2000, but while Mirage is built to fly independently, MiG-29A needs to be hand held by GCI. The MP servers do not restrict weapons since that scares away too much of the crybaby playerbase. As such, the only viable servers for a MiG-29A are also mostly dead and not visited by NATO players. - All other DCS full fi modules dont have ECM modelled properly - the F-14/F-16 radar is unjammable, yet they are the most popular modules. - R-27ER/ET - See above. The real matchup is R-27ER/ET against the AMRAAM. R-77 is an added bonus for close combat or when you missed the chance to fire R-27.

DCS Su-30 is just a Su-27P with 2 seats. 1980s. Sure, Su-34. If ED can add such a modern striker, surely an AI Su-27SM3 or Su-35 isnt an issue?

There are no modern Redfor AI planes either. And none are planned. Which proves to me that ED isn't just neglecting Redfor purely out of lack of documentation.

Please read my post properly. It never lost lock on cold (A term for "running away", when the target is showing you its rear) targets when they were inside 15km.

MiG-29A and S datalink was purely GCI based. They did not have F2F, or even a proper tactical scope. MiG-31 was developed exactly because Siberia lacked Early Warning assets and they needed an aircraft that could protect large areas with small numbers. MiG-25 and MiG-29 did not have the long time on station and capable radars to be able to do that. Because they were designed as SAMs with AA missiles on them.

PVO MiG-21bis had a GCI Datalink too, though all that one did was change a waypoint, so we dont miss it too much when we recreate the way the real thing was meant to fly. That is, in Multiplayer. Singleplayer GCI will not put you and your comrades into a position, from which you can surround the enemy aircraft, make you hide from F-14 radars etc. Su-27 has F2F datalink, can see aspects without locking and has a wide cone for scanning. Its built to fight more like a western fighter, independently, and as such when put into a NATO doctrine environment in DCS, it does a bit better. Though it suffers from the lack of 1990s missions and aircraft too. MiG-29A and S however will have all the problems of the DCS MiG-21 amplified by x10. Even its 80s opponents have very good situational awareness and slightly superior BVR weapons (AIM-7>R-27R), and as such the lack of GCI Datalink and a tactical and stragetical GCI will be absolutely detrimental to the flying experience. Think of all MiGs from 23 to 29S as SAMs with missiles and guns attached. SAMs dont work well when you just maddog them roughly at the enemy, they need to be guided at the right target at the right time, perhabs even in a stealthy way (SAM trap).

You definitely have an app or something that tells you when people mention the word "AMRAAM" on the forums. No wonder you dont fly with a full time job like that. Watch how AMRAAMS behave when launched on targets that go cold and dive, theyll loose lock and reaquire, or be driven into the ground while in memory mode. Thats a new thing with the new API.

BLUFOR 4th gen aircraft were always able to build their own SA picture. AWACS could help them out, but their radar has a wide cone AND CAN SEE TARGET ASPECT AND SPEED WITHOUT LOCKING. Without this, you cannot lead a flight on your own, and as such MiG-29A integrated into NATO were "never leading a flight" when used in operations. The soviets have had these GCI slave tactics and specially designed GCI datalinks to decrease pilot training cost (50-60 hours flying time per year) and because for a long time, they did not need an independent air superiority fighter. This only changed with Su-27 and MiG-31, which were built to patrol Siberia, which lacked EWR coverage. But every plane before Su-27P/S, especially MiG-23, MiG-25 and MiG-29 were built to purely execute GCI commands. To the point where MiG-23 pilots died because they did not want to eject without GCI permission. I dont think most people asking for 9.12/9.13 here are aware what they're getting into. Youre not getting a plane that you can just take off and fight with, it only works as an integrated asset in the IADS, as a SAM carrying missiles and guns if you will.

MPRF/HPRF is on the DCS AMRAAM. Notch filter for example is different within 20 and 10km distance. Two way datalink is only on F-35 and the latest AIM-120Ds. R-77 has been exported all the way through the 90s and 2000s. It was very widely used in the thousands.

Except that all of NATO in DCS will still fly around exclusively in 20-30 year newer planes with 20-40 years newer missiles... You guys are confusing the 9.12 Fulcrum with the later ones. If you think that youre buying a 4th gen fighter, youre setting yourself up for disappointment. 9.12-9.13 = Absolute garbage, with mass producability as the primary priority. Radar is completely unable to build an own SA picture, you do not have target aspects until you lock it. That is if you can lock it given its dogshit performance against the ground and ECM. You will be a GCI slave with no own thinking. That is if ED includes an entirely reworked GCI and Lazur datalink for Soviet doctrine. If they dont (They wont), youll not only be blind, but also dead. It does not mean that it was a bad fighter at its time. But it used very boring (for the pilot) doctrine (watch the Luftwaffe MiG-29 pilot interview for more info on it), which depended on many things DCS does not have - GCI DL, a capable GCI that makes tactical and strategical decisions (good luck in singleplayer) and 80s-90s opponents with no flawless Link16, AIM-9X, AIM-120C. The actual, in a DCS sense "flyable" fulcrums that have enough fuel and situational awareness to work independently and patrol an area, much like modern F-16s, are the upgraded ones after the mid 2000s. Listen to the Indian MiG-29 pilot on the fighter pilot podcast for a longer explanation. EDs options: 1: Add multiple NATO 80s modules to fill the gap, rework 20 year old core aspects of the sim and add a GCI datalink which they have no information on... 2: Add a more modern Fulcrum that just fits in, with western-like datalink and RWR. Do you think Option 1 is easier?

Do you think an original export F-16A would have sold even nearly as well? Do you think all the NATO flyboys would have moved over from Falcon BMS? Do you think the original export MiG-29A will interest fans of russian aircraft enough to come back? Even games like Arma have more versatility for russian 4th gens than DCS. You get to use TGPs, work together with ground units for CAS. In DCS you will take off, intercept some striker, die to his defensive AIM-120C since he had you on link16 and TWS the whole time, and repeat. ED does not add weapons to aircraft when they dont carry them. Unless you get 500 upvotes on hoggit or are a popular youtuber telling people to boycot the game.

I can link you some of the things ED has been saying over just the past 1-2 years in interviews and forum posts. It definitely plays a role. Things like them "not liking the performance" of a certain aircraft in their sim show that they indeed care about balance, just not in the way politically neutral devs do. Statements like 'F-16 will beat Su-57 in a fight' are always amusing too and show EDs attitude and what type of environment they want DCS to be.

ED is not even offering us LOW-FID modern REDFOR aircraft. So that gap is easy to fill. With ED, politics are not taken into account. They are mostly russian opposition and thus already have a difficult relationship with having a strong REDFOR side in their sim. On top of that of course Sukhoi and Mikoyan will never work together with them for that reason. Doesnt mean they wont work together with other companies. 2000s Aircraft like Su-27SM and MiG-29K are very obsolete at this point and will start to be phased out soon. With how much they have been exported, western intelligence knows all it needs to know about them at this point. It wouldnt be enough to face a frankenstein Eurofighter, that carries Meteors despite not being able to. But it would be an improvement.

You overestimate the capabilities of the 29S. Even with R-77, it can only really fight AIM-120A and B carriers with no Link16, and only while close to the point they are tasked to defend, since they rely entirely on GCI Datalink for situational awareness. For a modern F-16 counter, you need AT LEAST Indian MiG-29K, and even those suffer from lack of capable missiles. ED does not want capable russian equipment in its simulator. ED has their internal statistics and can see that fans of russian aviation are running away in masses - the "we want to do it" are pure PR statements. and they have been feeding them to us for a decade, while delivering absolutely nothing. Fortunately the rules of the market dictate that such a gap cannot exist forever. We just have to wait for competition to catch up.

Which is why i dont recommend this sim to anyone that is looking for modern 4th gen combat. There is a reason why even the Su-35 testpilot on the forums will not touch the DCS Su-27. He likes modern avionics like the KA-50 offers them.

Just the early 90s R-77 will not help much. Especially if the radar is so awful that you cannot multi-launch with it at all and perform sneaky launches in TWS. In DCS, soviet TWS shuts off when there are any jammers ahead, and TWS2 in MiG-29S causes a launch warning and takes way too long to lock. You need either an R-77-1, or an avionics suite that is so capable that it can make the combination of R-27ER and 90s R-77 deadly enough. An example for such a suite would be SU-30MKI.

Redfor in DCS can not even recreate the obsolete Syrian air force. Syria uses MiG-29SM, which can use guided air to ground weapons. I refuse to believe that anyone could consider this acceptable, playable even.

I did not know you needed to ask Putin and Jinping for permission to edit some .lua files.

Which missions? Singleplayer? Dont exist. Multiplayer? No players.

Which one has sold better, MiG-21 or Ka-50? MiG-21 or F-16?

Sorry to disappoint, but 9.13 is not much less useless. Against Eurofighter and DCS F-15/F-16/18 it has -SA disadvantage -much inferior missiles (horrible radar does not help here) We need a MiG-29K to fight back at all, a Su-30MKI or Su-27SM3 for parity. Anything less can not survive in DCS and will generate poor sales.

Ah yes, a full fidelity export 80s MiG with no GCI Datalink (because ED does not have the info to make it) and with unfinished features for 2 years. The MiG-29 9.12 is in the game already. Try to have any fun with it: The 80s servers are dead, there are no 90s servers that restrict hornet/F-16 datalink and weapons. No proper singleplayer campaigns focusing on its role as a point defense fighter - DCS GCI is designed for western aircraft and will not micro-manage you like a soviet GCI would have. If you want to get shot down by Eurofighters and late 2000s F-16s, go right ahead and spend 80$ on a 9.12 (That is already in DCS). But my faith in humanity makes me believe that reasonable people will not.