Terrorban
-
Posts
414 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Terrorban
-
-
A 80000+ tone carrier won't be easily sunk by only 2 anti-ship missiles with that little explosive. Maybe 2 heavy torpedos will do, but not 2 medium sized missiles.
Yeah, I always though those RB15 are a bit too convenient. Those are thick missiles but DCS also does not simulate armor penetration so delay charge has no effect.
I think to counter this effect, they just increased the base damage value. Unless the real missile was that crazy powerful back in the day. Who knows.
-
It appears that both are test aircraft.
And it seems the one on the right is actually the WS-13.
People were saying that RD-93 has full black muzzle while WS-13 has 2 coloured muzzles.
Since both aircraft are at the same distance and at the same angle. When use a ruler on them, the one on the right is 1mm longer. I know this kind of measurement isn't accurate. Maybe Deka knows more on the topic.
Also, there is this news
The two jets look like they are using the same engines. Same size and the colouring of the right one is what we have in DCS currently.
As for the news article, I suppose the WS-13 seem like a backup measure in case the Russians pull the plug on their engine supply, which does not seem like the case so far so no point in adapting Work in Progress engine this early.
Additionally, with you mentioning that Chinese advertising the jet, I see no claims of that anywhere since most (if not all) of the deals for this jet have gone through Pakistan representatives so far. But this is more off topic discussion so I won’t go into too much debate on it.
Finally you mentioning that Chinese have version with the WS-13, HMD and all the other features, it makes sense naturally since they are developing the jet in China so there are bound to be a few prototypes.
Since there is no official or solid proof of those jets with Chinese engine being in active service somewhere, there is no reason to bring it in DCS unless they now accept under development prototypes.
This is just my take on the topic. I would love to see advanced features but I doubt we will be getting the block 3 version into DCS since if the news are accurate, they carry a bit more advanced sensors and components that Chinese currently use in their jets and we all know how strict they are with their active service tech.
-
OK, I have another idea.
Not only we get the block I and II, we also need to have the Chinese Variant.
I know some of you guys will be confused since JF-17 hasn't been accepted into the service of the Chinese military. Yes, true. But Chinese have some JF-17 as demonstrator. They use those aircraft to show the potential buyers how good JF-17 is. The Chinese variant has some advantage over the Pakistan version. For example: The Chinese JF-17 block II demonstrators have at least 3 advantages:
1: Helmet aiming sight for missiles.
2: WS-13 Engine
3: PL-8 and PL-9 missiles
Pakistan didn't purchase those due to budget constrains.
I think this will be good for Deka team if this is made, since it will be a good advertisement for JF-17.
Got any sources for those JF-17 using WS-13 which the chinese are showing off? I would love to see what changes they had to do to the airframe to fit that engine. I cannot imagine it was a simple slot in the back hole kind of a deal. Even the intakes would need to be changed for it.
The image you provided previously is a very early model.
-
You are probably not going to find any female voices from anime for jets I believe. I am not an anime fan myself but I am sure there are plenty of mech anime that use similar language which the airforce might use.
-
There was this old poster for JF-17 indicated that at some point, at least it was planned to allow the inner pylons to carry SD-10. I don't know, but maybe we can do so with block II.
I believe that poster is really old. Looks like the original FC1 aircraft from the intakes. The final jet model probably needed some changes to what we have now.
-
I also love doing ground missions with it. It does not carry much ordinance but that is why I find it so fun. Makes me want to plan my objectives and routes instead of just bulldozing through everything.
-
thanks Tiger-II, Terrorban
i can get very consistent hits at those ranges, i'm just trying to make sure i utilize the ld-10s to their full potential, which is hard to do if you don't know much about their specs
e.g. i'm trying to guess what their max altitude is - they seem to fail if i loft them to extreme (by western standards at least, for similar weapons) heights. I was hoping someone would have gone through the pain already and could provide more concrete numbers :D
Don't know what numbers you are looking for however if you are lofting them, I hope it is in ACT mode since then the missile will know where to guide itself and look for possible threats otherwise, it will keep flying into the sky until it loses energy.
Furthermore, I am not sure if the HARM missiles have battery life simulated but these wont stay active forever and after some time, the missile will go dumb.
Sorry I am not the number guy, so cannot really give you exact numbers and most of the time those numbers are estimations based on averaging the test results anyway.
-
Korean map make more sense in this regard.
Since this "taiwan" thing isn't recognised by anybody, it is not presented in DCS. So having this "taiwan" doesn't make much sense.
Korea on the other hand makes more sense as many factions would get involved IF conflict rises. Factions like China, Russia, US, both Korea and Japan, and maybe Canada as well.
Another possibility is Kashmir region. For started, it is a region where 3 powers clashes, since it has a disputed border between China, India and Pakistan. Not to mention we just got JF-17. Besides, for people who doesn't enjoy conflict and war, this map would be super since it has mountain Everest. Just imagine the scenery. ;)
I love the idea of Kashmir. There are so many mountains around borders and we can even have the K2 mountain. This would be the most harsh environment for ground combat since there are a lot of places for ground units to hunker down and hide form long range air weapons.
We would have perfect reason for using our GPS guided bombs and waypoint based missiles.
Probably not going to happen but one can dream.
-
This seems like an unnecessary provocative thread created at the worst/buggiest time of the module’s development. Calling it the best module in DCS when a lot of it broke just recently is quite odd.
One thing I will add here is that I love flying this jet out of combat. The flight model is really fun and I use the fly by wire to do crazy aerobatics.
Once the massive recent bugs are fixed, this jet will again become a very good stalker/hunter in pvp.
P.S. The new cockpit is also beautiful.
-
Yeah, 42,000 altitude is really high so I'm sure the missile can reach that range under perfect conditions like your speed, wind resistance level and power of the target radar emitter.
Not effective way of using it since this is not a guarantee hit. Also regarding the speed, the missile is going downward towards a non-maneuvering target so it wont bleed any speed or pull any high Gs.
I am guessing that 80nm is when you know exactly where the target is and you are pointing directly towards it so the missile does not lose any energy turning towards target and picks it up easily on its way down.
-
-
I vote for whichever of the two are better at multi role or ground attack. These jets won’t survive in current dcs air to air environment anyway and timeline locked server are usually not that well populated.
-
Nothing wrong with using padlock unless it follows the enemy aircraft perfectly through the cockpit blind spots.
Like if it is able to track the enemy when they are below the jet then it would be a little cheatsy but then again people go 3rd person to track other jets as well when allowed in server so all seems fair to me.
-
This fix seems to give the placebo effect. It does not fix the problem yet changes a little information on RWR so some think they are seeing positive results.
The devs have acknowledged and fixed the problem. Not sure if we will get any update this Wednesday.
I’m starting to get used to the jump scare deaths by now.
-
Oh right of course. Sorry, I got confused between the two.
-
Frankly, I don't own F-5E module. I only noticed there are 2 version of F-5 listed as flyable when I was making multiplayer missions for my friends.
Same goes for P-51. There are 2 variants for P-51. That I know for sure since I flied both of them.
I understand what you are saying. Better understanding would be how Heatblur are offering F-14A and F-14B within the same purchase.
After reading some of the points you guys made, I would have to agree, providing us with an option to use both block versions would be a welcome addition to an already amazing module.
Not every scenario would require AAR. Especially if the loadout already has fuel tanks. It is very necessary though for this jet because the internal fuel capacity is quite low.
Additionally, Since this jet was designed to be completely modular, it makes sense how we can have all the different setups between blocks because the original jet has very similar setup.
-
Terrorban you really need to stop ruining threads by mentioning Sd10. After 30 posts of pointless cryfest this thread will die with you saying "oh I'm done with this discussion. I'll let the internet engineers handle this". How many times will you repeat this?
Don't know why you got so salty suddenly over what I posted here week ago under different circumstances.
I am not the one getting the threads locked, it is people like you who ignore the thread topic and start fighting with other users.
Regarding the topic, If Razbam agreed to add the missile on MIG-19, will it be the same version as the JF-17's?
-
I would only ask for two versions if the jet has any changes to the cockpit.
So far Deka said that there will only be external modification and the AAR switches are already present in cockpit so there is no real reason for having two versions.
Good thing it is on the side and not on the nose like Mirage.
Gotta love the blind right side.
-
Oh boy, I guess no fix until next year.
-
Really can't be bothered with SD-10 drama anymore. I will let these internet engineers deal with it.
I am sure, everytime someone gets hit in pvp server with this missile, they will head stright here.
-
Nothing changed to dogfighting capabilities. Here's a test from a user at the F-16 forum:
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4145616&postcount=163
Thank you for the clarification. What about the new missile behaviour I mentioned above?
-
I cannot really assume anything for sure in this matter.
Personally, I would prefer that developers dont let these rumors get worse before they decide to respond. Right now the general idea within the JF-17 community is that the jet's flight model and the SD-10 has been "nerfed" by the request of ED.
I am not making any judgement yet since this is just the beginning of these rumors. If the developers dont give a clear statement, I fear this is going to spread and get worse.
Currently I am on Deka side. If anything was changed, I am sure they would have provided the chages or explained why and when this happened. I see no proof of that in the patch notes or changelogs.
I have noticed some different behaviour with the SD-10 which I have stated above however, this might not be related to Deka but time and more testing will tell.
-
In that case, I would really love it if Deka would consider making a Russian jet. I have a lot of respect for these developers and having a russian jet from these guys would most likely have very well modeled functions and features.
DCS will be more balanced and we will have a more diverse crowd in the community. I hope you guys get a proper modeled module soon.
-
I didn't check the range since I dont care about that. I did notice that the SD-10 now loses lock easily and flies past the enemy. On the other hand, the new AIM-120 is doing exactly the same so not sure if Deka tweaked their missile's performance or ED broke/balanced something.
Full fidelity Russian as next module?
in Deka Ironwork Simulations
Posted
I think it is safe to say that we can all forget about getting any 4th gen Russian "Jet" in DCS anytime soon.
The current ED pipeline is full of American jets.
Deka have already stated that they will not do any Russian jets.
Razbam is doing an on and off job with MIG-23.
Polychop doesn't like Russian "helicopters" because of how they feel.
No other developer has shown any interest in anything relative modern from Russia.
I believe if we are to get any developer's interest going, we need to make some noise in the main DCS subforums so they understand that there is bigger demand for these jets now that we have so many nato sided planes.
I really wish there were some other Russian developers than ED who were interested in Red Jets.