TaxDollarsAtWork

Wouldn't that mean a simplified depiction of its capabilities it has in service? Ie without the control panel for it, but always working automatically. I am pretty sure it isn't something off a prototype.

This I don't understand. Despite being a survey sim it is still a sim, as ED describes the FC3 planes, "Standard Systems Modeling (SSM). A DCS module using SSM is characterized as including just the most essential cockpit systems and using keyboard and joystick commands only to interact with the cockpit. Examples of SSM in DCS include all of the Flaming Cliffs 3 aircraft." Things such ass accurate radar detection ranges for the Eagle, correct armament available for Russian 4th gens and the F-15/A-10 (R-73 RDM-2, AIM-9M-9) and correct Avionics such as Lazur datalink and Peer to Peer and Fighter to fighter modes fall under essential cockpit systems as they would be crucial features in combat. Its not like we're asking for Pitot heat or canopy anti icing controls... Seems inconsistent to not try and also have the FC3 planes modeled to same capabilities of their real life counterparts in a sim

While this type of preliminary threat estimation information can be helpful particularly in regards to things where more accurate info is scarce, One needs to bear in mind its often times wrong as the guys on the other side typically know a lot less about a new system so early on in its life Better information has become available to ED.

It doesn't matter if other planes have it It matters if the plane IRL has it, its the only thing the DCS Su-27S should really be compared to. With the Su-27 being sold and regarded as a Sim, it should clearly have this capability as enough is known with regard to the system and it is possible to implement in DCS as evident with other aircraft.

I don't think anyone is seriously asking for a balanced game They are asking for an accurate depiction of the capabilities of a near peer state like Russia or China in the Noughties and Teens as well as the 20th century (relative to NATO/MNNA Nations) Part of this would include certain upgraded versions of legacy fighters as AI or otherwise, and naval & ground assets too. Accurate depiction of the systems and weapons etc... About that will the new info on the R-27 Autopilot be introduced when the CFD is finished?

Very interesting find with regard to R-27 guidance It seems to highlight an issue plaguing DCS and that is poor PN laws Maybe now DCS can start with a PN formula that accounts for time to go to solve the inconsistency in allowed G depending shot parameters followed then by Kallman filtering being added and ending with Predictive Guidance/ZEM

Interesting find Flanker How about the Authenticity of the Su-27/33 FM in DCS? How close or far is it from the real thing

Seems the R-73 needs tweaks too

Usually when one wants to indulge such a what if fantasy of upgrades and weapons that never were, the resort to making mods. Not asking for capabilities on plane without a shadow of a doubt did not have.

One can't deny that a considerable part of this helicopter's service has been in that of a foreign airforce. The solution really is simple, do both and allow people to chose which they put in the mission allowing for greater authenticity of the scenario.

How exactly

Either would be fine One can dream

Well if the main avionics are Russian, and the Avionics update (MFI-55 etc) is mostly Belorussian in origin & export focused...

Its not the standard I set, its the standard ED has set. I'm basing the advice I give you on successes I've had Like this https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4448979&postcount=9121 Since manufacturer data didn't convince him. I don't understand why you're being so impolite with these accusations when I am trying to help you.

If they wont believe that, get confirmation from a ground tech, crew chief or pilot then. They'll probably listen then.

Could signal strength for certain types be changed as well (as in make certain planes appear close than they are on the SPO-15 display) or is it purely under which signal it is filed under

I understand what you are trying to say, and this is indeed the realm where we are forced to make assumptions based upon some nondescript but credible information. There still are a number of other questions that need to be answered here Is the new seeker/missile in service? This is a big one with the CIS Arms industry as they make quite a few ambitious projects that people don't pick up and buy like the K-30/izdeliye-300 for example. Is it compatible with existing platforms in DCS, so that we know who gets it who doesn't. Does it have enhanced ECCM detection range? Is it even a new Seeker or an improvement to an older one? If you answer those questions ED might just give you a more modern R-27T/ET

And how about a J-11A in FF?

The PL-12 is in the DCS files, I've played with it a bit it behaves exactly like an SD-10 with a slight improvement in CCM Doesn't strike me as particularly out of this world mostly

Questions such as if the R-27 family have received any upgrades while in Russian service and particularly from when the Dux factory started production again in the last 10 years would be best answered by actual RuAF pilot of which some do frequent these forums.

AMRAAMs in STT no longer give launch warnings, only when they go active will you get one. I am not sure if ED has this as intended behaviour or not.

How about as a paid upgrade later on, or as part of the F-14D if that ever gets added.

Would HB consider adding DFCS to the F-14B to make it more different from the coming F-14A? Are enough SME's around for it?

I think it makes a great deal of sense really, the only people really drawn to those planes in the flightsim community have very little understanding or appreciate for truly breathtaking marvels of engineering such as the Teen series fighters (how many times have we heard the "oh but muh cobra" routine before) and clearly they don't value things like advanced system modeling or multi-role capability otherwise they would've had them years ago, ED just knows its audience's taste very well. Seems to me ED is on the money, why give them more when they're already amazed with the plane being able to take off and and land? Those FC3 planes are only really cheap thrills for some and training wheels for those getting into study sims I don't see why an airplane only good for airshows needs all that :D

Yes Proportional Navigation is purely angular It works on the principle that the missile was launched within its kinematic envelope and will always have closure over its target All the seeker now aims to do is keep the line of sight rotation rate at zero so it is in the same constant spot of the missile reticle at some point it will collide with the target