Lucas_From_Hell

There are photos of the Kh-35(V variant, not to be mistaken by the Vietnamese variants) on Ka-27s, though few and far between. Seems like the idea is old by the age of them. The Kh-31 however way too far fetched, and few sources have mentioned anything related to it. You can find a fair amount of info on the Kh-35/Ka-52K combo, and it looks real enough to me.

Here's a 1-year old publication on the concept and requirements, for those interested: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/pak-ta.htm

Great! Out of curiosity, are you modeling it after a particular air frame (and if so which one)?

It's unusual indeed. Most countries opt for either partially or full prop training (see Brazil for example), but there are exceptions like Russia and Sweden (SAAB 105).

From that same link: As you can see, their college experience goes from the -39 to what I assume are MiG-17 and -21 training variants to get soon-to-be fighter pilots a more high-performance jet experience. If you look into Soviet Air Force inventories back then, you will not find the Yak-52. Their time on it is probably at the DOSAAF (ie leisure). While I'm no expert in the matter, I'd risk a guess that both trainers have been in use on their own because, although they're no prop aircraft, they are straight wing jets with very gentle handling characteristics, meaning a rookie can do the job.

Just a side-note, Russian (and Soviet pilots after a while) are not trained in the Yak-52. The L-29 started an era of all-jet training, which carried onto the L-39 and now the Yak-130. I don't know when the Delfin packed its bags but I would risk a guess that most Grach pilots went from the L-39 to it straight away. You're most likely to find a Yak-52 at the local DOSAAF.

Unpopular opinion, but I think for the kind of COIN the A-10 is doing nowadays the Super Tucano is a viable and combat-proven alternative. The aircraft was, after all, designed with this in mind - replacing expensive jets like the A-10 in low-intensity combat for a good price without losing in quality. The avionics are top notch, it's cheap to acquire, it's cheap to operate, and it was built to operate normally from remote airstrips and roads in the Amazon forest as needed. It's not a tank buster or a flying tank, because it wasn't meant to be. It was meant to deliver quality COIN for a good price, and that it can do well. Meanwhile in Eurasia, while I haven't heard anything about it ever since, Russia is (or was at least) developing a stealth CAS aircraft to replace the Su-25SM: http://sputniknews.com/military/20120221/171427430.html

The Su-17 (22 IIRC) was said to be down the line an age and a half ago. Didn't the M3 and M4 have a primitive ground radar? A few years ago the devs toyed around with a VTOL FM for the MiG-21 to learn a thing or two as well, maybe a Harrier or Yak-38 (dreamy) could be true but I doubt it. RAZBAM's doing the Harrier anyway.

So, when does DCS get them too? :D

I saw a guncam shot of a Mirage III (IDF) being shot down by a MiG-21, RN Sea Harrier shot down an A-4 with guns. These were what I found superficially, I'm sure there are more. If you count incidents other than dogfights between fighters, a few drug smugglers have been gunned down recently, and before that a Sea Harrier shot down a C-130 - because the IR missiles wouldn't lock! Sensors fail more often than bullets. No good countermeasures have been created against those :D

The MiG-23 user reports give me trust issues - either it was clunky junk that required too much maintenance and delivered too little in return, or it was the fighter if all fighters which successfully shot down 3 F-16s and an F-15 per sortie (see Syria's claims vs Israel). I love it to bits though, and I'd love to fly it in DCS.

If memory serves me right, the early Phoenix was a bomber killer, and even its latest versions weren't too impressive against fighters - let alone small maneuverable ones. Wasn't overcoming the Phoenix and Sparrow's limitations and poor performance a requirement and driving force behind the AMRAAM's development? There's no doubt the F-14 outclasses the MiG-21 in BVR, but blind trust in the mentality of 'BVR advantage = no contest' is sure to end up badly eventually. They're historically accurate as a match, and have advantages in their own ways when employed correctly. According to some reports, Aggressor F-5s gave Tomcats and Eagles a hard time even when BVR missiles were simulated. This only changed when the latter learned how to avoid giving the light fighters even a remote chance to close in for a turn fight with IR missiles and guns. My point is that you all have to use any aircraft wisely - a reasonable pilot in an inferior aircraft knows better than try to play equals. How it will create a situation where it has an edge over you depends on the mission and situation, but if you rely on magic BVR rocket wands carelessly, you will soon be featured in the MiG-21 vs modern fighters thread. :D PS: As a side-note, I remember reading a good few reports that the MiG-23 was not all that, and many crews and I believe even Air Forces preferred the MiG-21 for a number of reasons, despite the Flogger's avionics suite. I could be wrong.

Great photos, very interesting. Note: The iron sights are there because MiG-21 models after the F series and before the internal cannon was a feature had the option to hang a gun pod in the centerline pylon (much like early F-4s). Here's a photo: http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/imgs/mikoyangurevich-mig21-fishbed_8.jpg

I want the Sukhoi, I want the A-10A. Great initiative!

I want the MiG.

Drawing: >->- --------> l-|- ___________________________ Full name: 'MiG-21 firing R-60M at A-10 over Chechnya in winter', 2014. © Very professional :D

Thanks for the help, guys! Still looking, so far didn't find anything that fit the bill so if anyone knows something, it'd be a life saver. Needed as soon as tonight really. Cobra, thanks for that, any news by chance? Hope Metaldays went well by the way!

I gave it a try already, unfortunately hosts seem less than willing to do anything short term, but thanks for the suggestion! So far we're managing, stumbling here and there but surviving so there's that :) But if anyone knows something or someone, that helps too.

Thanks for the wishes guys! If anyone knows someone who's renting, has a place available or so and so, that works too. Aaand thanks again!

I do hope this doesn't infringe any rules of the community, but things got a bit dire here and necessity is the mother of invention so… Me and my girlfriend are in Stockholm, Sweden right now. Because of a streak of problems that is hard to even believe happened, we ended up without a place to stay (our supposed landlord bailed on us after we landed). So, not to bother you with the details, does anyone have a place to rent out in Stockholm for a couple of days, or knows someone who does? It's an emergency and our budget doesn't allow for hotels anymore. Reply here or PM me if you need more specific information, and thanks everyone. Wish I could offer a copy of DCS: F/A-18 in return but they didn't make it yet so there's that. Thanks!

Ditto. Not to mention that flying in a passenger's seat can get tiring after a while, imagine doing that plus having to keep the flying bathtub going without killing anyone in the process. That and having to handle annoying coworkers sometimes... bad combination :music_whistling: The maintenance situation is extremely worrying indeed, and the thing is this isn't restricted to low-cost airlines. Throw 'cause of crash improper maintenance' on Google and go through the results. One source I found cites that between 94 and 04, 42% of all aviation accidents in the USA were due to faulty maintenance one way or another. ...meanwhile in DCS an independent study conducted by myself found that uh, 97% of my crashes were also due to faulty maintenance, of course. :D

Next up we'll have people saying fighter pilots should just sleep in the plane since it's all turning the autopilot, firing 10 AIM-120s and resuming the nap :P On the averages, I decided to look it up, looks like they got the data from whichairline.com (http://www.whichairline.com/news/Battle-of-the-low-cost-airlines%3A-is-Ryanair-the-cheapest) Meaning this table already counts a 20kg suitcase (or whatever the airline offers). I've flown Pegasus Airlines previously, prices were pretty neat and the flight went smooth as butter. Adding to the drama it was canceled 4 times because of visibility nearing 0 at the departure airport but they booked me in a 5-star hotel (with food that was far less than 5-stars) for the night and made sure everything went smoothly.

Fair points :D But from personal experience in Europe budget airlines do the job quite well (you pay for oxygen though, but that's for another day). Has anyone here ever flown Air One? It's ran by Alitalia, but I don't know exactly how much is that worth at the end of the day.

Putting mach 2 fighters, armoured attack planes and sturdy helicopters aside, I think the thing most of us has flown more is the passenger's seat of an airliner. :pilotfly: I came across this infographic here and I thought most of you would be interested. The Cheapest Airlines In The World For those who've read it: why are all of them on the same continent, since taxes there are far from low? Enjoy :D

I came across this article yesterday, a list of 5 air shows to not miss: http://trekeffect.com/blog/5-air-shows-every-aviation-enthusiast-must-visit While I think only 5 is a bit cramped, it turned out pretty good to me at least (Flying Legends and Le Bourget bias here :D) Your thoughts? :)