Chappie Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Su-33 is a at form for the Kh-31A. Can we have this please?
joey45 Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Unless you can provide evidance the the 33 has used it then yes.... But As Far As We Know it has never used it offically. The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
tovivan Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Unless you can provide evidance the the 33 has used it then yes.... But As Far As We Know it has never used it offically. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS-17_Krypton under "launch platform". :smilewink:
Beagle One Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Wikipedia is usually never taken as a reliable source. Don't try and use wikipedia as a source in any scientific or university work, you will get the same guideline. Anybody can write a wikipedia article and there are enough false, fake and plain wrong ones around.
Chappie Posted December 10, 2014 Author Posted December 10, 2014 Unless you can provide evidance the the 33 has used it then yes.... But As Far As We Know it has never used it offically. Why is evidence required? Anyone can locate on the internet a picture of an Su-33 with the Kh-31A attached to the underside which is evidence enough. The MiG-21 can attach a nuke and there is no evidence it was ever used; this is the same situation and hence qualifies the Su-33 to be able to attach the Kh-31A and use it in-game much like the MiG-21 uses the nuke.
tovivan Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Wikipedia is usually never taken as a reliable source. Don't try and use wikipedia as a source in any scientific or university work, you will get the same guideline. Anybody can write a wikipedia article and there are enough false, fake and plain wrong ones around. That's why the winking smiley... :doh: Trust me, I know all too well to avoid using wiki for serious work. Can you believe it, they actually taught us about sources and literature! The horror! Then again, if this right here and now is considered serious work, then we really need to reconsider our priorities and/or views. :P The MiG-21 can attach a nuke and there is no evidence it was ever used; +1
joey45 Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Why is evidence required? Anyone can locate on the internet a picture of an Su-33 with the Kh-31A attached to the underside which is evidence enough. Yes there are pictures but most are from a static airframe / mock up at airshows or testing. The Su-33 never offically got the upgrade/all clear to use the Kh-31. The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Chappie Posted December 10, 2014 Author Posted December 10, 2014 Yes there are pictures but most are from a static airframe / mock up at airshows or testing. The Su-33 never offically got the upgrade/all clear to use the Kh-31. Good friend pointed out to me that the Ka-50 and the SU-25T were never in service but they are in the game. What gives with that? Fact is, the Kh-31A has been associated with the Su-33 and should be an available option for ground weapons. 1
Calman Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Also, as far as know, the mig-21 never used grom missles, yet they are in the game too. "Failure is always an option and landing is always optional." -Cal the Almighty -Founder of the Pandas -Callsign: Mother Warning: Prolonged exposure to DCS Forums may cause tourettes syndrome. Sometimes I don't know which plane to fly:helpsmilie::pilotfly:
karambiatos Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) Youll hardly find anyone defending the nuke thing in DCS, especially those who make a mission or two Edited December 10, 2014 by karambiatos A 1000 flights, a 1000 crashes, perfect record. =&arrFilter_pf[gameversion]=&arrFilter_pf[filelang]=&arrFilter_pf[aircraft]=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC"] Check out my random mods and things
pepin1234 Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Good friend pointed out to me that the Ka-50 and the SU-25T were never in service but they are in the game. What gives with that? Fact is, the Kh-31A has been associated with the Su-33 and should be an available option for ground weapons. Ka-50 hat compat tested in Chechenia, also the Su-25T was used in Georgia war. So they should be in game, cuz ED do not make a playable ground atack Russian fixed wing like Mig-27, Su-22m4 or Su-24m. Kh-31 could be in secret as operational state for the Su-33. A good example is the The R-27P version, this missile is in operational state since long time and was declared officially operational just several month ago. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Xeno426 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Also, as far as know, the mig-21 never used grom missles, yet they are in the game too. Kh-66 was designed for use with the MiG-21 and the RP-21 radar. It can't be used on an aircraft without radar, which would limit its use to basically the MiG-21 and MiG-23. Why is evidence required? Because otherwise anyone could put anything on anything. I want the AIM-120 on the Su-33. Wait, you mean I need evidence that it could? Why? Anyone can locate on the internet a picture of an Su-33 with the Kh-31A attached to the underside which is evidence enough. Well, here's evidence we should be able to attach men to the A-10. Also we should be able to put the R-60 on the wingtips of the Mi-24. ...except that these are rather fake and there is no actual capability to use them. Sometimes the internet lies to you... The MiG-21 can attach a nuke and there is no evidence it was ever used Well no, that's because the USSR has never nuked anybody. Good friend pointed out to me that the Ka-50 and the SU-25T were never in service but they are in the game. They have seen actual combat use and deployment and actually have the systems in the game integrated. Fact is, the Kh-31A has been associated with the Su-33 and should be an available option for ground weapons. Just because people on the internet associate them doesn't mean they use them. The Igla and R-73 have been associated with the Ka-50, but it's never used them nor has it ever had them integrated. The Su-33 lacks any kind of PGM capability, and while it would be trivial to attach the Kh-31 to a Su-33 there would be no way for the pilot to designate targets and launch the missile because there's no integration. When it comes to Russian equipment, English sources are wrong in a lot of instances.
BitMaster Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Aren't there pics around with men on the moon ? Pics say nothing unless you have taken it yourself, just as any Excel sheet I havent tweaked myself to just say what I want and hide the rest. People should start listening to their stomach and sober minds rather than their eyes and ears. Anyway, it would be nice to have some kind of modern A2G vehicle that can zoom & boom into the TA and escape just as rapid as it came. The Su-25T, as much as I love it, lacks speed and dual use capability and the F/A-18 Hornet is not on the horizon yet. It would just be nice to have another option for A2G aside from what we already have. Bit Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Sapphire Nitro+ 7800XT - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus XG27ACG QHD 180Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X
joey45 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Anyway, it would be nice to have some kind of modern A2G vehicle that can zoom & boom into the TA and escape just as rapid as it came. The Su-25T, as much as I love it, lacks speed and dual use capability and the F/A-18 Hornet is not on the horizon yet. It would just be nice to have another option for A2G aside from what we already have. Bit The Mig21Bis... The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Harpoon Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 The Mig21Bis... He said modern. :lol: If you want to talk to anyone about anything personal, send it to their PM box. Interpersonal drama and ad hominem rebuttal are things that do not belong on a thread viewed by the public. One thing i have to point out... naming a thread.. "OK, so" is as useful as tits on a bull.
joey45 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Missed that bit...:lol: The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Xeno426 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Anyway, it would be nice to have some kind of modern A2G vehicle that can zoom & boom into the TA and escape just as rapid as it came. The Su-25T, as much as I love it, lacks speed and dual use capability and the F/A-18 Hornet is not on the horizon yet. It would just be nice to have another option for A2G aside from what we already have. Agreed, and I was so looking forward to the Su-27SM. And then they went and said it would just be the Su-27S... At this point, I'd be happy with just something like a Su-24M. The problem is that even if the Kh-31 was added to the loadout there'd be no way to use it as a human player. It's not hard to add it to the Su33.lua file.
Darkwolf Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Wikipedia is usually never taken as a reliable source. As for now you just qualified Wikipedia of "unreliable" without even showing hard data yourself. Ok Just kidding. Just to be pointy - Studiing history, Wikipedia helped me a LOT. Wikipedia can be a great source of data but can be wrong, As ANY source of data, cross check of things are often necessary. I just can't stand the way you put it :D He said modern. Old people on the forum will now feel even more older. :music_whistling: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] PC simulator news site. Also....Join the largest DCS community on Facebook :pilotfly:
joey45 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Damn these children... When I was young I had to type load "" And press play on the tape player... ... and wait, just to play a game.... Edited January 4, 2015 by joey45 The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Harpoon Posted January 5, 2015 Posted January 5, 2015 Damn these children... When I was young I had to type load "" And press play on the tape player... ... and wait, just to play a game.... :megalol: Commodore Datasette for the 64? If you want to talk to anyone about anything personal, send it to their PM box. Interpersonal drama and ad hominem rebuttal are things that do not belong on a thread viewed by the public. One thing i have to point out... naming a thread.. "OK, so" is as useful as tits on a bull.
Recommended Posts