Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
MIG25 or MIG31....a F14 rival

or a SU34

Mig-25.... A rival for the F-14? Maybe only for "long" ranged missile duels. Any other flight regimen the Tomcat eats the Foxbat alive! I don't understand the fascination with the Mig-25/31 family. Swell you can push up passed 2.5 Mach if you want to change your engines upon landing, not an issue in DCS currently I know! Very limited visibility, little to no ability to engage in a turning fight, limited ability below medium range missile duels, no practical air to ground..... It's a totally BVR fighter, you launch missiles at range and run. The R-33 is going to have similar, if not worse, problems hitting a fighter size target as the AIM-54. What is the attraction? A zoom climb to high altitude? I'll take a Mig-23/27... maybe. It's an AI aircraft leave it at that in my opinion.

"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Leonardo Da Vinci

 

 

"We are tied to the ocean. And when we go back to the sea, whether it is to sail or to watch - we are going back from whence we came."

John F. Kennedy

Posted
Mig-25.... A rival for the F-14? Maybe only for "long" ranged missile duels. Any other flight regimen the Tomcat eats the Foxbat alive! I don't understand the fascination with the Mig-25/31 family. Swell you can push up passed 2.5 Mach if you want to change your engines upon landing, not an issue in DCS currently I know! Very limited visibility, little to no ability to engage in a turning fight, limited ability below medium range missile duels, no practical air to ground..... It's a totally BVR fighter, you launch missiles at range and run. The R-33 is going to have similar, if not worse, problems hitting a fighter size target as the AIM-54. What is the attraction? A zoom climb to high altitude? I'll take a Mig-23/27... maybe. It's an AI aircraft leave it at that in my opinion.

 

I guess some prefer the Priest's wife and others prefer the daughter.

 

For me at least the 25's PD version seems like a perfect thing. Very few aircraft in DCS currently and in the foreseeable future can come even close to 1.5 Mach on a combat load, yet the 25 can blast considerably faster. For it's era (60's) it was also a high tech piece with performance that had no rival. Overall that period of time where flying the aircraft was still for the most part done by the pilot instead of the plane and the iphone systems inside it, is one of the reasons I'm personally quite enjoying the cold war era aircraft coming to DCS in general (Mirage/MiG/Possible Viggen).

Posted
I guess some prefer the Priest's wife and others prefer the daughter.

 

For me at least the 25's PD version seems like a perfect thing. Very few aircraft in DCS currently and in the foreseeable future can come even close to 1.5 Mach on a combat load, yet the 25 can blast considerably faster. For it's era (60's) it was also a high tech piece with performance that had no rival. Overall that period of time where flying the aircraft was still for the most part done by the pilot instead of the plane and the iphone systems inside it, is one of the reasons I'm personally quite enjoying the cold war era aircraft coming to DCS in general (Mirage/MiG/Possible Viggen).

Don't get me wrong, it's a technical wonder! It lends itself to the scenarios without a doubt! I would love to see more late 50's through 70's fighters, Russian, European, and American! I guess I would like to see more WVR multi-purpose aircraft that can take on a light swing rolls than single roll limited use strictly BVR fighters! Mirage 3s, F-1s, Saab Draken, F-100 Super Sabres, F-4 Phantoms, are almost a requirement to that list, Mig-17 and -19, Mig-23! So many awesome "light" multi-roll aircraft to be had in those decades! But... As always we each have our own tastes as you say!

"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Leonardo Da Vinci

 

 

"We are tied to the ocean. And when we go back to the sea, whether it is to sail or to watch - we are going back from whence we came."

John F. Kennedy

Posted

What does this have to do with the topic???

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Posted

One thing to consider in this whole debate, I believe, is this. A sensible developer, especially at this point in their career, would develop an aircraft with the widest appeal and usage possible.

 

For example a lot of people here think that a Viggen is likely. To me the issue there is that, to the best of my knowledge, the Viggen was never sold to anyone else and has not seen deployment outside of Sweden. Thus it would seem an incongruous choice given the theaters we have or know about. Maybe this will be more likely if we get a Swedish / Finish map with a cold war theme.

 

I think it would be a better choice to go for an aircraft which is operated by a lot of countries and has seen deployment, or at least could feasible see employment, in the theaters we have.

 

My own personal wish would be for some form of dedicated strike aircraft with a decent loadout and a decent range. We have lots of CAS type aircraft but not one single Strike aircraft (flyable).

Posted
One thing to consider in this whole debate, I believe, is this. A sensible developer, especially at this point in their career, would develop an aircraft with the widest appeal and usage possible.

 

For example a lot of people here think that a Viggen is likely. To me the issue there is that, to the best of my knowledge, the Viggen was never sold to anyone else and has not seen deployment outside of Sweden. Thus it would seem an incongruous choice given the theaters we have or know about. Maybe this will be more likely if we get a Swedish / Finish map with a cold war theme.

 

I think it would be a better choice to go for an aircraft which is operated by a lot of countries and has seen deployment, or at least could feasible see employment, in the theaters we have.

 

My own personal wish would be for some form of dedicated strike aircraft with a decent loadout and a decent range. We have lots of CAS type aircraft but not one single Strike aircraft (flyable).

 

You mean -- sort of like the F-14? ;)

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Posted (edited)
You mean -- sort of like the F-14? ;)

 

Well I feel that's more of a Kludge strike aircraft, with a none too staggering payload due to carrier ops. I'm talking about something more F-111, F4, F-105 ish.

 

Well maybe the F-4 and f-105 aren't good examples as they were also kludged fighters.

Edited by TJTAS
Posted (edited)
Well I feel that's more of a Kludge strike aircraft, with a none too staggering payload due to carrier ops. I'm talking about something more F-111, F4, F-105 ish.

 

Well maybe the F-4 and f-105 aren't good examples as they were also kludged fighters.

 

I think what he meant was this.

 

"A sensible developer, especially at this point in their career, would develop an aircraft with the widest appeal and usage possible."

 

"You mean -- sort of like the F-14?" - Cobra

 

One thing to consider in this whole debate, I believe, is this. A sensible developer, especially at this point in their career, would develop an aircraft with the widest appeal and usage possible.

 

For example a lot of people here think that a Viggen is likely. To me the issue there is that, to the best of my knowledge, the Viggen was never sold to anyone else and has not seen deployment outside of Sweden. Thus it would seem an incongruous choice given the theaters we have or know about. Maybe this will be more likely if we get a Swedish / Finish map with a cold war theme.

 

I think it would be a better choice to go for an aircraft which is operated by a lot of countries and has seen deployment, or at least could feasible see employment, in the theaters we have.

 

My own personal wish would be for some form of dedicated strike aircraft with a decent loadout and a decent range. We have lots of CAS type aircraft but not one single Strike aircraft (flyable).

 

 

  • The F-14 and F/A-18, F-15C, A-10's and Mirage 2000 all does not fit in the caucasus map.
  • 109 K-4, 190 D-9, P-51D and all other WW2 aircraft coming out don't belong on the current maps at all.
  • F-86 Sabre, UH-1 Huey doesn't belong in the caucasus at all.
  • MiG-15, F-86 & WW2 stuff does not WW2/Korean War era ground units and AI planes to support them.

 

Since when has that ever stopped anybody?

And you're also forgetting that LN has claimed that they will make AI units and a small theater for any plane that feels "out of place"

 

Lets just say it actually is the Viggen.

 

The Viggen did thousands of interceptions of Soviet and WP aircraft and ships and if any cold war gone hot scenario they would likely be involved in some of the first air-to-air engagements and anti-surface operations over Europe.

 

How is it irrelevant to a cold war game again?

 

You also mentioned that you want a dedicated strike aircraft? The Viggen comes in three versions. Interceptor, Strike Fighter & Maritime Recon. the AJ-37 or AJS-37 is a dedicated supersonic strike aircraft capable of firing weapons such as the RB-04E and RBS-15 anti-ship missiles and Mavericks amongst other things.

 

So in conclusion, the only thing i actually agree with is that Viggen doesn't have the widest appeal and usage but overall appeal is subjective such as americans prefering american planes, and alot of europeans prefer european planes. So that leaves that objectivly the Viggen did not see widespread use.

 

I think what you really want to say is, you would prefer other planes that you personally would rather see in the game.

Edited by Skjold
Posted
Well I feel that's more of a Kludge strike aircraft, with a none too staggering payload due to carrier ops. I'm talking about something more F-111, F4, F-105 ish.

 

Well maybe the F-4 and f-105 aren't good examples as they were also kludged fighters.

 

Um, the Tomcat can carry over 14,000lbs of weaponry, which isn't too shabby in the strike fighter role. You seem to want a bomber, not a striker.

Posted

 

 

  • The F-14 and F/A-18, F-15C, A-10's and Mirage 2000 all does not fit in the caucasus map.
  • 109 K-4, 190 D-9, P-51D and all other WW2 aircraft coming out don't belong on the current maps at all.
  • F-86 Sabre, UH-1 Huey doesn't belong in the caucasus at all.
  • MiG-15, F-86 & WW2 stuff does not WW2/Korean War era ground units and AI planes to support them.

Apart from the WW2 stuff. Well they do fit into the other part of my argument of widely used by numerous nations. And could conceivably be in the theater we have or those that we know are coming (IE Nevada and Straits or Hormuz).

 

Um, the Tomcat can carry over 14,000lbs of weaponry, which isn't too shabby in the strike fighter role. You seem to want a bomber, not a striker.

 

14000lbs is less than half of the F-111 payload of 31000lb.

Posted
Apart from the WW2 stuff. Well they do fit into the other part of my argument of widely used by numerous nations. And could conceivably be in the theater we have or those that we know are coming (IE Nevada and Straits or Hormuz).

 

 

 

14000lbs is less than half of the F-111 payload of 31000lb.

 

F-14: 14,500lbs

Tornado: 18,500lbs

Jaguar: 10,000lbs

Strike Eagle: 23,000lbs

F-16: 17,000lbs

AV-8B: 9,000lbs

Typhoon: 16,000lbs

F-4: 18,650lbs

F-105: 14,000lbs

F-18: 13,700lbs

 

As you can see, most strikers don't carry anywhere near the F-111's payload. It shares more in common with dedicated bombers. Hell, that throw weight is more than the Avro Vulcan.

Posted
Apart from the WW2 stuff. Well they do fit into the other part of my argument of widely used by numerous nations. And could conceivably be in the theater we have or those that we know are coming (IE Nevada and Straits or Hormuz).

 

 

 

14000lbs is less than half of the F-111 payload of 31000lb.

 

Yes, but you also know that leatherneck will create a small theater for any plane that feels out of place, so that argument is weird.

 

Where do u draw the line on conceivably being deployed?India could have very well have been an operator of the Viggen, and so could many others in Europe but it didn't becouse of a number of reasons, not least diplomatic pressure from the US that their NATO allies would buy american. If we're gonna go as far to say that USAF F-15 and A-10 Squadrons are deployed in Georgia to fight the start of WW3 you are pretty far out there in the realms of possibility.

 

In that case, you can also quite easily concieve that Viggen got those missed export contracts and saw more widespread service.

 

And yes, Straits of Hormuz does makes sense for any USN plane despite not being out yet, i'll give you that. You could also argue that any and all Red Flag participants including Sweden could fit in the Nevada, so that point is also kinda mute with that logic. Given, as far as i know we always used Gripens and not Viggens in the Red Flag but since USAF has found a new home in Georgia not too far fetched at all.

Posted
14000lbs is less than half of the F-111 payload of 31000lb.

 

Yes....

 

But the F-111 didn't use a load remotely that size on operational missions. Their standard load was 6,000-8,000 lbs.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_United_States_bombing_of_Libya

 

The F-111A carried more iron bombs during Linebacker II - generally 24 - Mk 82s. So 12,000 lbs of ordinance.

 

image015.jpg

 

So it seems that 14,500 should do nicely...at least in terms of realistic operations. :D

 

Plus, since the 1980s it's been all about more accuracy and less collateral damage - so fewer bombs, but put them in the right place.

 

Any man who needs 31,000 lbs of bombs to do what others can do with 4,000 lbs...well he definitely should take what he needs. ;)

 

-Nick

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...