DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion

[mattebubben]

Some more Video of this Beautiful bird =).

 

And this time its an old video from the AJ 37s early years

(Video taken in 1975)

 

[ame]

[/ame]

 

First 1 minute and 28 seconds are on the Viggen.

Edited March 5, 2016 by mattebubben

[T0x1s]

Thanks Cobra and Mattebubben :)

 

I really hope the 30mm pods will get some badass sound :D

[amb]

Sorry about asking again, but did anyone get a chance to grab a copy of the flight manual before the links went dead? Would be awesome if someone could re-post them somewhere else.

[MA_Seyo]

These links still work:

 

SFI AJS37 Part 1, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVedU5xVUR6al8tTUE/view?pref=2&pli=1

 

SFI AJ37 Part 2, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVeNzI2a3laZnBiZXM/view?pref=2&pli=1

[amb]

These links still work:

 

SFI AJS37 Part 1, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVedU5xVUR6al8tTUE/view?pref=2&pli=1

 

SFI AJ37 Part 2, chapter 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bCDRcq9BVeNzI2a3laZnBiZXM/view?pref=2&pli=1

 

Awesome! Thanks a bunch!

[Frisco1522]

I for one would love it if they would make a Viggen sub-thread already! I'm sure that by this time, it deserves it's own home on the ED forums. Sure it's not out yet, but neither is the F-14. (Or Gazelle, or BO, or 90% of VEAO's aircraft :D)

 

Frisco1522

[mattebubben]

I for one would love it if they would make a Viggen sub-thread already! I'm sure that by this time, it deserves it's own home on the ED forums. Sure it's not out yet, but neither is the F-14. (Or Gazelle, or BO, or 90% of VEAO's aircraft :D)

 

Frisco1522

 

But the difference is those modules have been officially announced.

 

the Viggen has not.

 

The info was leaked and later on Leatherneck acknowledged that it was true.

 

But they also said that the Official announcement would wait.

 

And We will very likely not get the dedicated thread or a Viggen tab on the leatherneck website until they have made their official announcement.

 

Without the leak its likely they would have announced it already.

 

But now since everyone knows about it already i think they are waiting for it to be nearly complete before the official announcement with Video Footage / Pictures.

[Hook47]

But the difference is those modules have been officially announced.

 

the Viggen has not.

 

The info was leaked and later on Leatherneck acknowledged that it was true.

 

But they also said that the Official announcement would wait.

 

And We will very likely not get the dedicated thread or a Viggen tab on the leatherneck website until they have made their official announcement.

 

Without the leak its likely they would have announced it already.

 

But now since everyone knows about it already i think they are waiting for it to be nearly complete before the official announcement with Video Footage / Pictures.

 

I bet to differ on your last point, I bet the leak had no bearing on announcement plans. We will still be in the dark hanging out on the speculation thread without it, I assure you :)

[mattebubben]

I bet to differ on your last point, I bet the leak had no bearing on announcement plans. We will still be in the dark hanging out on the speculation thread without it, I assure you :)

 

Im pretty sure they would have made a limited announcement by now without the leak.

 

Just to let ppl know.

 

But then again Cobra is a bit of a troll that likes to Torture us poor fans ^^

 

So when he controls things you never know.

[Hook47]

:pilotfly:

Im pretty sure they would have made a limited announcement by now without the leak.

 

Just to let ppl know.

 

But then again Cobra is a bit of a troll that likes to Torture us poor fans ^^

 

So when he controls things you never know.

 

Based on the self imposed criteria for announcing as per Cobra in prior posts, and the fact that the Viggen fell behind the ancitipated year of announcement and release, I don't think LNS would have or will announce the Viggen until it's pretty much done. I think that's been the idea from the onset really. I don't think the leak made any real difference except ease some community frustrations :lol:

 

FWIW Cobra please correct me if I'm wrong, but if I know LNS I do not think I am :)

[RagnarDa]

This is one of the very few times i actually think that gameplay should go over realism, short salvo mode for the rocket pods would be very useful in DCS while full salvo mode is likely to make me choose other options for the air to ground role as wasting 2 full pods on a single target (10-12? rockets) when most targets would require 1/3rd of that. DCS is all about sniping due to well fragmentation not being amazingly represented.

 

That is just my opinion however, i can totally see why people want the purist way too.

 

 

Ok it's implemented now.

[Skjold]

Ok it's implemented now.

 

o.O That is awesome. I assume it will be optional (kinda like the unrealistic heater pipper for the MiG-21?).

[Farlander]

o.O That is awesome. I assume it will be optional (kinda like the unrealistic heater pipper for the MiG-21?).

 

Really hope it is optional... And i hope servers can choose what will be used..

[Skjold]

Really hope it is optional... And i hope servers can choose what will be used..

 

I agree but there is already numerous unrealistic options in the game.

 

All WW2 Planes? (Auto Rudder)

Ka-50, Mi-8, UH-1 (Rudder Trim)

MiG-21 (Simplified Engine Managment, Unrealistic ASP IR A-A Missile Reticle)

[Farlander]

Putting myself in the purist section for this module I prefer to have options open in games for all kinds of What-if scenarios - purist level comes from mission building, not what Tools we have in the toolbox.

 

Way too often "realism-fanatics" demand that there should be no what-if's possible, I just can't understand how they Think (there's a few examples in the F-14 section and way too many in ArmA where I do most of my addon and mission creations).

 

Well, problem is when a server cannot set what will be used.. as far as i know, you can run unrealistic pipper on the mig-21 on any server, and they can't control it... Now, that might not be a huge problem, but if one mode offers an advantage over the other in multiplayer people tend to use those. Not because it is realistic or more fun in itself, but they feel they are able to do more with them.. For example with the large imposters, everyone knew they could make the game a bit more realistic looking at range by setting it to anything less than maximum enlarged, but it would set them at a disadvantage, so most did not. (discussion for another time, we all know it has problems at close range etc... not now)

 

I cannot care less what people use on singleplayer, but i want to have options decided by the server in multiplayer.

 

EDIT:

 

Seems im wrong, you can set the pipper to be static server side..

Edited March 13, 2016 by Farlander

[Farlander]

I agree but there is already numerous unrealistic options in the game.

 

All WW2 Planes? (Auto Rudder)

Ka-50, Mi-8, UH-1 (Rudder Trim)

MiG-21 (Simplified Engine Managment, Unrealistic ASP IR A-A Missile Reticle)

 

see above :) i'm all for it as long as it can be restricted for multiplayer by the server/mission designer :)

[mattebubben]

Ok it's implemented now.

 

Any Clarification of how it will work.

 

Will it be simply one of those where if you hold down the release button you will fire the entire pods but fast taps will only launch 1-3 rockets a tap.

 

As that feels the easiest way to do it since if the Viggen did not have salvo fire it would not have any switches /buttons for it.

Edited March 7, 2016 by mattebubben

[Schmidtfire]

DCS is all about sniping due to well fragmentation not being amazingly represented.

 

I agree that fragmentation isn't well represented, however, If you wan't to play "sniper", use another aircraft, or Rb05 ;) Don't dumb down modules, use the right module for the job instead. Viggen is an "one pass, haul ass" aircraft. The solution is flying in larger groups with a combination of bombs, rockets and missiles. Embrace it :thumbup:

 

(I guess some things has too be changed for gameplay, but don't whine later when there is no option to change it to how it's supposed to be)

[Skjold]

I agree that fragmentation isn't well represented, however, If you wan't to play "sniper", use another aircraft, or Rb05 ;) Don't dumb down modules, use the right module for the job instead. Viggen is an "one pass, haul ass" aircraft. The solution is flying in larger groups with a combination of bombs, rockets and missiles. Embrace it :thumbup:

 

(I guess some things has too be changed for gameplay, but don't whine later when there is no option to change it to how it's supposed to be)

 

I know the doctrine of the Viggen well, and as i specifically said in my post: It is just my opinion and i understand where the purists (aka you) are coming from. I play DCS to have fun just as much as i play it for for realism and it was my opinion that the Viggen would be much more fun with shorter salvos. I mean, it is not like it is outside the realms of possibility. It should actually be a fairly minor modification to the wiring to be able to do that, it's not like i am asking to have AMRAAM's on a AJS 37.

 

I also am of the strong opinion that it should be 1. Optional 2. Turned OFF by default.

 

I would love to embrace the doctrine of the Viggen in organised events or major PVP events such as blue flag, but in the other style more "relaxed" servers such as 104th (moving mud on that is basicly having the secret service as your bodyguard, no enemy fighters can come close) and open conflict i will loiter with the aircraft. I am a filthy casual, i know ;P

Edited March 7, 2016 by Skjold

[Enduro14]

I agree that fragmentation isn't well represented, however, If you wan't to play "sniper", use another aircraft, or Rb05 ;) Don't dumb down modules, use the right module for the job instead. Viggen is an "one pass, haul ass" aircraft. The solution is flying in larger groups with a combination of bombs, rockets and missiles. Embrace it :thumbup:

 

(I guess some things has too be changed for gameplay, but don't whine later when there is no option to change it to how it's supposed to be)

 

I think what he is saying is the current terminal modeling of ordinance and vehicle/infantry damage modeling is pretty bad. If it was modeled better i think the whole ttp of blowing your load in one pass would be more effective with this aircraft or any other in dcs world. The issue is the lethality of the bombs and rockets needs to be corrected as well as the damage modelling.

Until then an aircraft like the viggen will be sub par on even its mass amounts of weapon drop on one pass SOP.

 

But their is hope

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2689604&postcount=1

[amb]

I don't care a huge amount about this - I think it's kind of fine either way, but I just want to say that things like this makes me worry a little bit, because it's a very slippery slope... If you start doing some modifications to an aircrafts capabilities for gameplay reasons then exactly where do you draw the line?

 

I just want DCS to stay a true simulator and not go the way of implementing unrealistic things for the sake of gameplay/balance. Call me a purist I guess. But like I said, I'm sort of okay with this modification, I just don't want this to be used as justification for more compromises regarding realism...

[Schmidtfire]

I also play for fun, and seeing a lot of rockets leaving my aircraft is a lot of fun :thumbup:

Anyways, Im not here to pick a fight. Love the Viggen and would like it to behave the way it should, thats all. I think that salvo is great to have, but having no option but to use all rockets in one pass also provides a fun challenge.

 

I don't know of this salvo setting will be optional on release and that is why Im a bit concerned when "gameplay features" are added. This is a minor issue, but as amb wrote, It's a slippery slope...

 

Either way, I think that this will be a great module.

[mattebubben]

I also play for fun, and seeing a lot of rockets leaving my aircraft is a lot of fun :thumbup:

Anyways, Im not here to pick a fight. Love the Viggen and would like it to behave the way it should, thats all. I think that salvo is great to have, but having no option but to use all rockets in one pass also provides a fun challenge.

 

I don't know of this salvo setting will be optional on release and that is why Im a bit concerned when "gameplay features" are added. This is a minor issue, but as amb wrote, It's a slippery slope...

 

Either way, I think that this will be a great module.

 

It kinda depends on how they do the Salvo feature though.

 

If they make it that only 1-2 rockets fire each press then that i have something against.

 

But if it launches all rockets if you hold the fire button (lets say for a second)

 

and it only launches 1-3 rockets if you very quickly tap and release that is something i would be more alright with.

 

And aslong as they make it optional (as i would probably not use it atleast not to start with) i have no problem with it.

 

And the rockets would mostly be used against formations / columns of vehicles where the spread of the rockets would result in dmg.

 

And also since a rocket attack from low altitude would be done at a very shallow dive angle the rockets would spread over a longer area (hit further apart)

 

And i really hope they give the rockets a proper black smoke =>.

 

(ive linked this clip before but il do it again)

 

[ame]

[/ame]

 

Rocket attack starts at around 1:44

 

If the rockets look this awsome ingame that alone will be good enough of a reason for me to use them xD

Edited March 7, 2016 by mattebubben

[Skjold]

Yes it is a slippery slope but it was handled well with the MiG-21 in my opinion Kh-66 Grom can quite simply be removed from the arsenal, as that from what i understand was not used on the Bis but the radar was able to guide it and the heater pipper is optional - the thing that changes position on the HUD to the position of the enemy aircraft with a heater lock.

 

I would never support radar guided missiles on an AJS as an extreme example but this to me is basicly a minor field mod to the rocket pod system, nothing drastic. The AGM-65B was never operated by the SwAF either, but for gameplay reasons they will be included and yeah Schmidtfire i'm sure we will have the opportunity to continue this discussion somewhere else.

 

On topic yes, the rocket smoke look awesome in that video and i will keep patiently waiting for the Viggen. When this beast comes out im afraid most of my other planes will be gathering dust.

[mattebubben]

When this beast comes out im afraid most of my other planes will be gathering dust.

 

You mean they will all be eating the Viggens dust ...