Su-47 Berkut

[jonatron5]

as a lover and biased patriot of american aircraft, I can recognise an amazing machine when I see one. I understand its by no means a production model, and more of an experimental thing. but darn it looks too sexy not to play with

[DaveRindner]

Or NASA X-31B TVC

[wedge_one]

Or NASA X-31B TVC

 

if the mirage 2000 and the f-16 had a baby

[bkthunder]

Many years ago I started to model an X-31 for FS9. That never saw the light of day, other than a half finished 3d model and cockpit. By today's standards, it would be a totally unacceptable 3d model XD

[Fri13]

Or NASA X-31B TVC

 

YF-12, the aircraft that I got familiar through old G.I Joe cartoon magazine as it was modeled to one of them as Cobra "Night Raven" aircraft.

 

 

The Su-47 looks interesting, like many others, but it just looks sometimes that it really wouldn't have much benefits.

[carss]

How about also a Mig-1.44???

 

 

[jonatron5]

It wouldnt exactly fit withen the scope of the game but that picture reminded me of nasas old XB-70 supersonic nuclear bomber. its another plane that never got out of experimental stages (mainly becuase ICBMS are better weapon platforms) it itrestingly enough has a folding wing

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

YOU MUST THINK IN RUSSIAN..

[mattebubben]

If people whine now about Devs making aircraft like the F-5E,Mig-21 or the different trainer aircraft Imagine if some of the Devs decided to module Experimental aircraft with no combat capability what so ever xD.

[SkateZilla]

Su-47?

 

lol, Given the state of Classified Material for Russian Fighters, it'll never bee done,

 

You have a Better chance of seeing a F-302

[jonatron5]

Well i mean we obviously couldnt get first hand data. but we could make some darn good assumptions. we know what it looks like. we Know how much it wheighs, We know max thrust. from a purely physics standpoint thats your flight model.

 

now internal cockpit would be very hard to get ahold of. then again... it is russia... Since they decomishioned the thing and it never whent into production, it might not me that bad classified

[Buzzles]

Well i mean we obviously couldnt get first hand data. but we could make some darn good assumptions. we know what it looks like. we Know how much it wheighs, We know max thrust. from a purely physics standpoint thats your flight model.

now internal cockpit would be very hard to get ahold of. then again... it is russia... Since they decomishioned the thing and it never whent into production, it might not me that bad classified

 

:lol:

That information wouldn't even be enough to make a half correct SFM.

 

As an aside, even if we did have information like testing reports, construction bluprints etc.. we're talking about an early 90's prototype aircraft of which one (1) was ever made, never saw combat, probably was never ever flown with weapons and would have absolutely no place in DCS scenarios, unless someone wanted to re-create something akin to Firefox :D

Edited August 7, 2016 by Buzzles

[jonatron5]

i dont understand the issue, if I can build a model with the same mass distribution, to the real thing, the same shape as the real thing with correct variable control surfaces and scale it down to put it into a wind tunnel How can my data not be correct?

[FSKRipper]

i dont understand the issue, if I can build a model with the same mass distribution, to the real thing, the same shape as the real thing with correct variable control surfaces and scale it down to put it into a wind tunnel How can my data not be correct?

 

First of all you have not more than speculations about the weight and the thrust performance from which you can not even guess about the mass distribution. Neither are there enough data on avionics or the FCS nor are there any reliable Infos about the cockpit which is a must for a simulation. If you could bring us the official flight handbook it would be another point but I think you would be a very endangered Person and since ED is a russian company...no way

 

You would have more success about asking for DCS Mars Lander, Believe it or not, ED doesn't create fun modules based on pure speculation. The Su-47 would at best be a crazy idea flown from 3rd Person perspective and HAWX, here we are...

 

BTW, I have flown the F-22 in 1992 with a nice external model (for this time) but I have serious doubts about the grade of the Flight model...

Edited August 7, 2016 by FSKRipper

[cichlidfan]

The bottom line is that there is far more involved in making a DCS level simulation than you think.

[zerO_crash]

Because you know nothing. You don`t know at what angles different control surfaces move (relative to any parameter the computer takes into account on the real AC), you don`t know how weight is distributed (where is GC and AC), you don`t know what the FBW measures and how it reacts, you don`t know how much deflection there is to all the surfaces, you don`t know the AOA settings for different flight regimes.... the list is too long to even start mentioning the simplest of things. I see you are new, but trust the devs when they tell that it cannot be done.

 

And yes, aerodynamics is not something you can simply sit down and figure out by thinking, and it`s not as simple as creating a small model for wind tunnels if you don`t know pretty much every tiny spec there is to know about it.

[jonatron5]

you can certainatly make a good guess as to where the center of mass is. we know the density of the medium its moving through we have video of the the thing performing. we know the speeds its performing at we know at what cross section to the wind the plane has at all times during its manuvers.

 

youd have no idea what the distribution of the weight is. but for a flight model thats all you need is where its centered.

 

the absolute hardest part would be knowing how far each control surface moves and how tbe fllight computer intergrates that, which is honestly probbably the deal breaker on the accurate simulation, but id wager you could make a good estimate looking at previous generations of aircraft

 

it wouldnt be amazingly accurate(like dcs standards) but id bet money

 

 

they might not want to do it if they cant provide a 100% accurate experience. but i think you could get pretty close, which in my mind is better than not having one

[FSKRipper]

you can certainatly make a good guess as to where the center of mass is. we know the density of the medium its moving through we have video of the the thing performing. we know the speeds its performing at we know at what cross section to the wind the plane has at all times during its manuvers.

 

youd have no idea what the distribution of the weight is. but for a flight model thats all you need is where its centered.

 

the absolute hardest part would be knowing how far each control surface moves and how tbe fllight computer intergrates that, which is honestly probbably the deal breaker on the accurate simulation, but id wager you could make a good estimate looking at previous generations of aircraft

 

it wouldnt be amazingly accurate(like dcs standards) but id bet money

 

 

they might not want to do it if they cant provide a 100% accurate experience. but i think you could get pretty close, which in my mind is better than not having one

 

Even with detailed pictures or videos you can't guess flight characteristics. Only 20cm deviation of the center of mass can change everything. The "medium" changes with altitude, temperature, wind and humidity.

You said it yourself. It would not be accurate but more fun, so a nogo for DCS. As you again ignored, you don't know weights, speeds, avionics, control surfaces and fcs systems. You take some points from wiki and call it facts. You are still ignoring hat the other DCS modules are not made by guesses. They are made from hard data from existing relationships between actual pilots, pilot handbooks or in rare situations official agreements with military contractors.

 

If all what you want is a simple fun module to fly in DCS you could make a request in the Mods subthread but believe me, if you are asking for something less than 75% reality you are in the wrong place in this thread :music_whistling:

Edited August 7, 2016 by FSKRipper

[Svend_Dellepude]

... it itrestingly enough has a folding wing

 

Not excactly folding.

The wingtips on the XB-70 was used to trap the shockwave from the engine inlets in order to provide more lift, ''for free''.

[Svend_Dellepude]

 

youd have no idea what the distribution of the weight is. but for a flight model thats all you need is where its centered.

 

 

What about inertia?