Jump to content

New DCS Mig23 and Mig-19 Project


VIRUS_AT
 Share

Recommended Posts

well considering the american counterpart to the Kh23 radio guided missiled , the agm12 bullpop series had been developed and put into service more than a decade earlier, yea the kh66 and Kh23 were a bit late for thier time, if not arguably obsolete when they entered service.

 

Well, you are comparing two different war doctrines. Just because americans used it earlier, doesn`t meant that they were obsolete in USSR. Both had great accuracy (KH-66/23 and Bullpup). Also notice how we in USSR had S-24 and later on S-25 missiles. Their accuracy was quite incredible for ranges up to 3-4 km. Us had nothing of the kind. At the end, you cannot really compare apples and oranges, and different tasks they have. (Although similar here)


Edited by zerO_crash

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, you are comparing two different war doctrines. Just because americans used it earlier, doesn`t meant that they were obsolete in USSR. Both had great accuracy (KH-66/23 and Bullpup). Also notice how we in USSR had S-24 and later on S-25 missiles. Their accuracy was quite incredible for ranges up to 3-4 km. Us had nothing of the kind. At the end, you cannot really compare apples and oranges, and different tasks they have. (Although similar here)

 

yes you can compare them, if they are intended for a comparable task in question

 

its just that in most cases, the USSR was behind US in avionics and guided weaponry. so they had to make do with different ( more crude) weapons for a similar tasks, in comparison what US would have had at the same time frame ( or earlier).

 

SAM threats had grown considerably by the time Kh23 was in service in the early 70s vs when the bullpop came around at the end of the 50s, when low AAA would have been a bigger threat, and early SAM missiles like the sa2 were easy to spot, due to smoke trail and not that hard to dodge.

 

the bullpop had subjectivly good accuracy, but its problem was lack of damage against strategic targets like bridges, and effect of stress in practical combat scenarios. hell on paper and range tests aim9bs performed well agaisnt level flying drones. so even the aim9b looked spectacular to the top brass , but actual combat proved otherwise, for both e the bullpop and Aim9B. US had the Vietnam experience to learn on. so they knew agm12 had many limitations , hence the need for more sophisticated precsion guidance systems, and ones that could be used from a safer distance from ground units


Edited by Kev2go

 

 

 

Build:

 

 

 

 

 

Windows 10 64 bit,

 

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Noctua NH14S cooler),Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 32gb ram (2666 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, some bad news:

 

After discussions with TFC/ED about the MiG-23, we have discovered this choice is unavailable, we are sorry for all the hype we created around this aircraft and our involvement in creating a DCS version, but it does not means that the team behind it wont be in charge of another projects immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, some bad news:

 

After discussions with TFC/ED about the MiG-23, we have discovered this choice is unavailable, we are sorry for all the hype we created around this aircraft and our involvement in creating a DCS version, but it does not means that the team behind it wont be in charge of another projects immediately.

 

Can confirm the Mig-19P, Prowler111?

More news to the front

My Rig: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Eight-Core  3.60 GHz / Crosshair VI Hero / Corsair H115i / 48 GB DDR4 RAM Vergance RGB Pro / GTX-1080 8 GB RAM / HD 1Tb / SSD 2Tb/2x1Tb / Warthog / 2 MDF / TFPR / Track Ir V / Logitech G633

DCS: Roadmap (unofficial): https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

DCS: List of Vacant models: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4076891#post4076891

Silver_Dragon Youtube

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, some bad news:

 

After discussions with TFC/ED about the MiG-23, we have discovered this choice is unavailable, we are sorry for all the hype we created around this aircraft and our involvement in creating a DCS version, but it does not means that the team behind it wont be in charge of another projects immediately.

 

Does that mean another 3rd party is underway with development for this module? Don't want to assume anything.

Intel i5-9600K @ 3.7GHz

Gigabyte Z370XP SLI Mobo

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2070 8GB 256-Bit GDDR6(Assume the latest driver version)

Thermaltake Water 3.0 Certified Liquid Cooling System

Windows 10 Professional

Oculus Rift-S /TrackIR 5 in case VR dies

Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog w/ Thrustmaster T-Flight Rudder Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes you can compare them, if they are intended for a comparable task in question

 

its just that in most cases, the USSR was behind US in avionics and guided weaponry. so they had to make do with different ( more crude) weapons for a similar tasks, in comparison what US would have had at the same time frame ( or earlier).

 

SAM threats had grown considerably by the time Kh23 was in service in the early 70s vs when the bullpop came around at the end of the 50s, when low AAA would have been a bigger threat, and early SAM missiles like the sa2 were easy to spot, due to smoke trail and not that hard to dodge.

 

the bullpop had subjectivly good accuracy, but its problem was lack of damage against strategic targets like bridges, and effect of stress in practical combat scenarios. hell on paper and range tests aim9bs performed well agaisnt level flying drones. so even the aim9b looked spectacular to the top brass , but actual combat proved otherwise, for both e the bullpop and Aim9B. US had the Vietnam experience to learn on. so they knew agm12 had many limitations , hence the need for more sophisticated precsion guidance systems, and ones that could be used from a safer distance from ground units

 

No you cannot compare them because as said, USSR had other weapons (rockets) which were meant to be used in many cases where US would otherwise use bullpup because they had

nothing else. Also military doctrine comes into question in the form of what`s cost effective, and what you wish to use much money for. I sense a bit of subjectivity in your statements, and as such will not discuss this, because you don`t seem to want to see the difference.

 

(If you wish to argue for US having better equipment e.g. avionics than USSR, then you are simply making a big mistake of neglecting your opponent. E.g. US could never match USSR`s GCI equipment. In fact, even to this day, MiG-31 continues the tradition of the best intercept capabilities in the world. What USSR was doing in 1960`s, the US only figured out a dacade later. Some things might be backwards, but others are ahead. Without specifics, this argument is dead.)

 

SA-2 relatively easy to dodge? Mhm, tell that to the dead US pilot and his U2 in 1960`s. I`m sure he would agree. And he had altitude, the best position to be put in. Or maybe ask Israeli`s back during Six Day War. Effectively shot down so many Israeli fighters, that all were restricted from going even close to there. (Reason Egypt + Syria lost was that Egypt made a move under pressure, which moved their forces out of Sa-2 umbrella, otherwise Israeli jets might as well drive on the ground and fight as such.) I won`t believe in anything you claim here, because world history facts point all against you. Where did you even come up with that nonsense!? Or do you maybe have any info on Sa-2? (Don`t link wiki, won`t bother reading, otherwise if you even believe this non-primary source, we could make an F22, or Pak FA, no?)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wanted to do the MiG 23 and its unavailable for them to do, dont read anymore into it than this.

 

What does this mean though? You can't tell us not to read more into a project a huge portion of the community was hype for.

 

Why can't ED come out and explain why this project was not available?

 

First, an FC3 tier mod gets cancelled out of no where, and now an actual module is cancelled days after it was announced.

 

I want an official response from ED as to why these things happen. I think we are owed some sort of explanation.

 

If its Putin him self saying "no modern Russian jets" then we should know this. People get hyped and then have their dreams crushed by the most vague and unspecific reasons.

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's unavailable and we have to suck it up because there will not be any further explanation, and RAZBAM is of course not to be blamed because they are the best company at communication.

 

Oh I'm sorry, i missed the part where you were Eagle Dynamics.

 

What is the point of the forums if we aren't allowed to discuss things?

 

I don't think you understand the point of forums my dude. You should probably figure it out before posting again.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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