New Active missile for su 33 ?

[Kaliphtan]

Hello,

 

Since the SU-33 is almost never used, when i go to a server i just use it some secondes or minutes before obviously crashing into water ( i'm very bad at landing),

 

I propose to add some missiles that can add some dynamics and make him more versatile,

 

In this picture, in bottom right corner you can see some more missiles that exist for Su-33

and can be added in DCS world because, the current missiles aren't powerful enough to compete against some AIM-120 and others.

 

 

Thank you

[razo+r]

I'm not sure, but those missile can be added, though for upgraded SU-33, which ours isn't, so we won't be able to use them (from the realistic side)

 

from the modding sight, we can use the R-77, and load the other big missiles, but we can't use them.

[Frostie]

The real Su33 hasn't been upgraded to use R-77 or any of those anti-ship missiles, maybe for the Chinese variant but i'd rather ED do what Russia is doing, instead of upgrading Su33 get the better carrier based choice, the MiG-29K.

 

The anti-ship missile could be used previously, you could assign targets in the ME and engage them but that has been taken away in FC3.

[Kaliphtan]

Hello Frostie,

 

i'v found this in wikipedia :

 

"Sukhoi is working on a more advanced version, the Su-33K, a development to integrate the advanced technologies of the Su-35 fighters into the older Su-33 airframe", so yeah it has been upgraded. Even if it show that it's a project, i managed to get a picture of it, in use.

So razo+r "from the realistic side" it's ok :)

 

[Frostie]

There is a gargantuan difference between 'working on' and 'in service'.

Keep researching. ;)

[Xenovia]

I don't know what you mean by "the current missiles aren't powerful enough to compete against some AIM-120 and others". It all depends on your tactics and quite frankly, if you're going head on with an Eagle while flying a Flanker you're doing it wrong. So unless you know how to use the R-27ER's superior kinetic energy, you're as good as dead.

[probad]

fairly sure that's an image of a su-27kub.

Edited February 12, 2017 by probad

[Seaeagle]

Hello Frostie,

 

i'v found this in wikipedia :

 

"Sukhoi is working on a more advanced version, the Su-33K, a development to integrate the advanced technologies of the Su-35 fighters into the older Su-33 airframe", so yeah it has been upgraded. Even if it show that it's a project, i managed to get a picture of it, in use.

So razo+r "from the realistic side" it's ok :)

 

Well wikipedia.

 

That is an old photo from around 1999 and shows a Su-27KUB of which only 2 prototypes exist, so it is not "in use". Aside from the obvious(side-by-side cockpit) it also has various other airframe differences including new wings, so its not "the older Su-33 airframe" nor does it have much in common with the Su-35 - e.g. it had an upscaled version of the radar used in the MiG-29K/KUB.

 

The Su-33 has recently been moderately upgraded involving things like a new RWR, MFD and a new delivery system for unguided munitions, but there is no evidence that the upgrade included a new/upgraded radar and ability to use new weapons such as the ones you suggest.

[Oceandar]

Darn, I miss Flanker 2 days when you can hunt and shoot A2G missiles in MiG-29K and Su-33 :D

[Drona]

The real Su33 hasn't been upgraded to use R-77 or any of those anti-ship missiles, maybe for the Chinese variant but i'd rather ED do what Russia is doing, instead of upgrading Su33 get the better carrier based choice, the MiG-29K.

 

The MiG-29K would be a fine choice if ED decides to do it, but I'd be happy if ED starts working on the Su-33 PFM. If they add the latest upgrades to the Su-33 like the new MFD and the SVP-24 modification, it would awesome (its a bit far fetched, but one can only hope).

 

I'll be quite happy though with ED just modeling the peer-to-peer datalink capabilities in multiplayer for both flanker models and the Su-33's supposedly superior OLS.

[JunMcKill]

I do not expect anything favorable to Russian aircrafts from ED, honestly. Maybe a third party makes something good.

[DarkFire]

The MiG-29K would be a fine choice if ED decides to do it, but I'd be happy if ED starts working on the Su-33 PFM. If they add the latest upgrades to the Su-33 like the new MFD and the SVP-24 modification, it would awesome (its a bit far fetched, but one can only hope).

 

I'll be quite happy though with ED just modeling the peer-to-peer datalink capabilities in multiplayer for both flanker models and the Su-33's supposedly superior OLS.

 

Agreed. Having the SPV-24 would give the Su-33 an interestingly different capability to the standard -27, though I'd imagine that like all modern Russian military equipment it's highly classified.

[Maverick Su-35S]

I don't know what you mean by "the current missiles aren't powerful enough to compete against some AIM-120 and others". It all depends on your tactics and quite frankly, if you're going head on with an Eagle while flying a Flanker you're doing it wrong. So unless you know how to use the R-27ER's superior kinetic energy, you're as good as dead.

 

You can't beat an AIM-120C with R-27ER at this moment in DCS. Head on or through whatever magic tactics you can think of. The ER doesn't have much greater kinetic energy than the AIM-120C, just some 5-8% more, so that's not helping you much at all as long as the AIM-120C is chaff resistant while the ER loves chaff. It's virtually no match. One good F-15 player can fight against 2 same good Su-27/33 players armed with R-27ER and both will always end up either smashed by an AIM-120 or running away. After the Su-27/33s get into the no escape through maneuver range of the AIM-120C, the Eagle pilot makes fun of their ERs with chaff and turns while keeping them locked with TWS and puts them both on the run for their lives with the remaining AIM-120s (usually at least 4 left).

[Sajarov]

I do not expect anything favorable to Russian aircrafts from ED, honestly. Maybe a third party makes something good.

I agree. We will stick to engagements between 90's and 2000's American fighters vs old 80's Soviet fighters for years.:joystick:

Edited December 15, 2018 by Sajarov

[Maverick Su-35S]

So, who else has the feeling that everything which goes around in DCS is pro-western? Don't know why but I have the feeling that the F-15 is made to have an exaggerated/unrealistic lift and control at very high angles of attack on purpose (where it should normally have almost no lateral-directional control as well as a reduced lift).

 

All that the red side has at best is the J-11!

[Silver_Dragon]

To build a Russian aircraft, first need a licences from Military and a "approval" form russian government and military by the "Official Secrets Act of the Russian Federation". Remember the main develop team of DCS has on Moscow.

 

From the russian forum always has talk without a licence, they can build nothing module.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Silver_Dragon

[Mars Exulte]

SD, Mav here is one of the local conspiracy theorists that think ED is western biased and extensively reference gut feelings when debating aircraft handling +)

[falcon_120]

To build a Russian aircraft, first need a licences from Military and a "approval" form russian government and military by the "Official Secrets Act of the Russian Federation". Remember the main develop team of DCS has on Moscow.

 

From the russian forum always has talk without a licence, they can build nothing module.

You dont need a contract or license for a low fidelity module with a more advanced version, otherwise we would not be flying a SU27 o Mig29S. Maybe that is all we need for the time being.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Edited January 24, 2019 by falcon_120

[falcon_120]

You can't beat an AIM-120C with R-27ER at this moment in DCS. Head on or through whatever magic tactics you can think of. The ER doesn't have much greater kinetic energy than the AIM-120C, just some 5-8% more, so that's not helping you much at all as long as the AIM-120C is chaff resistant while the ER loves chaff. It's virtually no match. One good F-15 player can fight against 2 same good Su-27/33 players armed with R-27ER and both will always end up either smashed by an AIM-120 or running away. After the Su-27/33s get into the no escape through maneuver range of the AIM-120C, the Eagle pilot makes fun of their ERs with chaff and turns while keeping them locked with TWS and puts them both on the run for their lives with the remaining AIM-120s (usually at least 4 left).

That is constantly proven wrong in multiplayer competitions where VS flying 27s or 33s come on top of experienced eagle drivers. At the end you still have a magic datalink, a stupidly long range EOS and R27ET who does not behave as it should, so you can compensate the 120C.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Edited January 24, 2019 by falcon_120

[falcon_120]

I agree. We will stick to engagements between 90's and 2000's American fighters vs old 80's Soviet fighters for years.:joystick:

Who's fault if by 2000s russian was on a collapse and still using equipment from the 80s? You want ED to simulate a parallel reality where russia is flying modernided flankers that have entered service after 2005 and only in very small numbers? Why is that a good option? You can go play ace combat 7. Did americans have aim120 in 1999? Yes, did russians have r77 in 1999? Only in development, so that is what we have.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Edited January 24, 2019 by falcon_120

[Satarosa]

+1

 

Su-33 fighter officially entered service in August 1998

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree for more armements :

 

 

Kh-31A (Su-33 upgrade in 2006?)

25 km–103 km

It entered service in 1988 and was first displayed in public in 1991

 

 

Kh-25MP ??

(No idea if this missil fit on Su-33 with an upgrade?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

The others weapons like Kh-41, Kh-31P, R-77.. is only for the Su-33K variant..

Edited January 24, 2019 by Satarosa

[GGTharos]

Maverick Su-35S is definitely good at thread necromancy.

[Silver_Dragon]

You dont need a contract or license for a low fidelity module with a more advanced version, otherwise we would not be flying a SU27 o Mig29S. Maybe that is all we need for the time being.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

Are you sure that has "free"?..... intent build a Su-22 or a Tu-16 FC-3 without a license or russian military and sell them. Remember what happens with other "russian company" with intent put a B-17 and other ww2 arcrafts without "license" on a "old" simulator. Can ED put free a FC-3 F/A-18C / A-10C without review a contract?

Edited January 24, 2019 by Silver_Dragon

[falcon_120]

Are you sure that has "free"?..... intent build a Su-22 or a Tu-16 FC-3 without a license or russian military and sell them. Remember what happens with other "russian company" with intent put a B-17 and other ww2 arcrafts without "license" on a "old" simulator. Can ED put free a FC-3 F/A-18C / A-10C without review a contract?

I'm not a lawyer and probably there exist certain limits and bounds you can not surpass, but there are some play room to develop military systems without license from the manufacturer or the country. Some examples could be:

DCS: su27/mig29, AI units (both air, grounds and ses units).. does ED have a license or explicit permission from the russian goverment? If yes, i guess they can have it again limiting the simulation level.

Ace combat 7: in that game you see from su57 to F22s, at such a low fidelity level that it is ridicolous to think of a contract or permission.

BMS: there are several mods to fly russian planes, though this is not strictly a product since its free..

Flanker 2.5: this first game simulated advanced russian fighters when the company was much smaller and yet they could make those variants in a pc game.

 

Bottom line, a lawyer will tell you the limitations you cannot surpass but you can develop "arcade" sims.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[falcon_120]

One more thing i want to add, I dont buy the "russian goverment wont allow to make a full fidelity 4th gen russian fighter" argument. When i hear that what i really understand is:

 

-"Right now is not top priroty for us so as to put the needed resources and knock at the right doors during the needed amount of time to make it true, better any other day if the opportunity arise..."

 

Too many bright projects on the horizon to bear the nuances of russiam regulations, secrecy and what not

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk