After the Tomcat?

[FoxAlfa]

I would love the Fulcrum,but lets be honest, the best option to make everybody happy would be SU-30MK, twin seat, can do superiority, and do ground attack and interdiction, is Red Air, has fox 3's, can fit in to all scenarios (middle east, far east, black sea...) not as sensitive as Su-30SM... and a beautiful aircraft!!!

 

Edited March 29, 2019 by FoxAlfa

[RDDL405]

I would love the Fulcrum,but lets be honest, the best option to make everybody happy would be SU-30MK, twin seat, can do superiority, and do ground attack and interdiction, is Red Air, has fox 3's, can fit in to all scenarios (middle east, far east, black sea...) not as sensitive as Su-30SM... and a beautiful aircraft!!!

 

I swear if we got an SU-30 of any kind, immediately we'd get a damn Sol Squadron skin...

[DocSigma]

Wags said that it's near impossible to get the avionics and flight data to do anywhere near a modern red jet as a result of EDs location in Moscow. Were already getting a mig23 from razbam and maybe data on a mig25 is possible, but my vote goes to the Tornado.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[carss]

If we were to go into specifics for Su-30s, how about the Su-30M2? Not only is it like all the above but just a tad but upgraded as well just enough maybe to counter Razbam's F-15E which I believe is also an upgraded Strike Eagle from 2007 not the early 90s model

 

[Badger1-1]

Wags said that it's near impossible to get the avionics and flight data to do anywhere near a modern red jet as a result of EDs location in Moscow. Were already getting a mig23 from razbam and maybe data on a mig25 is possible, but my vote goes to the Tornado.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I think he also said that a 3rd party would not have these difficulties as they are not based in russia...I could be wrong

[CarbonFox]

I think if a 4th gen Red aircraft could be done, it would have been done already. I think the most sophisticated you're going to get are late 3rd generation like the MiG-23MLA and possibly a MiG-25PD. I'd love to see the MiG-27K personally. But for aircraft more aligned with where HB seems to be going, certainly looking forward to a flyable A-6E SWIP Intruder and hopefully, the F-14D Super Tomcat down the road.

[SWE-Timberwolf]

I think he also said that a 3rd party would not have these difficulties as they are not based in russia...I could be wrong

 

Yea, I remember hearing him say that in a podcast a few weeks ago.

[dSAF Dancer]

they would have less legal problems using them, but still the same problems getting them, as far as I have heard

[Ice707]

I would love to see the B-1B or B-52H

 

The Intruder is confirmed to be done by Razbam afaik

Bring on the B-52H!!!!!!!

We need this BOMBER!!!

[Shadow_1stVFW]

 

Don't @ me

[TLTeo]

^ that was addressed in an interview by Wags here: https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

 

 

basically, as a Russian-based company ED would have serious trouble in making a full fidelity Russian aircraft, but 3rd party devs that are based outside of the country (for whatever reason) would not be as limited.

[Oceandar]

^ that was addressed in an interview by Wags here: https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

 

 

basically, as a Russian-based company ED would have serious trouble in making a full fidelity Russian aircraft, but 3rd party devs that are based outside of the country (for whatever reason) would not be as limited.

I never get it. NATO probably knows most of the Russian hardware secret anyway not to mention the old one like MiG-29A or Su-27S? , really still not allowed to make those jet ? I wish I could get Putin on the phone lol.

 

On the other hand, I don't understand why US allowed ED to make Hornet module for example, as its still in service in few countries AFAIK.

[QuiGon]

I never get it. NATO probably knows most of the Russian hardware secret anyway not to mention the old one like MiG-29A or Su-27S? , really still not allowed to make those jet ? I wish I could get Putin on the phone lol.

 

On the other hand, I don't understand why US allowed ED to make Hornet module for example, as its still in service in few countries AFAIK.

You don't understand why Russia doesn't allow it, but on the other hand you don't understand why the US does allow it? Isn't that a bit contradicting itself?

Edited April 3, 2019 by QuiGon

[Oceandar]

You don't understand why Russia doesn't allow it, but on the other hand you don't understand why the US does allow it? Isn't that a bit contradicting?

Heh... really? WTH happened to me today lol

[pepin1234]

^ that was addressed in an interview by Wags here: https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

 

 

basically, as a Russian-based company ED would have serious trouble in making a full fidelity Russian aircraft, but 3rd party devs that are based outside of the country (for whatever reason) would not be as limited.

 

As Mi-8 and Mi-24, Yak-52 are Russian. They were made or announced by ED so there is no reason to keep telling lies everybody here.

 

All this show is more marketing/political than anything else. We are not stupid...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=187698

Edited April 3, 2019 by pepin1234

[TLTeo]

Yes, ED and every other 3rd party dev is out to spite you personally. Clearly. Obviously. It's all a conspiracy. We also never went to the Moon and the Earth is flat.

 

I agree as much as anyone that Mikoyan/Sukhoi being as tight-lipped as they seem to be is weird considering, for example, that the Mig-29 is flown by NATO countries and the Su-27 by Ukraine, but to invoke pointless conspiracy theories and complain about "lies" when you have no way of proving that these statements are false is utterly ridiculous.

 

Also, the Mi-8 and Yak-52 are hardly as critical an asset as the Fulcrum and Flanker, and the Hind is not in DCS yet.

Edited April 3, 2019 by TLTeo

[pepin1234]

You still don’t clarify nothing in your post. Honestly speaking.

[TLTeo]

Right, let me make it easy for you. The options are

 

 

a) both ED and 3rd party developers have decided that they all hate Redfor jets and people that want them, and are thus conspiring them to not make anything more modern than, say, a Flogger, to the point where they will lie about why they wouldn't make such modules

or alternatively

b) making modules in general is complex and, per ED's official stance, making Redfor modules doubly so and particularly if one company is not based in Russia, hence why they have not tried it.

 

 

Given that conspiracy theories are utterly stupid I personally aim for option b) and maintain that anyone claiming option a) is wrong, misinformed and not sig nificantly better informed than your average conspiracy theorist. I'm claiming that the fact that widely exported, non vital assets like the Mi-8 and Yak-52 being ingame is NOT proof in any way shape or form that option a) should be favoured over b).

 

 

 

 

Is that clearer for you?

[Zius]

I never get it. NATO probably knows most of the Russian hardware secret anyway not to mention the old one like MiG-29A or Su-27S? , really still not allowed to make those jet ?

 

 

Well, the MiG-29A and Su-27S could still contain some equipment that's also on recent versions of these aircraft and still classified. Although I assume that NATO knows every last bit of the MiG-29A at least as they were/are in use by several NATO members.

 

 

But this point of components still being classified was the reason why Heatblur made the AJS version of the Viggen and not the more advanced Jaktviggen version, as some equipment of that version is still used in the Gripen.

 

 

 

As Mi-8 and Mi-24, Yak-52 are Russian. They were made or announced by ED so there is no reason to keep telling lies everybody here.

Well, the Mi-8 and Yak-52 are old tech and also in very widespread civilian use around the world. So that's not the same as the MiG-29, even A version. Although I guess that the MiG-29A could be considered on a similar level as the Mi-24. The Ka-50 is of course more advanced, but it was developed in a different era, it was the first DCS module.

 

All this show is more marketing/political than anything else. We are not stupid...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=187698

 

 

What would be the marketing advantage of not having a suitable Opfor/Redfor fighter for the Hornet??? I think the lack of suitable opposition should be a big headache for ED, especially in multiplayer.

 

 

Maybe they see the success of the Hornet and doubt that they can make the same money with a MiG-29A and they may even be correct. On the other hand, if the choice is between a F-8 or A-6 (both quite obscure/outdated/uninspiring aircraft in my humble opinion), or even the Viggen (which I think is fantastic, but is still rather niche as it was only used by one neutral country) and the most widespread modern(ish) Red fighter, the MiG-29, the choice which one will sell better is not so difficult in my opinion.

 

 

b) making modules in general is complex and, per ED's official stance, making Redfor modules doubly so and particularly if one company is not based in Russia, hence why they have not tried it.

Good point, but I still think that a MiG-29A should be possible using public sources. And I also think that both the MiG-29A and the Su-27S would be a great commercial succes and therefore worth the effort.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Zius

[TLTeo]

Good point, but I still think that a MiG-29A should be possible using public sources. And I also think that both the MiG-29A and the Su-27S would be a great commercial succes and therefore worth the effort.

 

 

I agree. It's very likely that in doubt, ED is just erring on the side of extreme caution (which is fine by me to be honest).

 

And I would SO buy a full fidelity Fulcrum. Love that jet.

[Silver_Dragon]

As Mi-8 and Mi-24, Yak-52 are Russian. They were made or announced by ED so there is no reason to keep telling lies everybody here.

 

All this show is more marketing/political than anything else. We are not stupid...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=187698

 

The Mi-8 and Yak-52 coming from private projects (first a trainer flight simulator bulder by BSK with the AVIA company and the second from a private project), the Mi-24 was a BSK project, can from by the same "company" from the Mi-8. I dont see lies here.

 

About "after" the tomcat, Heatblur was very clear.... (A advanced jet with multicrew and ground radar)

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3538913&postcount=1263

Edited April 3, 2019 by Silver_Dragon

[pepin1234]

Right, let me make it easy for you. The options are

 

 

a) both ED and 3rd party developers have decided that they all hate Redfor jets and people that want them, and are thus conspiring them to not make anything more modern than, say, a Flogger, to the point where they will lie about why they wouldn't make such modules

or alternatively

b) making modules in general is complex and, per ED's official stance, making Redfor modules doubly so and particularly if one company is not based in Russia, hence why they have not tried it.

 

 

Given that conspiracy theories are utterly stupid I personally aim for option b) and maintain that anyone claiming option a) is wrong, misinformed and not sig nificantly better informed than your average conspiracy theorist. I'm claiming that the fact that widely exported, non vital assets like the Mi-8 and Yak-52 being ingame is NOT proof in any way shape or form that option a) should be favoured over b).

 

 

 

 

Is that clearer for you?

 

 

You forgot option C and D. Try again tomorrow when you calm down.

[Kev2go]

Even if ED cant make a modernish russian module, A 3rd party located out of Russia doesnt have this restriction.

 

Something that wags stated in the podcast in essence this tells us that if a 3rd party wane they could make Russian jets. SO with that in mind id think a Mig29A would be a feasible to expect. IT has seen widespread export users some by former Warpact members now part of Nato, and is privately owned even in the US, aNd there is plenty of public data on it.

[FSKRipper]

OK folks. start your business. :pilotfly:

 

Sacrifice some hundred hours and some of your money to get your hands on the FM data from the private owned MiGs. Should be a matter of some hundred flight hour, not more

 

After you did all the programming stuff, the avionics and the artwork (should be only 2-3 years of your sparetime) you can go to early access and get a full load of BS and insults for your work from people already complaining about the ED PFM's.

 

Is that not a good reason to become a 3rd Party dev :thumbup:

[Kev2go]

OK folks. start your business. :pilotfly:

 

Sacrifice some hundred hours and some of your money to get your hands on the FM data from the private owned MiGs. Should be a matter of some hundred flight hour, not more

 

After you did all the programming stuff, the avionics and the artwork (should be only 2-3 years of your sparetime) you can go to early access and get a full load of BS and insults for your work from people already complaining about the ED PFM's.

 

Is that not a good reason to become a 3rd Party dev :thumbup:

 

 

man why bother getting out of bed with that attitude.

 

Wy bother doing anything for a passion or hell even for a living? This can happen in all lines of work. People will critique you, and its all OK if its fair, constructive, or in this case if it comes from Testers or those doing bug reports. Because even a developer can make a legitimate mistake that would require fixing if enough documentation is provided for bug report. ANything else may as well just be background noise. Haters gonna hate.There are always a vocal minority that are just salty trolls.

 

It should be welcome that your customer base is interested in seeing the product suceed vs just packing up thier bags ( so to speak) and leaving.

Edited April 6, 2019 by Kev2go