Realistic or Balance - J-11A Datalink

[upyr1]

realistic

[QuiGon]

Just like with the D2M of the M2000C I would like to see this DL feature gone in order to keep it realistic.

[Hoarfrost]

I voted no, however in hindsight, I think it should be a server option. Depending on is the server is modeling earlier type aircraft or later type, depends on the scenario.

 

can then return datalink and MiG-29, create a vote) as a temporary version until the next modifications MiG. With the ability to block datalink on servers close to reality)

[oreste]

I am of the opinion that a country that is not at war may not want to spend too many resources on armaments and perhaps does not even want to alarm neighboring countries by arming itself too much, but I also think that their activities are mainly those of training and surveillance for which the data sharing system is especially useful to cover large areas such as those of China. They certainly have a Russian or home-made system, I can't think otherwise.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

What is Deka's opinion on the Peer to Peer and Fighter to Fighter modes of the J-11A?

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

 

It is a problem with the Su-27 & 33 in DCS but does Deka plan to rectify this with their coming J-11A MFI-55 update?

 

 

Would be much appreciated to see Deka succeed where ED could not, as it would also make for a more realistic depiction of its capabilities

Edited August 11, 2020 by TaxDollarsAtWork

[jojyrocks]

Why do we need to remove the ONLY redforce plane that has SOME advantage over the upcoming superb Bluforce planes?

 

 

Removing this will make the Blueforce overpowered...they got AWACS datalink plus better missiles.

 

 

 

I'm sure the LATE versions of J-11 has datalink modded into them.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

Why do we need to remove the ONLY redforce plane that has SOME advantage over the upcoming superb Bluforce planes?

 

 

Removing this will make the Blueforce overpowered...they got AWACS datalink plus better missiles.

 

 

 

I'm sure the LATE versions of J-11 has datalink modded into them.

Makes you think what was the original point of the vote

 

 

The J-11 had DL like a Su-27SK though at the start of its service China didn't have ground stations which could talk to it,

 

 

 

DCS does have those support assets which can talk to the avionics it already came with, if some one wished to model it without DL support the mission maker simply shouldn't give the J-11s side EWR or AWACS

[AeriaGloria]

Idunno, I could believe that Sukhoi sent Shenyang the kits without the datalink radios necessary, that’s what it sounded it like to me at the beginning of the thread

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

The first post implies its about the lack of DL stations / support not lacking the feature in the plane

[PLAAF]

The first post implies its about the lack of DL stations / support not lacking the feature in the plane

 

if it doesn't have Russian DL, does it have support for Chinese DL?

 

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

 

if it doesn't have Russian DL, does it have support for Chinese DL?

 

I think there is still much confusion

 

In summary at least how I interpreted what was said by the Devs,

In the earl 90s to maybe early 2000s very little to none EWR / AWACS that could feed the Su-27SK/J-11A DL was around in China though the capability remained on the planes

 

The problem arises in that the EWRs and AWACS regardless of compatibility feed the Flankers.

 

I feel an easy work around would be an option to disable TKS DL but keep (the yet to be implemented; wink wink nod nod Deka) fighter to fighter and peer to peer modes

Similar to how MIDS can be turned off in options

[nooneyouknow]

On 5/19/2018 at 4:19 AM, blokovchan said:

It wouldbe interesting to know how many of remove voters, are actually F15C pilots...

Just what I was thinking. Their cries to remove the 120c from the F-15C are deafening