Any chance of a proper modern Russian fighter DCS ?

[Cristofer]

What are you guys talking about? We got the Mig 28.

[pepin1234]

 

MIG-25 (FOXBAT)

MUCH MUCH FAST 2,83 MA 3200km/h uuuaaaaaaaaooooooooo veryfast

 

This.

[moco]

If ED announced an Su-27SM I would probably never fly another module again. I love the flanker family but I'd prefer a full module over the FC3 that we currently have, plus like the original post was about I'd want a flanker that I'd feel confident taking into battle against the modern NATO fighters we're getting (F-14B, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-15E).

[Baco]

This is beating a dead horse LOL.

 

I believe that what ED Should do is provide more 70s Blue planes to have a counterpart to what red we have now. I truly don´t like the Beyond 1990 jets... And I am so sorry they abandoned the 50s and 60s... still no sim has focused on that time frame witch by the way was the most awesome cold war period, with new designs, new tech and doctrines.... when pilots made the difference not over sophisticated computers, FBW and super sensors....

 

Give me the 23, the 17, give me SU 17´s. Give me F 100, give me 105s give me Phantom II´s

[AeriaGloria]

However they don’t often address the grey line about 3rd parties doing it. Eventually a third party is gonna say, we see a lot of demand for (ex) Sukhoi 27SM(insert other Russian fighter). We wants to make it and think we can make a sophisticated systems model that gives an authentic and immersive feel. If this company can show ED the product meets their standards, how can they turn them down?

[pawea]

Young teens and gamers have zero interest in old dinosaurs man they want modern fighters theres a reason the Ace Combat series sells over a million units consistently every release ok i'm not comparing DCS with Ace Combat but it proves a point there is money to be made for sure,why waste resources developing out dated stuff that will only have a small niche customer base......

[Kev2go]

Young teens and gamers have zero interest in old dinosaurs man they want modern fighters theres a reason the Ace Combat series sells over a million units consistently every release ok i'm not comparing DCS with Ace Combat but it proves a point there is money to be made for sure,why waste resources developing out dated stuff that will only have a small niche customer base......

 

because for a study simulation level

 

A) probably not enough documentation for an accurate enough simulation of Modernized Mig29s' Su27s's or Next generation jets and thier avionics.

 

B) Draconian Security laws in Russia. Its not about getting Liscense from the Defense contractor. It has been stated in the past when the at one point ED considered an Su27SM scrapped that idea after realising They likely wouldn't have gotten permission, and didn't want to risk breaching any laws.

 

 

The closest thing to a REDFORCE modern Multi mission, Glass pit jet will be Dekka Ironworks JF17 thunder for the foreseeable future

Edited October 6, 2018 by Kev2go

[mytai01]

We don't have the latest equipment on the US jets...so we don't have the newest the US has to offer either. Also, the Flaming Cliffs aircraft are simplified, so none of them really count for accuracy...

[Rushx]

Incoming J 11A upgrade!

 

 

Post from J 11A topic: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3591473&postcount=48

 

 

MFI 55 upgrade J 11A info: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=207287

[veenee]

What are you guys talking about? We got the Mig 28.

Lol so true!

[Evoman]

It seems there will always be new comers to DCS that have not done some deep researching as to why there are not more modern aircraft in DCS.

Does anyone know of either a good written outline or video explanation to refer these people to? If not one needs to be made. It could just be a new thread with the outline explanation along with all of the latest info about the topic.

Edited October 6, 2018 by Evoman

[Kev2go]

We don't have the latest equipment on the US jets...so we don't have the newest the US has to offer either. Also, the Flaming Cliffs aircraft are simplified, so none of them really count for accuracy...

 

NO we might not have an F22 or F35

 

bu the equipment on the US side is still from post Y2K when looking at thier post production Upgrades and still far more modernized than equivalent Russian birds in DCSwhich is the point he was carrying across,not that the US is using the best availble equipment.

 

The F/A18C for eg only was pulled from active duty service this year. There wouldn't be a whole lot of differences from the NAvy Hornets that were recently retired than the one we currently have besides the ability to fire newer blocks of the existing weapons weapons they are implementing into DCS, or a newer software suites for the Flight Control System ( IRRC after OFP 13C there was OFP 15 and lastly 20X).

 

A10C soldiers on but with some extra features like scorpion HMD and newer software suites than the one we have in DCS.

Edited October 6, 2018 by Kev2go

[musolo]

there`s temporary IC clean server with buffed Flankers with pl12 on them. Called Flanker Fox3.

[Max1mus]

there`s temporary IC clean server with buffed Flankers with pl12 on them. Called Flanker Fox3.

 

Its a sad truth that ED and the MP server owners would rather accept modding a WIP missile onto a plane that did not carry it, than support a modernization of FC3 modules or just run a 90s scenario with a few restrictions.

[Capn kamikaze]

As I understand it, modern Russian fighters are a no-go due to state security concerns (if I may put it so bluntly).

 

OTOH, the US apparently has no significant qualms about putting our newest and bestest out there for just anyone to see, fly, and get advanced online training.

 

But what do I know? (And when did I know it? LOL)

 

But the US doesn't put their newest and bestest out either, there is no DCS: F-22 or F-35, what there is is stuff from 15-20 years ago.

[Northstar98]

Balancing is up to mission makers, not the devs.

 

If we had peer assets I'd agree, but we don't so gonna say nah on this one...

 

DCS shouldn't have balance in the way most think about, every weapon and aircraft should ideally be as close to real thing as feasibly possible.

 

The way we achieve balance is by having assets go up against their contemporaries - one side will probably always have the edge but the idea is to narrow the gap.

 

 

Let's go through this in detail:

 

REDFORs assets are pretty much all Soviet era stuff, pre-90s; the MiG-29s we have are the very first production variant and the first major upgrade, which in terms of capability is basically identical, just with the addition of the first variant (AFAIK) of the R-77.

 

It's a similar story with the Su-27S, Su-33 and J-11A. It's again the very first production variant with the Su-33 being basically identical apart from +2 hardpoints and being carrier capable. The J-11A in DCS is essentially identical to the Su-27S, just with R-77 capability. None of these aircraft are full-fidelity, they are all simplified.

 

In terms of air defences, it's again, all soviet era stuff, pre-90s (or just into the 90s with the SA-15 & SA-19). Again, largely simplified and there's a fair few battery components missing.

 

Compare that with BLUFOR, which are mid-2000s variants of aircraft from the 70s and 80s, with comparatively modern (post-2000s) weapons. the F-16CM and F/A-18C (let alone the Eurofighter) already eclipse everything REDFOR has to offer by a significant margin in almost every way, and REDFORs aircraft aren't full fidelity. I've neglecting the JF-17 as it is an aircraft used by Pakistan, which is more GREENFOR and not REDFOR (of course fictional scenarios and all that).

 

Now I'm not saying these aircraft are completely noncompetitive, but there's a significant gap between our current BLUFOR (mid-to-late 2000s variants of 70-80s), especially when you consider air-to-ground. At the moment, these aircraft best match the F-14A/B with similar air-to-ground capabilities (slight edge to the F-14B, purely because TGP and LGBs), the Tomcat is also superior in BVR, but is at a slight disadvantage in WVR against HMD cued R-73s. In general they're very well matched with similar capabilities.

 

Against stuff like the F-16CM, and the F/A-18C, the real contemporaries are probably going to be the MiG-29M/K and the Su-30SM/35S (going by the same era), since all of those are kind of a no-go, it would be better IMO, to have older variants of our current aircraft from say the late-80s to early-mid 90s. Examples include the F-16C Block 40 and the F/A-18C Lot 10, and going earlier the F-16A Block 15 and the F/A-18A.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Northstar98
Added Seaeagle's suggestion, looks like history is something I need to brush-up on.

[Baco]

Yes I agree ED should not do "plane taht kills all in MP quake" but similar dated aircrafts.. sin we cant go fordwar with red planes we need 80s Blueforce aircrafts... Not super douper 200ish ones...

 

Also we need mid 70s or even 60s Blueforce, since we do have migs or we will soon enough to fight them.

[TotenDead]

Against stuff like the F-16CM, and the F/A-18C, the real contemporaries are probably going to be the MiG-29M/K and the Su-30SM/35S, since all of those are kind of a no-go, it would be better IMO, to have older variants of our current aircraft from say the late-80s to early-mid 90s. Examples include the F-16C Block 40 and the F/A-18C Lot 10.

 

Need to say that yomcat is superior in BVR only due to dcs aim-54s, in reality US failed to shoot anything with it and Iran... Well, not really creditable sourse

 

Su-30SM, not to mention 35S are way superior to F-16/18C, they'll ruin the game because of huge SA advantage and way more powerful pesa radars. On the otger hand, 29K/SMT are good options as they lach pesa/aesa and use similar missiles in terms of performance

[Northstar98]

Need to say that yomcat is superior in BVR only due to dcs aim-54s, in reality US failed to shoot anything with it and Iran... Well, not really creditable sourse

 

Okay I guess we're going here again...

 

Firstly, they only fired 3 of them... Of which 2 had faulty rocket motors and the last one missed after the bandit turned cold (I'm guessing the bandit simply outranged the missile). We don't have random system failures for weapons and we assume we have fresh off the factory weapons that work properly every time.

 

And a sample size of 3 is absolutely pitiful when it comes to statistics...

 

And you can apply the same thing to basically every other weapon in DCS, including the AIM-9X and the AIM-120 and yada yada yada, blah blah blah let's not go there.

 

Su-30SM, not to mention 35S are way superior to F-16/18C, they'll ruin the game because of huge SA advantage and way more powerful pesa radars.

 

Yep, but that's not far off the current situation with current REDFOR vs BLUFOR, just the other way around. The F-16C and F/A-18C have a pretty large SA advantage, have way more capable RADARs and more capable weapons, not to mention are full-fidelity.

 

I'm not too up to scratch with Russian aircraft, basically it boils down to whatever variant was around in the late 80s/early 90s. I guess that would probably mean the MiG-29K or MiG-29M (though it didn't have much of a production run in the Soviet Union and later Russia, but the SMT is just so ugly).

 

Again, I think the best option IMO is to procure early 80s and 90s variants of our current pool of BLUFOR. Or develop BLUFOR aircraft that are suitable. So far, to me, the F-14B is the best fit right now.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Northstar98
Su-27SM is too modern, thanks, Seaeagle.

[Seaeagle]

If we had peer assets I'd agree, but we don't so gonna say nah on this one...

 

DCS shouldn't have balance in the way most think about, every weapon and aircraft should ideally be as close to real thing as feasibly possible.

 

The way we achieve balance is by having assets go up against their contemporaries - one side will probably always have the edge but the idea is to narrow the gap.

 

 

Let's go through this in detail:

 

REDFORs assets are pretty much all Soviet era stuff, pre-90s; the MiG-29s we have are the very first production variant and the first major upgrade, which in terms of capability is basically identical, just with the addition of the first variant (AFAIK) of the R-77.

 

It's a similar story with the Su-27S, Su-33 and J-11A. It's again the very first production variant with the Su-33 being basically identical apart from +2 hardpoints and being carrier capable. The J-11A in DCS is essentially identical to the Su-27S, just with R-77 capability. None of these aircraft are full-fidelity, they are all simplified.

 

In terms of air defences, it's again, all soviet era stuff, pre-90s (or just into the 90s with the SA-15 & SA-19). Again, largely simplified and there's a fair few battery components missing.

 

Compare that with BLUFOR, which are mid-2000s variants of aircraft from the 70s and 80s, with comparatively modern (post-2000s) weapons. the F-16CM and F/A-18C (let alone the Eurofighter) already eclipse everything REDFOR has to offer by a significant margin in almost every way, and REDFORs aircraft aren't full fidelity. I've neglecting the JF-17 as it is an aircraft used by Pakistan, which is more GREENFOR and not REDFOR (of course fictional scenarios and all that).

 

Now I'm not saying these aircraft are completely noncompetitive, but there's a significant gap between our current BLUFOR (mid-to-late 2000s variants of 70-80s), especially when you consider air-to-ground. At the moment, these aircraft best match the F-14A/B with similar air-to-ground capabilities (slight edge to the F-14B, purely because TGP and LGBs), the Tomcat is also superior in BVR, but is at a slight disadvantage in WVR against HMD cued R-73s. In general they're very well matched with similar capabilities.

 

Against stuff like the F-16CM, and the F/A-18C, the real contemporaries are probably going to be the MiG-29M/K and the Su-30SM/35S, since all of those are kind of a no-go, it would be better IMO, to have older variants of our current aircraft from say the late-80s to early-mid 90s. Examples include the F-16C Block 40 and the F/A-18C Lot 10.

 

Excellent post! :)

 

..since all of those are kind of a no-go, it would be better IMO, to have older variants of our current aircraft from say the late-80s to early-mid 90s. Examples include the F-16C Block 40 and the F/A-18C Lot 10.

 

..or F-16A block 15 and F/A-18A(any lot) for the 80' ies and F-16C block 40 and F/A-18C lot 16 for the 90'ies.

[Seaeagle]

 

I'm not too up to scratch with Russian aircraft, basically it boils down to whatever variant was around in the late 80s/early 90s. I guess that would probably mean the Su-27SM and the MiG-29K or MiG-29M (though it didn't have much of a production run in the Soviet Union and later Russia, but the SMT is just so ugly).

 

For late 80s/early 90s that would be MiG-29M(9.15), MiG-29K(9.31) and Su-27M(aka Su-35)....all test aircraft though.

 

The MiG-29SMT didn't exist back then(the earliest version appeared in the late 90'ies) and the Su-27SM is a much more recent upgrade.

[Kev2go]

If we had peer assets I'd agree, but we don't so gonna say nah on this one...

 

DCS shouldn't have balance in the way most think about, every weapon and aircraft should ideally be as close to real thing as feasibly possible.

 

The way we achieve balance is by having assets go up against their contemporaries - one side will probably always have the edge but the idea is to narrow the gap.

 

 

Let's go through this in detail:

 

REDFORs assets are pretty much all Soviet era stuff, pre-90s; the MiG-29s we have are the very first production variant and the first major upgrade, which in terms of capability is basically identical, just with the addition of the first variant (AFAIK) of the R-77.

 

It's a similar story with the Su-27S, Su-33 and J-11A. It's again the very first production variant with the Su-33 being basically identical apart from +2 hardpoints and being carrier capable. The J-11A in DCS is essentially identical to the Su-27S, just with R-77 capability. None of these aircraft are full-fidelity, they are all simplified.

 

In terms of air defences, it's again, all soviet era stuff, pre-90s (or just into the 90s with the SA-15 & SA-19). Again, largely simplified and there's a fair few battery components missing.

 

Compare that with BLUFOR, which are mid-2000s variants of aircraft from the 70s and 80s, with comparatively modern (post-2000s) weapons. the F-16CM and F/A-18C (let alone the Eurofighter) already eclipse everything REDFOR has to offer by a significant margin in almost every way, and REDFORs aircraft aren't full fidelity. I've neglecting the JF-17 as it is an aircraft used by Pakistan, which is more GREENFOR and not REDFOR (of course fictional scenarios and all that).

 

Now I'm not saying these aircraft are completely noncompetitive, but there's a significant gap between our current BLUFOR (mid-to-late 2000s variants of 70-80s), especially when you consider air-to-ground. At the moment, these aircraft best match the F-14A/B with similar air-to-ground capabilities (slight edge to the F-14B, purely because TGP and LGBs), the Tomcat is also superior in BVR, but is at a slight disadvantage in WVR against HMD cued R-73s. In general they're very well matched with similar capabilities.

 

Against stuff like the F-16CM, and the F/A-18C, the real contemporaries are probably going to be the MiG-29M/K and the Su-30SM/35S, since all of those are kind of a no-go, it would be better IMO, to have older variants of our current aircraft from say the late-80s to early-mid 90s. Examples include the F-16C Block 40 and the F/A-18C Lot 10.

 

 

 

Then mission designers can balance by giving red force mores slots to give them the quantity advantage if they cant win on quality one. Also you can make aircraft more peer by limiting munition types.

 

 

Albiet not realistic you can mix redforce to have blueforce planes with opforce skins if that still isn't enough.

 

 

IF ED or any 3rd party are unable to make any modern Russian aircraft for whatever reasons that have been discused dozens of times in other threads, then its a shame, but it is what it is.

Edited September 18, 2020 by Kev2go

[TotenDead]

Then mission designers can balance by giving red force mores slots to give them the quantity advantage if they cant win on quality one

 

Pffff, it doesnt work that way, bluefor will always be more numerous because it's easier to "win" on blue planes

[Thor_H]

We currently have zero modern Russian fighters in DCS done with the SU 33/27 and their crappy radars and weapons your outmatched every time heck and thats just against ai.........how can multiplayer be balanced when using outdated unmatched aircraft...we need a Modern Russian fighter..Mig29K.....SU33M/35 etc.....is there anything like this in development folks ? or at least an upgrade to allow the use of more modern Russian AA missiles...R77

 

 

Cubanace is working on a SU-57.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2539621/

 

https://cubanace-simulations.artstation.com/

 

Edited September 18, 2020 by Thor_H

[Northstar98]

For late 80s/early 90s that would be MiG-29M(9.15), MiG-29K(9.31) and Su-27M(aka Su-35)....all test aircraft though.

 

The MiG-29SMT didn't exist back then(the earliest version appeared in the late 90'ies) and the Su-27SM is a much more recent upgrade.

 

Thanks, I will edit my previous posts.

 

Then mission designers can balance by giving red force mores slots to give them the quantity advantage if they cant win on quality one. Also you can make aircraft more peer by limiting munition types.

 

Whilst this is certainly a valid way of setting up an appropriate scenario that is closer to historically accurate (which is really how I should've phrased 'balance' from the get-go). The BLUFOR aircraft that works the best with limiting available weapons is the F-15C (again, a simplified aircraft) and the F-14A/B and the latter is essentially the same generation (late Cold War mid-80s to early 90s).

 

If you leave BLUFOR as is and don't restrict the weapons, there's literally nothing contemporary to fight.

 

Just for an example, take WWII, the current set of aircraft are historically accurate so we can set up a realistic peer-to-peer fight without resorting to significant artificial handicaps. We probably wouldn't settle for a WWII scenario where we only had BLUFOR post-war jets vs REDFOR with piston-engine fighters, we'd want things of around the same time frame (early to mid-40s) so we can have contemporaries fighting contemporaries and that's exactly what we have. Sure the asset pool isn't exactly comprehensive, but it is probably the 2nd most comprehensive we have right now among contemporaries of the same era.

 

We also have it for the 1950s with the F-86F and the MiG-15bis - it's only 2 assets and we basically don't have anything else - we're only just getting the ZSU-57-2 teased, but at least it's something.

 

Again with the MiG-19P and MiG-21bis vs the F-5E-3, at least here there are a few more air defences.

 

Then we get to the 80s onwards, of which we only have Soviet late Cold War stuff that cuts off at the very start of the 90s, but most of the assets and aircraft are mid-to-late 80s. And their contemporaries

Let's not forget, we don't have a single REDFOR aircraft from the mid-80s that is full fidelity.

 

Albiet not realistic you can mix redforce to have blueforce planes with opforce skins if that still isn't enough.

 

Again, you can. It's also basically the only way you can have a consistent era between REDFOR and BLUFOR from the 80s onwards... And resorting to this just to set-up a scenario of a consistent generation without artificial restriction I find to be a major limitation. It's especially problematic when peer REDFOR aircraft of the same era (mid-to-late 2000s) is a no-go.

 

IF ED or any 3rd party are unable to make any modern Russian aircraft for whatever reasons that have been discused dozens of times in other threads, then its a shame, but it is what it is.

 

Yes, I am all too aware of this, that's why I think the best solution is to develop variants of our current aircraft, and other aircraft that better fit, and I don't think I can put it any other way, literally everything else in DCS. The F-16A Block 15 and the F/A-18A for instance and plenty more.

 

I think a part of the problem is we have a fairly significant portion of the player base, who wants the latest and greatest as far as possible, and while that's fine and perfectly understandable, it does create exactly this problem, which is incredibly difficult to solve.

 

I mean, I doubt an earlier F-16 would be popular given that we already have one that does everything the earlier variant can do but is superior in basically every way.

Edited September 19, 2020 by Northstar98