In need of an opposing aircraft

[LisaAzra]

Great that another modern high fidelity plane is being released but we really could do with one from Russia. I would love to see the Su-35 in the same detail as the F-18/ F-14 and this new F-16. I know there is a Su-35 mod about but a heatblur or ED backed module would be both fantastic and balanced.

[Sierra99]

https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

 

11:44 - Eastern Bloc Aircraft in DCS?

[FSKRipper]

Great that another modern high fidelity plane is being released but we really could do with one from Russia. I would love to see the Su-35 in the same detail as the F-18/ F-14 and this new F-16. I know there is a Su-35 mod about but a heatblur or ED backed module would be both fantastic and balanced.

 

This get's boring. But for the 1000th time:

 

There is no available data on modern russian planes. Break into the russian MoD. get it and stay alive long enough to bring it to ED. Wait , a russian company…., so no they won't use the data.

 

Use mods or face the reality that we won't see modern eastern stuff until Russia and China become a little more relaxed regarding their secrets.

[Katj]

Luckily the Americans and the French sell their jets to all kinds of countries like Iran, UAE, Pakistan, Kuwait, Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Canada, there's really no end to it.

 

So if you're looking for opposition it's not that hard to dream up a fitting scenario.

[agentdarnell]

Yep we cover this constantly. Yes I would love a su-34 but it wont happen as secrecy and ability for them to get permission and the right info.

[Cantilever10]

One is under development already, and if the company is to be believed it'll be out later this summer. The JF-17 will be a perfect rival to a F-16 actually.

 

Also...i wouldn't ever get my hopes up about a Su-35. It's way way too modern(think super hornet not legacy hornet). Honestly, just about all the rivals to the F-16 are in the game, just not high fidelity and as others have said...we arent getting the data to make them high fidelity anytime soon

[Harlikwin]

The data thing is mostly a canard. ED left the door open for 3rd parties to do it. There is more than enough "data" on the old commie era mig29s to do a hi fi module from western sources, germam sources, polish sources, czech sources etc.

 

My personal theory is is ED left a bag of flaming poo at certain russian aerospace companies front doors but not others like kamov an mil.

[Kayos]

The Russians don't want us to know how far behind in technology they are. It's been the same since the cold war : )

[IanHx2]

Would have thought that given some of ED's previous products, they'd have sufficient data for a Su-27 Flanker ... ? :)

[Fri13]

The Russians don't want us to know how far behind in technology they are. It's been the same since the cold war : )

 

Instead they want you to believe that nothing has changed from those assumptions.

[Fri13]

Wait , a russian company…., so no they won't use the data.

 

No one has so far explained that why Russian company can't do it, but any company outside of the Russia can do it

 

Ie the data there is, is denied from Russian but free to use by any foreigner

[Fri13]

Would have thought that given some of ED's previous products, they'd have sufficient data for a Su-27 Flanker ... ? :)

 

The challenge is that as soon you want more advanced than Su-27S, you are in the modern operational aircrafts.

[Deano87]

No one has so far explained that why Russian company can't do it, but any company outside of the Russia can do it

 

Ie the data there is, is denied from Russian but free to use by any foreigner

 

Because the Russian government is extremely strict with what it allows regarding its military equipment, even old military equipment. A large chunk of ED is Russian so it’s pretty obvious why a Russian company wouldn’t want to go anywhere near something that is heavily controlled by the government. However what can the Russian government do about a 3rd party outside Russia? Not much. Also the 3rd parties probably do all of their dealing with Eagle Dynamics Sa which is a Swiss registered company so that also helps protect the Russian contingent because they wouldn’t have any direct contracts with 3rd parties developing aircraft.

[Pikey]

There's more to do with money than people think.

If it were viable, someone would find a way in a neutral country. Like err, Switz... wait....

 

Moving on... the market decides. So far Americans will pay for the teen series to play American conflicts as Americans, in American ventures abroad.

The other market countries just don't have deep enough wallets for anyone else to consider market viability of a non US module. DCS is a risky venture as a third party. If it's not a passion project, or made by someone who can reduce the time to develop with experience, or a an F-14, 15, 16, 18, X it's a business risk.

 

 

What we need to develop is the section of Americans with eclectic and expensive tastes.

[Sierra99]

There's more to do with money than people think.

If it were viable, someone would find a way in a neutral country. Like err, Switz... wait....

 

Moving on... the market decides. So far Americans will pay for the teen series to play American conflicts as Americans, in American ventures abroad.

The other market countries just don't have deep enough wallets for anyone else to consider market viability of a non US module. DCS is a risky venture as a third party. If it's not a passion project, or made by someone who can reduce the time to develop with experience, or a an F-14, 15, 16, 18, X it's a business risk.

 

 

What we need to develop is the section of Americans with eclectic and expensive tastes.

 

But why male models?

[LisaAzra]

Thanks for the info guys, sorry it was a repetitive question. Su-35 being too modern, fair enough. The reason why I posted this is that I like flying DCS and do like the feel of the Russian and Chinese birds. Sadly flying these and the FC3 models in VR as they are low fidelity models makes it difficult as all functions are either key-mapped or need to be mapped to the HOTAS, that is a lot of buttons. Having some in cockpit function for the Su's and Mig 29's would be good. High fidelity or face-lift versions of the FC3 planes like they are doing with the KA-50 would be really great

[IanHx2]

 

What we need to develop is the section of Americans with eclectic and expensive tastes.

 

DCS: Howard Hughes :)

[Kev2go]

Instead they want you to believe that nothing has changed from those assumptions.

 

 

Don't be silly Its not an assumption, its an educated conclusion largely that can be based on understanding economics 101, combined with reflecting on past history.

 

 

 

Benjamin Netanyahu once said something along the lines of " that you could have the most brightest Scientists and best Education in the world, but all that won't matter if you don't have a strong economy to fund technological research"

 

And honestly ain't that the truth.

 

Simply put USA already outspends meny countries combined, and Russia doesn't have the economy to invest enough money into the military to be more high tech then the USA even if they actually had the the brightest scientists and engineers all working on defense projects. Add to that that in the last couple years worldwide sanctions have further reduced their yearly GDP even further. Fall in price of Crude oil recently hasn't helped the situation, as the 60% of thier exports constitute Oil and Gas, and 30% of thier overall yearly GDP.

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by Kev2go

[Katj]

Don't be silly Its not an assumption, its an educated conclusion largely that can be based on understanding economics 101, combined with reflecting on past history.

 

 

 

Benjamin Netanyahu once said something along the lines of " that you could have the most brightest Scientists and best Education in the world, but all that won't matter if you don't have a strong economy to fund technological research"

 

And honestly ain't that the truth.

 

Simply put USA already outspends meny countries combined, and Russia doesn't have the economy to invest enough money into the military to be more high tech then the USA even if they actually had the the brightest scientists and engineers all working on defense projects. Add to that that in the last couple years worldwide sanctions have further reduced their yearly GDP even further. Fall in price of Crude oil recently hasn't helped the situation, as the 60% of thier exports constitute Oil and Gas, and 30% of thier overall yearly GDP.

 

Well, that paints an extremely crude picture. A comparison between Russia's GDP and GDP PPP suggests that they get about 3 times as much R&D for each dollar spent as the western countries. How all that money is spent is also important. The US maintains a very large amount of bases all over the world as well as a very large fleet with lots of carriers and other stuff that Russia doesn't bother with.

 

Also India and Saudi Arabia spend a heck of a lot on their military but have zero decent indigenous jets to show for it.

 

What I'm trying to say is; it's obvious that Russia can't afford to keep up with the US in any kind of arms race. But that doesn't mean that all of their jets are crap.

 

After all, the best digital combat (flight) simulator is Russian!

[Xilon_x]

Russia is limited to expenses and saves.

Don't forget that Russia is the 1 nuclear power in the world.

According to my opinion, America spends too much on military expenses and we must note that we are in a period of peace if we were in a period of war, things would change quickly.

in the future EUROPE is expected to have a single military body so NATO will disappear so all US bases from Europe will disappear.

[sLYFa]

EUROPE is expected to have a single military body so NATO will disappear so all US bases from Europe will disappear.

It will probably take decades for a unified european army to emerge, epsacially given the current anti european movement on the rise everywhere in europe. And even if that happens, I highly doubt the NATO will disappear or the US will just give up their bases they spent so much money and effort on.

[Kev2go]

Well, that paints an extremely crude picture. A comparison between Russia's GDP and GDP PPP suggests that they get about 3 times as much R&D for each dollar spent as the western countries. How all that money is spent is also important. The US maintains a very large amount of bases all over the world as well as a very large fleet with lots of carriers and other stuff that Russia doesn't bother with.

 

Also India and Saudi Arabia spend a heck of a lot on their military but have zero decent indigenous jets to show for it.

 

What I'm trying to say is; it's obvious that Russia can't afford to keep up with the US in any kind of arms race. But that doesn't mean that all of their jets are crap.

 

After all, the best digital combat (flight) simulator is Russian!

 

I wasn't saying that all of their jets are crap.

 

Basically what i'm getting as, is in the past they had opted for quantity over quality. Once thier economy had stabilized post 90's they have been playing catchup to modernize the gen 4 fleet to capabilities that US already had for decade or more, nor do they have enough of these modernized fighters in service to have numerical superiority.

 

Their newer equipment ( in most but not all cases) doesn't appear to be as good nor produced in quantifiable enough numbers to turn a tide in a war, nor are all of their gen 4 produced fighter fleets are modernized.

 

Like the Pak Fa development only happened because India agreed to invest money to help development... and they are unimpressed and backed out of purchasing those stealth fighters. It will likely be Russia alone will only produce a small quantity of them, and there is no way way thy have anywhere near the level of technologies that F35 has, and questionable just how good the low observability is for T50.

 

Su35 is largely regarded as the best gen 4.5 fighter of Russia. Something that could actually go toe to toe with other nato 4.5 gen, yet again they have only afforded to be able to produce like an estimated 100 of them in the past 12 years, not all of which are in Russian Service but some sold to China.

 

A weak point for Russian fighters today are their engine lives. Russian made engines don't amount of flight hours as western made engines do.

 

For ground forces another examples the T14 Armata. Looks great on paper, but despite being presented in 2015. Only around 30 models exist, still going through state trials after all this time. In 2020 it is expected to enter operational service, and contract for 100 examples has been placed. However even Russians admit they wont ever produce the 1500+ tanks they wanted due to lacking the funding for it, are instead opted in the last few years to upgrade cold war vintage tanks like the T72B and T80B tanks with more modern Reactive armor, and internal changes to fire controls. So far there are no export buyers of the T14.

 

The Syrian intervention against ISIS has shown that despite of better available precision targeting technology, Most Russian weapons in inventory are of the unguided type being employed, by modernized aircraft that are capable of employing guided weapons. When used Most guided weapons used have been GPS guided bombs and they are limited in their strike capabilities due to small availability of Targeting pods ( which are fairly recent introduction to their air forces).

 

 

China has been ignored far too long. In recent years they really been investing alot into thier military. IN the coming years, it will be Chinese military will be able to far better challenge to US militarily than Russia ever could hope to, because they actually have a economy that nearly rivals the USA.

 

Thus in DCS we should be looking at China as the new primary "neer peer"OpForce adversary for hypothetical 21st century conventional conflict scenarios ( much more so than Russia). Hopefully we could get a Pacific/ Asia region oriented map for ( currently) fictional flashpoint.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Kev2go

[Svsmokey]

Good analysis . Great post !

[Harlikwin]

I wasn't saying that all of their jets are crap.

 

Basically what i'm getting as, is in the past they had opted for quantity over quality. Once thier economy had stabilized post 90's they have been playing catchup to modernize the gen 4 fleet to capabilities that US already had for decade or more, nor do they have enough of these modernized fighters in service to have numerical superiority.

 

Their newer equipment ( in most but not all cases) doesn't appear to be as good nor produced in quantifiable enough numbers to turn a tide in a war, nor are all of their gen 4 produced fighter fleets are modernized.

 

Like the Pak Fa development only happened because India agreed to invest money to help development... and they are unimpressed and backed out of purchasing those stealth fighters. It will likely be Russia alone will only produce a small quantity of them, and there is no way way thy have anywhere near the level of technologies that F35 has, and questionable just how good the low observability is for T50.

 

Su35 is largely regarded as the best gen 4.5 fighter of Russia. Something that could actually go toe to toe with other nato 4.5 gen, yet again they have only afforded to be able to produce like an estimated 100 of them in the past 12 years, not all of which are in Russian Service but some sold to China.

 

A weak point for Russian fighters today are their engine lives. Russian made engines don't amount of flight hours as western made engines do.

 

For ground forces another examples the T14 Armata. Looks great on paper, but despite being presented in 2015. Only around 30 models exist, still going through state trials after all this time. In 2020 it is expected to enter operational service, and contract for 100 examples has been placed. However even Russians admit they wont ever produce the 1500+ tanks they wanted due to lacking the funding for it, are instead opted in the last few years to upgrade cold war vintage tanks like the T72B and T80B tanks with more modern Reactive armor, and internal changes to fire controls. So far there are no export buyers of the T14.

 

The Syrian intervention against ISIS has shown that despite of better available precision targeting technology, Most Russian weapons in inventory are of the unguided type being employed, by modernized aircraft that are capable of employing guided weapons. When used Most guided weapons used have been GPS guided bombs and they are limited in their strike capabilities due to small availability of Targeting pods ( which are fairly recent introduction to their air forces).

 

 

China has been ignored far too long. In recent years they really been investing alot into thier military. IN the coming years, it will be Chinese military will be able to far better challenge to US militarily than Russia ever could hope to, because they actually have a economy that nearly rivals the USA.

 

Thus in DCS we should be looking at China as the new primary "neer peer"OpForce adversary for hypothetical 21st century conventional conflict scenarios ( much more so than Russia). Hopefully we could get a Pacific/ Asia region oriented map for ( currently) fictional flashpoint.

 

At the end of the day it comes down to doctrine. Soviet doctrine for decades was very pragmatic on how war goes based on soviet experience in WW2. Why build a warplane with an engine rated for 10k hours when it has a combat life expectancy of a few sorties? That sort of thing. Why spend tons of cash on a fancy radar when that plane will be shot down on sortie 3. Put that radar behind a SAM shield. The examples go on and on. And for the most part modern Russian doctrine is similar enough to it.

 

I agree with Kev on China, they have the money, manpower and dashing good looks to be the bad guys. But I don't see how you are gonna get even a semi modern Chinese jet in game. (The JF17 aint it). So my main hope is for an old school hypothetical with "aging" mig29's.

[Kev2go]

At the end of the day it comes down to doctrine. Soviet doctrine for decades was very pragmatic on how war goes based on soviet experience in WW2. Why build a warplane with an engine rated for 10k hours when it has a combat life expectancy of a few sorties? That sort of thing. Why spend tons of cash on a fancy radar when that plane will be shot down on sortie 3. Put that radar behind a SAM shield. The examples go on and on. And for the most part modern Russian doctrine is similar enough to it.

 

I agree with Kev on China, they have the money, manpower and dashing good looks to be the bad guys. But I don't see how you are gonna get even a semi modern Chinese jet in game. (The JF17 aint it). So my main hope is for an old school hypothetical with "aging" mig29's.

 

But they have been spending money on more fancy bells and whistles on their aviation assets, its just that not all of them are modernized.

 

 

 

Glass cockpits, GPS, datalinks, Precision guided weapons, HOTAS centric controls. Even PESA radars in some of the more advanced fighters vs using traditional mechanical array Radars.

 

But i think outdated doctrine would probably be the worst enemy.

 

If you dont have the appropriate doctrine to adjust for current technology or changes in modern warfare, then your technology will not be used to its fullest potential or in worst cases appropriately at all. Thats why any nation should be smart enough to study foreign conflicts, isntead of relying on an outdated war experience from 74 years ago which does not hold anywhere near the sort relevancy as it once did.

 

You have to consideRussia cant afford to take the sort of attrition rates in modern times like they could in ww2. Demographically Russian population has been decreasing. They just wouldnt be able to sustain mass casualties and easily replace them.

 

US intently studied the 1973 ARAB-Israeli conflict, as lessons learned there were highly applicable since Syrians used both Soviet equipment and Soviet Doctrine, especially noting new emerging threats like the appearance of AGTMs. TheUS has revised thier Doctrine countless times. Air Land battle of the early 80s was totally different from the preceding doctrines of the 60s and 70s. Even the 2014- present day conflict over Ukraine is something worth looking at.

 

AS for Chinese, its enough that we got AI assets for ground , air defense, naval, and air. hell the FC3 J11A is already a more potent adversary than the Su27S. Near identical variant, but its the R77 integration that makes the difference. Thats the 1 thing that everyone wanted on their Russian SU27 to make things more "balanced" against blufor.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Kev2go