Why are there (part from the KA50) no high fidelity "modern" Russian modules?

[Harlikwin]

Heh, well, the carrier would have been the second ship sunk by a nuclear sub, but yeah - what-ifs are what we've been dealing with all along; Georgia is a what-if after all. That was an interesting conflict not just because of the naval aspect, but it managed to not be a cold-war proxy fight. A nastier what-if would have been if Yugoslavia broke up a decade earlier, perhaps.

 

I'm struggling a bit to find a scenario that'd involve early 4th gen Russian aircraft without a full-on cold-war-turned-hot, though.

 

What of the serbs actually fought? Or the IRQAF instead of beating feet, or you make bluefor weaker. Both had 4th gen fighters. Or "best" korea.

[Devil 505]

Probably overthinking this, but did anyone notice the Mig-25 in the new Thanksgiving sale trailer? It looked a lot more detailed than the AI model usually does, unless my graphics are not bumped up enough. It would be sweet if they brought the Foxbat to DCS. Run the trailer at its slowest speed to get a good look.

 

I also noticed some new carrier footage with the deck crew.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

I believe Russian government basically told ED not to do hi fidelity sims of current RuAF aircraft. Even without Russian Ministry Of Defense assistance. USAF has a bunch ex-Moldovan Mig-29A in storage(?). US defense contractors operate MI-24 Hind-F as threat simulators for training.ED is working on MI-24 module. US has access to SU-24s of Lybian Air Force. Israelis have captured Mig-23 of Syrian Air Force. So ED may have access, if they ask US Government. But ED is clear that they only use information legally obtained, or in public domain.

Maybe a hi-fi sim of Chinese type that is not of Russian origin. Perhaps Xian JH-7, J-8, or JH-10.

[Harlikwin]

I believe Russian government basically told ED not to do hi fidelity sims of current RuAF aircraft. Even without Russian Ministry Of Defense assistance. USAF has a bunch ex-Moldovan Mig-29A in storage(?). US defense contractors operate MI-24 Hind-F as threat simulators for training.ED is working on MI-24 module. US has access to SU-24s of Lybian Air Force. Israelis have captured Mig-23 of Syrian Air Force. So ED may have access, if they ask US Government. But ED is clear that they only use information legally obtained, or in public domain.

Maybe a hi-fi sim of Chinese type that is not of Russian origin. Perhaps Xian JH-7, J-8, or JH-10.

 

The Russian govt story doesn't carry any water if 3rd parties can do it and ED puts it in game.

[QuiGon]

The Russian govt story doesn't carry any water if 3rd parties can do it and ED puts it in game.

Well, the big difference is that the 3rd partys are not based in russia, while ED on the other hand is.

[Fri13]

The whole, ED can't but 3rd parties can thing is a weird statement, and indicates to me that there isn't much of a "government" problem. The government wouldn't care who did it, just that a hi-fi module existed at all.

 

I have problem to believe that Russian government would deny a Russian company to access the data like wind tunnel, weapons etc. But would be glad to give all to foreign company (CIA, NSA etc) that they can't supervise at all same manner as they could supervise Russian company.

 

And considering that Sukhoi, MiG etc are are in same corporation, it is not like you would need to start discussing with multiple different companies.

 

But.... If there is a old law that denies a Russian company accessing or even searching a military secrets.... That is then another case that doesn't restrict government but the Russian companies, and not foreign companies.

But again the same logic above applies, why to give access to foreigners?

[Fri13]

Well, the big difference is that the 3rd partys are not based in russia, while ED on the other hand is.

 

ED is the publisher, that validates the data and has the legal agreement with the 3rd parties.

 

It still doesn't make sense that ED wouldn't be allowed because Russian, but foreign company is allowed. And if following the theory that Russian government got surprised by details that KA-50 was and changed laws, why they allow a foreign company do modules but not Russian, at that same level of detail?

[QuiGon]

ED is the publisher, that validates the data and has the legal agreement with the 3rd parties.

 

It still doesn't make sense that ED wouldn't be allowed because Russian, but foreign company is allowed. And if following the theory that Russian government got surprised by details that KA-50 was and changed laws, why they allow a foreign company do modules but not Russian, at that same level of detail?

Did they literally say they are not allowed to do so? I was under the impression that it was just the risk to get into any potential troubles was seen as too big by ED.

[Harlikwin]

ED is the publisher, that validates the data and has the legal agreement with the 3rd parties.

 

It still doesn't make sense that ED wouldn't be allowed because Russian, but foreign company is allowed. And if following the theory that Russian government got surprised by details that KA-50 was and changed laws, why they allow a foreign company do modules but not Russian, at that same level of detail?

 

Yup this is the sticking point that invalidates the whole ED can't but 3rd parties can bit, in terms of government approval. From the governments standpoint, who cares who builds it, if they don't want it out its irrelevant.

[Harlikwin]

Did they literally say they are not allowed to do so? I was under the impression that it was just the risk to get into any potential troubles was seen as too big by ED.

 

No they never said they aren't allowed. They said "its complicated" and other statements like that. My personal theory is that its cost/benefit thing for ED. Though the recent statement about a new "mystery module" that will be built before the F4 seems to suggest that it might be a 4th gen redfor plane.

 

Chiz stated at some point that he didn't think it would make enough money. But at this point I think that they have created enough pent-up demand for modern opfor planes. And yet another generic 4th gen "blue" plane will probably sell less well, though I'm not even sure what it would be. That theory should be testable with JF-17 sales, even though I would hardly call it an "iconic" plane but its sorta red and modern.

 

I think their best bets on redfor are:]

 

Without addressing the whole availability of documentation issue.

 

The main logic here being you need a multirole fighter to cover as many bases as possible. And as widely operated as possible. The main issue there being that sales of modern refor jets haven't been made anywhere on the same scale as the older less capable mig29 or su-27.

 

Modern multi-role carrier based flanker Su-33/J-15 or mig29k.

Covers those bases, plus being carrier based lets ED leverage that, and from a scenario design Point of view it generally lets you put a carrier air wing anywhere on any map. Plus you can of course fly them all from the ground to simulate their ground based brethren.

 

Of those I think the 29k or J-15 make the most sense moving forward though they are both past the "time-frame" of current DCS aircraft. The current SU-33 isn't really multirole or really that modern when compared to 2007 era vipers/bugs so its a bit old since it can't carry or use PGM's, probably fine for A/A though.

 

For ground based air, again multirole as much as possible.

 

Mig-29SMT is probably the best choice here as its exportable, and modern and multirole.

 

SU-27SK is an interesting export variant, and less modern than the SU-35 so maybe doable?

 

 

Then again, I'd also be happy with an F4E since it will fit very nicely into the older mig plane set that we already have.

Edited November 25, 2019 by Harlikwin

[Richard Dastardly]

"No, but well, maybe, but no, but well, maybe. No, probably" - https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3983067&postcount=1360 from the FighterPilot podcast interview, iirc. An answer worthy of a politician :P

 

Maybe they could work out a properly modular production & marketing pipeline & do every Flanker variant they can get data for...

 

Where's the data for the Mi-24 coming from, anyway.

Edited November 25, 2019 by Richard Dastardly