Day one review

[Pikey]

For potential purchasers, this is "my" 6hr flight time review based on me being a DCS addict for the last decade and having a thousands of hours across all of the combat modules, helicopters and trainers.

 

 

Off the bat, it meets my expectation of "early access" (classic beta software state), which is feature complete, perhaps with some minor keybindings missing. There are lots of those and this is one of the only items that might be seen as Day 1 'requirements'. Nothing you couldn't click though. All weapons and modes advertised are present, although I couldn't tell you what a real JF-17 has. There are a couple of less important placeholder pages and navigation seems a bit raw, but in terms of get up there and fight and fly, its got all it's arms and legs, maybe just a finger or toe missing.

 

 

The FM:

Reminds me of the Hornet if anything, without the FBW 1G. Very nose strong, holds speed (i think too much) in a turn but lacks the acceleration and feels a bit limp and you can end up sub 200kts in a dogfight and stuck. Doesn't climb well, clean it will get you to 20000 straight up, it's no Viper and even the Hornet has better altitude and climb. Straight, it can rocket, but you will spend a lot of time <300kts wallowing around. The feel of a rudder in a FBW is nice, the FM feels good, it's very simple to control, has a bit of "wallow" and inertia and feeds sensation back nicer than the Hornet, probably the Viper too. Trim when asymmetric is working and much lighter than the ED modules that tend to over correct. I'm not convinced though, by the FM. Something feels wrong, but the average player wanting to have fun will not complain.

 

 

Avionics:

I thought I'd hate the glass MFD excess but I don't. In a CV1 Rift the visibility is outstanding, this is possibly the best VR fit yet and it will mean that no matter what, VR users on 1rst gen devices without the massive hardware should be able to enjoy DCS without a headache. This is probably due to the quite computerised approach to the jet itself rather than developer skill, but who cares why, it just is.

The style of avionics isn't quite familiar to western drivers, but not as foreign as a Viggen or Russian aircraft, it's easy to understand after an hour of playing around. The systems are absolutely devoid of complications. And therein, I began to wonder where are those little things like being able to move bullseye around or even use one. That is a major deficit, right now it's a solo plane, integrating to a wing working with dissimilar aircraft and agencies will prove difficult without some of the tools we are used to in NATO standard. It remains to be seen if some of these tools are there: I do not know how the real plane works and i'm simply going on the comparison of module to module. I don't know if the plane lacks tools or the module at this point.

 

 

Ergonomics:

Clicking MFD's and pilot workflow is easy. In fact, technically, the plane is unchallenging. This is a good thing for humans, you can spend your eye dwell time, heads up and scans are super quick. Not being funny, but FC3 players wanting to step right into a fighter, jump into BlueFlag, THIS IS your first port of call for a purchase. It's got an arcadey feel. That rubs me personally in two different directions. I love complex machinery. The Thunder is a jet you can easily get on with, and that means it has a permanent front row hangar spot for everyone, because you dont always want to stress out in DCS, no matter how die-hard you think you are. Yes, I still love the Tomcat, the Mig-21 and Mi-8, but the point is they are something different which is good.

For switchology the Thunder is simply the best module/plane for handling combat tasks with a HOTAS. More bindings will be better, but the core ones allow you to swiftly dart around without a keyboard by design, lock up targets and deploy weapons. The radar controls can be handled on the HOTAS, things like moving range, azimuth and mode are all there rather than "cheating" by binding an MFD button to an unused button. Again, this is a plane thing but folks should appreciate a plane and see through a module.

 

 

Combat effectiveness

Right now I think the Thunder genuinely offers as good as anything else for air to ground. The air to ground radar is pretty decent for SEA mode and usable for direct mode. Right now only the Viggen can detect targets at long range at sea, the Thunder is easier/better in direct comparison for anti-Shipping. For land based surface targets the laser rockets might be the best thing in DCS, but I need to do some work on that. The capacity is there that in a permissive environment this thing will exceed the Ka50 and A-10C kill counts like Arnie on steroids. Air to Ground, this will be my go to.

 

 

Air to air is a different story. Much of air to air is SA based and weapon based. I think right now Air weaponry comparisons in DCS are quite difficult to discuss. Potentially, the Tomcat still has the longest shot, the AIM-120C second, but from a first shot perspective, the AmWan is competitive. The PvP environment is difficult to assess. Versus AI, I'm going through quite a few missiles to see a connection on a manouvering target. Versus humans is a longer test.

At the time of writing, the Radar is not ground stabilised and you cannot crank effectively which will kill it in 1:1 BVR versus any of the AIM-120 carrying modules. What I am saying there is that BVR with equal SA will come down to the kinematic delivery and more importantly the kinematic defence which is lacking in the Thunder module (but not the plane)

 

In close, is also a complex matter. I get the feeling that it will come down to surprise and first shot. Dogfighting I think the Thunder's ACM will end up losing to fighters that can use the vertical with acceleration. The turn rate I haven't measured but it's pretty quick with awesome handling and lots of strong nose but being forced down and level like the Hornet. The ACM modes were not picking up on the VSL I found.

 

 

Pretty strong module in many areas overall, and pretty strong fighter competitively, but no silver bullet in Air to Air. An Air to Ground hero is there though..

[Banzaiib]

Excellent write up. I appreciate it, since I'm stuck at work, especially the part about the flight model. Very well done, sir!

[Harlikwin]

Thanks Pikey,

 

I'll add that I flew it for less than hour offline and generally agree. It does look very good in my CV1 rift versus the F16 as recent comparison, I can't wait to see it in my Reverb once I get that mess sorted out. I did do a fair bit of offline AA as I couldn't figure out AG weps...

 

One thing that does stand out, I map all my HOTAS controls as close to the real jet as I can and click on everything else. And I gotta say that its one of the best hotas setups in the game, easily as good as the F16, and superior to pretty much everything else. Though I definately need to some axis tweaking for my TDC and antenna lever on my cougar throttle.

 

A-A

FM most closely feels like the F18. Its somewhat slow to build speed, and the engine smokes like the mig29.

BVR, the SD10 works well, and I think it can carry a max of 4. I didn't have any issues employing it in STT type modes, didn't figure out TWS yet.

WVR, it handles "ok" versus F16's that I fought, though the PL5's are somewhat limited compared to JHMCS off borsight missiles. Didn't try the gun cuz I couldn't get it armed.

 

I think online, its not going to be overpowered, I think alot of people will wail and lament if the SD is slightly longer ranged but at the end of the day I doubt its going to make a big difference on blueflag, the Phoenix is going to outrange it every time.

 

If you make it to merge I think it will be inferior to the F18/16 due to HOBS missiles, plus the smokey engine will make it easier to spot. And I don't think its kinematatically superior to the Viper, or M2K, and probably on par with the hornet.

 

A/G I couldn't arm my weapons so not much to say there, the Tpod is interesting and IMO more "real life" than the other Tpods in the game.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Harlikwin

[Manuel_108]

How are the sounds? What about hearing things like inverters, electronics humming, airflow coming out of the ECS vents, landing gear sounds etc.?

 

This is something that the ED modules like the Mi-8, A-10, F/A-18C and F-16 and Heatblurs F-14 all have and it's a very important part of the simulation in my opinion, especially as it is a fully priced module.

[sirrah]

Indeed excellent review! Thanks! :thumbup:

 

So how is VR, in terms of readability and performance?

 

The cockpit looks really clean/new on YT videos, a little too clean if you ask me, but that might increase readability

[shaHeen-1]

The startup sound with the canopy open is amazing.

The flight models seems to have some drag issues. I felt it wasn't easy to slow the plane down when coming in for landing.

In A2A I think the jammer pod is its greatest advantage. Greatest weakness is low off boresight WVR capability and maybe the at present confusing data link and IFF system. This block doesn't have the aesa radar so that's also gna be an issue when throwing it around.

To be fair, the jet is exactly HALF as smokey as mig29. ;)

[flameoutme]

@Pikey thanks for your take. After reading, I got the module. Just playing free flight and am VERY impressed.

 

Two things off the top, one serious one something else...

 

The clarity of everything in-cockpit in my Oculus Rift S is just off the charts. If Heatblur F-14 gets the award for well worn grittiness and exact modeling, the team at Deka Ironwork Simulations takes the title for absolute clarity of cockpit gauges and instruments in VR, and I own all except the Russian modules.

 

The other thing Deka takes the blue ribbon form is the sexiest "bitchen betty" voice. When she was saying "landing gear" I was thinking about dating her... :)

 

I think this is the start of a beautiful relationship between the JF-17 and me....

[shaHeen-1]

@Pikey thanks for your take. After reading, I got the module. Just playing free flight and am VERY impressed.

 

Two things off the top, one serious one something else...

 

The clarity of everything in-cockpit in my Oculus Rift S is just off the charts. If Heatblur F-14 gets the award for well worn grittiness and exact modeling, the team at Deka Ironwork Simulations takes the title for absolute clarity of cockpit gauges and instruments in VR, and I own all except the Russian modules.

 

The other thing Deka takes the blue ribbon form is the sexiest "bitchen betty" voice. When she was saying "landing gear" I was thinking about dating her... :)

 

I think this is the start of a beautiful relationship between the JF-17 and me....

 

Hahah wtf. I just imagined you and the plane in white skin and flowers with a ground chief in the middle saying: "I now pronounce you man and plane. You may now fly the bride."

[flameoutme]

Hahah wtf. I just imagined you and the plane in white skin and flowers with a ground chief in the middle saying: "I now pronounce you man and plane. You may now fly the bride."

 

:)

[Manuel_108]

How are the sounds? What about hearing things like inverters, electronics humming, airflow coming out of the ECS vents, landing gear sounds etc.?

 

This is something that the ED modules like the Mi-8, A-10, F/A-18C and F-16 and Heatblurs F-14 all have and it's a very important part of the simulation in my opinion, especially as it is a fully priced module.

 

 

Just bought the module so I am gonna answer it myself for anyone who might want to know too. All in all the sounds are great, in my opinion. I was positively surprised.

 

The switches, the electrical humming in the cockpit, the fuel pump etc. all sound very good in my opinion. The whole plane sounds quite harmonious on the ground and in the air, with the wind getting louder the faster you go and the engine spooling up and down when you change the throttle position or the afterburner kicking in during the takeoff roll. No cuts or loops are audible either.

 

I like the exterior sounds as well, especially when you pan around. Deka did a great job there.

 

Two things that could be better perhaps:

 

1)The F3 fly-by sounds are a little weak and artificially sounding in some phases, I think Deka already wrote that they are working on improving these. I wouldn't say that fly-bys sound bad though, not at all.

 

2)What I am missing a little bit are some sort of rattling effects from the airframe at high AoA, high G manoeuvers although I have to say that I do not know whether or not a real pilot would even hear these things, especially with the helmet on, or rather just feel them.

 

All in all I'd say that the module sounds good, the mixing is good, nothing is too loud or too quiet and I am very much convinced.

[shaHeen-1]

 

2)What I am missing a little bit are some sort of rattling effects from the airframe at high AoA, high G manoeuvers although I have to say that I do not know whether or not a real pilot would even hear these things, especially with the helmet on, or rather just feel them.

 

All in all I'd say that the module sounds good, the mixing is good, nothing is too loud or too quiet and I am very much convinced.

 

I dont know if fly-by-wire lets these through. The jet is much smaller than the tomcat so a bit stiffer? i guess and it shouldn't shake as much, i think thats why they have the artificial aoa warning sound.

[Tippis]

All in all I'd say that the module sounds good, the mixing is good, nothing is too loud or too quiet and I am very much convinced.

My ears would like to discuss the PL-5 with you. :P

Granted, you can turn the volume down but that also reduces the warning and Betty sounds, and they really could stand being at a more even level where not going deaf from the seeker tone still leaves the other loud enough to be heard.

[Manuel_108]

I dont know if fly-by-wire lets these through. The jet is much smaller than the tomcat so a bit stiffer? i guess and it shouldn't shake as much, i think thats why they have the artificial aoa warning sound.

 

Yes, I think you are right, good point!

 

My ears would like to discuss the PL-5 with you. :P

Granted, you can turn the volume down but that also reduces the warning and Betty sounds, and they really could stand being at a more even level where not going deaf from the seeker tone still leaves the other loud enough to be heard.

 

Yeah, now that you say it the seeker tone is very loud indeed, I just figured it is this way in real life as well. It is a bit weird that the warnings get turned down together with the seeker tone, like you wrote, but I guess it's just another quirk of the little jet :thumbup:

[Harlikwin]

@Pikey thanks for your take. After reading, I got the module. Just playing free flight and am VERY impressed.

 

Two things off the top, one serious one something else...

 

The clarity of everything in-cockpit in my Oculus Rift S is just off the charts. If Heatblur F-14 gets the award for well worn grittiness and exact modeling, the team at Deka Ironwork Simulations takes the title for absolute clarity of cockpit gauges and instruments in VR, and I own all except the Russian modules.

 

The other thing Deka takes the blue ribbon form is the sexiest "bitchen betty" voice. When she was saying "landing gear" I was thinking about dating her... :)

 

I think this is the start of a beautiful relationship between the JF-17 and me....

 

Yeah, even in my Beater CV1 its actually workable (unlike the f16 for example). I can't wait for my reverb to get fixed tho.

[surfcandy]

Something was wrong with the way the cockpit textures looked when I first saw it then I read another a post where others also mentioned what I was thinking. It was said that they will be improving the cockpit textures in a future patch. I'll wait.