MiG-27K or Su-17M4 instead of Su-25

[Renato71]

Hi all,

 

As I 'm aware that adding new aircraft is not possible (yet?), I was wandering if anybody is interested into supporting a suggestion to replace old Su-25 with flyable MiG-27K or Su-17M4?

 

I think we all agree that old Su-25 model needs rework. But why waste time on that? Because of its outdated electronics it is very useless in this game. In real life, it can make the difference, but here… Well, nobody is flying it online, except for occasional fun or curiosity. It is Su-25T that has most attraction and proves that ED's decision to add this aircraft was a correct one.

 

MiG-27K are Su-17M4 very similar to each other in respect of equipment. Better avionics then Su-25, but different enough from "T", including flying characteristics, to make it worth being present in the game.

 

Weapon choices are either the same as on "T", or less. Avionics are the same or less. So there will be no need for additional equipment. Only additional equipment is radio guidance for a2g missiles, but I believe it could be easily added by duplicating laser guidance logic. After all, there is no laser "spot" in the game (one aircraft cannot see a laser spot produced by another source/aircraft).

 

I know that new model and skins are needed, but I believe there are people that would like to contribute on this. I myself am not a modeler, but I could at least do some skinning or whatever is needed. It should be enough to bring any of those two to the level of MiG-29.

 

Only serious issues, which could be resolved only by ED, are single-engines and variable sweep. Can sweep be resolved through "redirection" of arrestor hook command? Or is it already possible to use it and how?

 

Any of these two (ah, preferably both!) would significantly boost the popularity of the game and extend its life in the same manner it was achieved with Su-25T.

 

I like old Su-25, but retiring him in this game is needed if it will not be upgraded to Su-25KM "Scorpion". In the current form it is completely useless. Current map is not suited well for him. There is too much of open space, and too little types of units that you can "surprise". AI units react in the same timeframe, regardless of you angle, altitude and speed. As in real life, when you can choose between two aircraft as which one is best suited for a certain task, you will choose the better one. And, if enemy ground troops have (AI) air defense - Su-25T is the only choice.

 

Original Su-25 was not built to fight the units from Lock On. Neither was SU-25T, but it is better against AI.

 

Please, replace Su-25 with MiG-27K are Su-17M4.

[mvsgas]

I fly SU-25 on line all the time with no problems and I think is good fun and good enough for the job, just my two cents

[Boberro]

Babalui - I see black.... coz:

 

- adding laser guided missiles (or TV) to my favourite in this pool Su-22 (in PAF :)) don't solve aiming problem. No TV, avionics, cocpit, we have nothing. So amateur mod is rather VERY un-realistic,

 

- solving that by ED is also mission impossible - all theirs programming forces are working under Ka-50 and its future expansions. Also ED isn't Microsoft which can do many projects or aspects of games in one time,

 

- FC is so un-modable, I wish to get DCS structure like is in MSFS series - open structure, people can do theis own models, terrains, cities ect - it is simple amazing! In FC it is terrible, DCS probably will be better but we will see after...

 

I tried to do Su-39 (we got super model, 25T is similar in model to TM, and AFM) with its weapons, but ED hardcoded weapons (dunno know why, careless decision IMO) and I couldn't add and fire weapon unless R-77 which I fired from fuelsage (!), not from pylon lol.

[2IAEMetoBG]

Why there is no answer "I don't won't it to be replaced!" in the pool?

[Blakk]

both of these planes having variable geometry wings, so without this feature, it will be useless, to change Su-25.

Also mind powerfull gun of Mig-27 and supersonic profile of Su-17.

But cockpit wise, Mig-27 can be easily simulated on Su-25T version. So perhaps crossing Su25T from cockpit side and (perhaps) Mig-29 from FM side will be possible.

 

http://walkarounds.airforce.ru/avia/rus/mig/mig-27k/burdin_mig-27k_71.jpg

 

image of Mig-27 Cockpit

[Excelsior]

but ED hardcoded weapons (dunno know why, careless decision IMO)

 

If you were around MP pre/post 1.1 you wouldn't say that it was careless. Hardcoding weapons was at request from the MP community who was sick to death of being splashed by a Mica carrying MiG-29A. Just as I did then, I still applaud ED for doing this.

 

Less modability = Less X-wings, Tie fighters and sharks with frickin laserbeams in the Lockon world.

[Renato71]

If you were around MP pre/post 1.1 you wouldn't say that it was careless. Hardcoding weapons was at request from the MP community who was sick to death of being splashed by a Mica carrying MiG-29A. Just as I did then, I still applaud ED for doing this.

 

Less modability = Less X-wings, Tie fighters and sharks with frickin laserbeams in the Lockon world.

 

Less modability? Do you have any mod installed? Over last two years freelance modders have achived more then DCS. Their "breaking the rule" is what keeps this game alive.

Without modability and freaks that mendle around and users that support them there would be no great skins, terains, models and utilities.

But, I guess you are neither user of mods or supporter.

 

We need modability, but it has to be contolled by the server, as in any other game.

 

@=2IAE=MetoBG: I'm sorry, my fault not to include that option :(

Please do not hold that against me.

In fact, to reflect the real life more properly, I would rather replace Su-25T with some other aircraft that is more widely used, but such suggestion would not receive warm welcome.

 

No matter which one gets replaced - oh well, even changed in mod - I would like that those codes for variable sweep could be available to the modders. That will not make any X-wing. Just variable wing.

 

But then, I didn't expect much of a support. Just take a lok at J-10 thread... Rick made such a great job, and half of the replies go like "make F-15" or straight OT :(

[Excelsior]

Less modability? Do you have any mod installed? Over last two years freelance modders have achived more then DCS. Their "breaking the rule" is what keeps this game alive.

Without modability and freaks that mendle around and users that support them there would be no great skins, terains, models and utilities.

But, I guess you are neither user of mods or supporter.

 

We need modability, but it has to be contolled by the server, as in any other game.

 

@=2IAE=MetoBG: I'm sorry, my fault not to include that option :(

Please do not hold that against me.

In fact, to reflect the real life more properly, I would rather replace Su-25T with some other aircraft that is more widely used, but such suggestion would not receive warm welcome.

 

No matter which one gets replaced - oh well, even changed in mod - I would like that those codes for variable sweep could be available to the modders. That will not make any X-wing. Just variable wing.

 

But then, I didn't expect much of a support. Just take a lok at J-10 thread... Rick made such a great job, and half of the replies go like "make F-15" or straight OT :(

 

Yeah, I see a lot of people play that game where they take people out of context. Twisting it to their own agenda.

 

Read my post again... slowly this time.... because I don't think you got it right the first time.

 

 

but ED hardcoded weapons (dunno know why, careless decision IMO)

 

If you were around MP pre/post 1.1 you wouldn't say that it was careless. Hardcoding weapons was at request from the MP community who was sick to death of being splashed by a Mica carrying MiG-29A. Just as I did then, I still applaud ED for doing this.

 

Less modability = Less X-wings, Tie fighters and sharks with frickin laserbeams in the Lockon world.

 

Now where do I list texture or model replacement as an evil thing. The subject I was speaking of was Boberro umbrage with hard coded weapons. To put other words in my mouth is insulting.

 

To answer your question. Yes I have some mods installed, all are made by ED partners or welcomed by the whole Lock-On community such as walmis. Is such mods in the hands of trusted people good = yes. I have no mods with alter what little realism we have atm, e.g. R-77 able Su-27S/Su-33 or AIM-54 carrying F-15s.

[Boberro]

If you were around MP pre/post 1.1 you wouldn't say that it was careless. Hardcoding weapons was at request from the MP community who was sick to death of being splashed by a Mica carrying MiG-29A. Just as I did then, I still applaud ED for doing this.

 

Less modability = Less X-wings, Tie fighters and sharks with frickin laserbeams in the Lockon world.

 

This decision broke any Su25T modding. Also why obtrude it ? We can ban somebody who uses unallowed weapons, like now on AA servers, and there is no problem with it. Or forbrid all planes or none.;)

[AlexHunter]

Mig-27K (Kayra) is liked, he can also what SU-17M4 plus due to a «Kayra» to apply KAB (Corrected Air Bombs) with the laser system of aiming, and Cannon powerful Gsh6-30

[Renato71]

Yeah, I see a lot of people play that game where they take people out of context. Twisting it to their own agenda.

 

Read my post again... slowly this time.... because I don't think you got it right the first time.

 

 

It is you that are twisting the subject to your own agenda, going to extreme ideas while I suggest inserting something REAL. You are the one that should take time to read slower. Or more then two rows are to hard to read?

 

Also, I do not get what was the point in giving me a negative rep just because I suggest realistic modding and you have some personal issues? What is wrong with you? Do you give negative rep to everybody that questions your comments? Jeez, you are some tense person. Relax dude. How many negative have you given to Boberro? I guess his rep took a huge downfall since you joined up...

 

To bring back to the subject, if ED is going to devote full attention to DCS and BS, I see no reason for contolled modding of FC. People could submit their work, and all ED has to do is to approve and give blessing (or not).

 

I have hard time believing that LO/FC is limited to current number of flyables. ED does not have to be the one to add additional flyables (or the replace the existing ones), but why not instruct the people how to do that?

 

Like, there are those great models of various Mirages. Why waste those on AI? If ED could make few more flyable slots, I bet that French guys could find real pilots that will be more then happy to participate.

 

Demand for a high quality of visual and flying models for additional aircraft is OK, but let's be realistic - not all aircraft are modeled to the same level.

 

I remember the thread about MiG-21 that was to be added as AI. Quite a big demand (in my eyes) were put before the guy(s) that worked on it, while in the same time horrible models for other AI aircraft existed. If I recall correctly, MiG-21 will not be accepted if not modeled almost to the same level as Su-25T!

 

Well, that's why I suggest replacing old Su-25 - it needs rebuilding, so why not make new model even more exiting and replace it with another aircraft? Maybe some western counterpart, like Jaguar?

 

Cheers.

[Yeniceri]

HEY..Chill out guys..

No need to be hostile..Talking for every side here..

 

As a member of "Official Modder Team Of DCS series!!!" I know for effect that ED is not close to any kind of modding. In fact I never see or hear any kind of game builder that adds a modder group to the development stage..

After clearing that out..

 

I think there should be some red lines here..

Lockon is one of the most "cheat free" games as possible..

And we own it to the tightness of the code..

Adding a new aircraft or cockpit is not one of the priorities of the code and it should not be..

We do what we can do..Like we do for lockon now..

 

AS far as i see, keeping the flight model or weapon dynamics unmodable on a multiplayer simulation is not something to complain about..

 

So dont..

 

141st_Yeniceri

[Groove]

Please use the PM system for any interpersonal issues!

 

Being a mud mover in lockon the 504th squadron flies the Su-25 regulary and for me its one of the best planes in game.

[Geier]

. Maybe Su-25 could have a chance if LO:FC simulated conflicts in... or Afghanistan?

 

Surely;)

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

Well I think that the reason many of us like the "useless" Su-25 is exactly because it is old school.

 

When you complete your mission DESPITE the problems of navigating to the target with the guages instead of a HUD, spotting the target with the poor view out of the cockpit, hitting it with the rubbish weapon aiming system, then you know you have really accomplished something....

 

Having said that, I'd love a flyable Mig-27K or Su-17M4, they are my favorite AI jets, I use them in missions all the time.

I never fly the F-15 it's rubbish. So you can replace the F-15 with a Su-17 and I'd be happy!

[Weta43]

I'm with BRD - replace the F-15 & leave my lovely Su-25A alone !

[X-man]

Su-25A is not useless! :) OK, it doesnt have the fancy TV or Anti radar stuff, but I really enjoy it. It's old school and a kill is so much more rewarding in a A than a T.

 

Also, the flight dynamics is much better in the A, which I find really useful when avoiding AAA etc :joystick:

 

Kh-25ML, rockets and bombs all the way! :) Leave my Su-25A alone! :P

[mvsgas]

I agree with BRD, Weta and X-man. I love flying SU-25. Rokosowsky, I have no idea why they use SU-25 instead of the MIG-27 or SU-17. Maybe it is because the SU-25 is more recognizable than other aircraft. I know you can confuse it with a SU-39 but, MIG-27 could be confuse with a MIG-23 and SU-17 could be confuse with a SU-7, SU-20 or SU-22 for some people that might not be as much of a nerd as I am :) It would be cool to have a fast ground pounder aircraft but I would not like to replace the SU-25A.

[Xenomorph]

as i see, keeping the flight model or weapon dynamics unmodable on a multiplayer simulation is not something to complain about..

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. Keeping a lockdown on lots of game code does not guarantee a cheat-free environment, nor does a more accessible code format open the floodgates to cheaters. Look at games like UT2k4 and Red Orchestra. Sure, there are cheaters, but they are not terribly prevalent nor do they make a very big impact on the enjoyment of the game. There are so many new aircraft models out there (like the Rafael, Mirage F1) that simply can't be added without losing another aircraft. Tons of people would love to be able to fly a properly made F/A-18, but the best that can be done is a replacement of the Su-33. There is a huge base of people that would be completely willing to spend the time and energy needed to bring these aircraft to the same standard that we already see in the game (just look at the Falcon 4.0 community), they just need the right tools to do it. Will we see more cheaters if the game source becomes more accessible? Most likely, but this can be combated by any of the myriad of anti-cheat systems other games use. Will the benefit to the community outstrip the downside? I most certainly think so.

[mvsgas]

My advice is simple: Su-25 and Su-25T out, MiG-27K or Su-17M4 in!

 

That way we have plane with all Su-25T avionics/weapon capabilities merged with unparalleled aerodynamics all in one! Then SEAD and deep interdiction missions make sense!

 

PS. Why the hell does planes' similarities matter???

 

Wow man calm down, plane similarities do not matter. I was just wandering why ED use the SU-25/SU-25T to begin with instead of the aircraft you want that was all. gees!!

[Boberro]

IMO Su25 is unneccessary scrap-metal. In 90 years of XX century? Plane without LCD\TV monitor? No way! Su25T has a good capabilities, has TV, can do SEAD ect. Su22 or Mig27 also would be very good instead of poor Su25.

[Xenomorph]

Su22 or Mig27 also would be very good instead of poor Su25.

Isn't the Su-22 just an export variant of the Su-17 with downgraded avionics (and thus downgraded mission performance)?

Personally, I like the Su-25T. Unfortunately, if you want to do SEAD missions in either the Su-17M4 or the MiG-27K, you have to replace the Su-25T since ED hardcoded it in that no other player controlled aircraft can fire anti-radiation missiles.

[significant]

Russians quickly withdrew from service all MiG-27s and Su-17s in early 1990s but retained Su-25s junk!

It was because of single engine scheme.

[tkairshows]

I think that this is a good example of what the Russian Air Force thought of the Su-25's "value". I used to export aircraft from Russian in the early to mid 1990s. I could buy almost any aircraft available at very reasonable prices except for Su-25s and Mi-24. MiG-27s (both versions) and Su-17 were offered for a few thousand dollars ($5-25,000) while the Su-25s and Hinds were in the millions.

 

OT-For me personally I did pick up the sexiest version of a Mig-21, the MiG-21F-13 from the Czech Republic. I found that it was REALLY expensive to operate so in the end I flew a MiG-17 (Lim-6R) from Poland in airshows for a few years.

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

In the US single engine F-16s constitute a half of combat planes arsenal and it is OK. Nobody urges to withdraw them!

I dont think this is really a valid point to use in this discussion. The service life and reliability of the engines in single engined aircraft in the USAF is much, much higher than comparable single engined Russian aircraft. I can quite understand that the Russian Air Force could have withdrawn single engined aircraft and kept dual engined aircraft for safety reasons.

 

What is the MTBF (mean time between failures) for an engine in an F-16 compared to a typical Russian single engined aircraft? What is the service life in thousands of hours for an F-16 engine, a MiG-27 engine?