announced DCS MiG-29A

[draconus]

MiG-33 is just a project name. One dropped, the other being 29M/ME.

[Sol 1 Mihaly]

5 minutes ago, draconus said:

MiG-33 is just a project name. One dropped, the other being 29M/ME.

Either way, since ED is allowing Meteors, they might as well allow R-77M's and R-37's now to put Redfor on equal / correct time periods.

[Lurker]

20 minutes ago, Sol 1 Mihaly said:

With Eurofighter released, there needs to be a MiG-33 or MiG-29SMT at this point.

 

20 posts by Mihaly. All of them hostile. All of them pushing for "balance" and all of them slandering Eagle Dynamics for not making REDFOR or Russian adversary jets, all of them skewed towards crazy conspiracy theories for reasons why Eagle Dynamics can't or rather "won't" do Russian active duty jets. 

 

Do you really think that making a new forum alter ego, and writing ridiculous claims online will somehow make all of these fantasies of yours come true? And they are fantasies. Why can't you enjoy what we have in the sim, instead of crying about what we can't have? 

Edited August 20, 2021 by Lurker

[BIGNEWY]

Please read the rules before posting, trolling posts have been removed, please keep the feedback civil and to the rules. 

 

thanks

[Silver_Dragon]

17 minutes ago, Sol 1 Mihaly said:

Either way, since ED is allowing Meteors, they might as well allow R-77M's and R-37's now to put Redfor on equal / correct time periods.

 

R-77M only on develop to the Su-57, R-37 has only use by Mig-31BMs interceptors

[Lurker]

I think one of the main reasons why Russian laws and regulations (and this is pure conjecture on my part, mind you) are so very strict in this regards with Eagle Dynamics, even though much of the data is probably readily on hand and publicly available for many of these aircraft, is not so much a fear of NATO and others having access to classified documents or data, since it's probably fair to say that NATO and others are very well acquainted with the capabilities of 80-90s era REDFOR fighters and weapons systems, but probably because they do not want it to become generally known how badly these airplanes performed compared to their western contemporaries. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Russian fighters, the Mig29A is a prime example of a premier fighter design, at least on par to pretty much anything when it was put into service. This is why ED have probably managed to get permission to eventually make it a DCS module. 

 

Other designs however, like the Su27 air superiority fighter, and it's derivatives or like the upgraded Mig29 variants etc. have changed very little over time, are still actively flown and more importantly sold to client states, but were superseded by US advances in electronics, radar technology and missile design even at the moment of their first entering service. 

 

In short, it's a matter of pride. At least that's my take on it. As long as there are no accurate simulations of any of these "forbidden" aircraft, in the imagination of everyone who has admired them they will always be more capable then they were in real life. 

Edited August 20, 2021 by Lurker

[ReyCandy]

hace 11 minutos, Lurker dijo:

In short, it's a matter of pride. At least that's my take on it. As long as there are no accurate simulations of any of these "forbidden" aircraft, in the imagination of everyone who has admired them they will always be more capable then they were in real life. 

 

I think the same. Virtually no DCS aircraft behaves like a real one. They can be as well simulated as you want, but that's what it is: simulated. The real systems are not there and many times the systems do what they are supposed to do but it really is a little programming hoax to make it look real. No serious nation is going to spy on another through DCS. It would be ridiculous... It is a very well done simulator, but nothing more.

 

On the other hand, if someone wanted to do a Mig29 they could do it. Some systems would work more or less like the real thing and others would be invented to make them look real. I personally would not care if they are like real one or not. I have never flown and will never fly a Mig29 and I think almost no one here will. Would anyone notice? I would prefer to have a more or less correct simulation of a Mig29 or Su27 would be than to have only the FC3.

 

This is my opinion.

[WarbossPetross]

1 час назад, Lurker сказал:

I think one of the main reasons why Russian laws and regulations (and this is pure conjecture on my part, mind you) are so very strict in this regards with Eagle Dynamics, even though much of the data is probably readily on hand and publicly available for many of these aircraft, is not so much a fear of NATO and others having access to classified documents or data, since it's probably fair to say that NATO and others are very well acquainted with the capabilities of 80-90s era REDFOR fighters and weapons systems, but probably because they do not want it to become generally known how badly these airplanes performed compared to their western contemporaries. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Russian fighters, the Mig29A is a prime example of a premier fighter design, at least on par to pretty much anything when it was put into service. This is why ED have probably managed to get permission to eventually make it a DCS module. 

 

Other designs however, like the Su27 air superiority fighter, and it's derivatives or like the upgraded Mig29 variants etc. have changed very little over time, are still actively flown and more importantly sold to client states, but were superseded by US advances in electronics, radar technology and missile design even at the moment of their first entering service. 

 

In short, it's a matter of pride. At least that's my take on it. As long as there are no accurate simulations of any of these "forbidden" aircraft, in the imagination of everyone who has admired them they will always be more capable then they were in real life. 

 

After the Soviet Union collapsed the Warsaw Pact countries and ex-Soviet member states were racing to carve themselves a place within the Western world and economy. For many (arguably most) of them that included NATO membership, which in turn entailed inspections of their militaries by NATO personnel to assess their current state. You can safely assume that all good and bad qualities of Soviet equipment are no secret to anyone who matters.

 

But that was 30 years ago. Russia was in no state to develop any modern tech until about a decade ago, so the technology they had at the timeline of our existing Hornets and Falcons is obviously nothing to write home about. And these are the airframes that ED was allowed to model, mind you. Good luck getting any info on Bars-equipped Su-30MKI. Good luck getting the same for the Super Hornet, F-15EX and what have you. And these are what the modern arms market is about, generally speaking. If modern Russian airframes were so bad why would anyone pay for them? It's all about that 20-year gap in technology and development effort that Russian aircraft production and the current allowed timeline fall through.

[Harlikwin]

9 hours ago, WarbossPetross said:

And correct me if I'm wrong, but there are only so many left to choose from. Skyhawk, Corsair (both of them, actually), Crusader and Intruder are already in the works. So, aside from European designs which I'm no big expert on, that leaves us with the Aardvark, the Starfighter and one particular thicc bird that, apparently, is not to be named by any DCS module developer...

 

I mean you have the whole of the century series F100, 101, 102, 104, 105, 106 thats not spoken for. But the Big one is the F4 and all its variants. Not to mention early variants of the F16/18/15.

 

Carrier wise, you have all the early 50's and 60's oddballs, and then the A4 (an official one), A7 (IDK whats going on with the dev but I'd guess they gave up), F4 again, And F8 is a ways out IMO.  

Eurowise, well theres a bunch there too, V1 harriers, Jag, Torando, Mirage 3, A-A viggen, draken, etc. 

 

And even for red there are plenty of things like a Su-7, Su-17, Su-25FF, Su-24, and different mig versions of the stuff we have.

[Lurker]

On 8/20/2021 at 5:29 PM, WarbossPetross said:

If modern Russian airframes were so bad why would anyone pay for them? It's all about that 20-year gap in technology and development effort that Russian aircraft production and the current allowed timeline fall through.

 

You've missed the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying that they are bad. I'm saying that the particular variants were inferior to their contemporaries at the time of their introduction to service. 

 

I do agree that it's complicated though. How do you make a proper Mig29A simulation, without including the complex EWR and GCI systems that it was designed to operate with? 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Lurker

[Gierasimov]

I am sooooo loooking forward to the newsletter that will finally confirm / announce MiG-29...

 

I went to the airshow this weekend, where a young fighter pilot girl was smiling and offering her remarks how great it is to be the MiG driver, since I won't be in real life, I want my DCS MiG-29 (FC3) experience to expand.  

[Furiz]

As far as I know ED said they want to do it, but they want to do many jets, anyway I never saw anything said about it being in development, last they said about MiG 29 was this:

 

So I guess you should keep looking forward;P

 

 

I'd love to see it in DCS ofc, best if they could do a version to match our Hornet and Viper around 2005.

[bies]

9.12 obviously won't match "Hornet and Viper around 2005", but instead it will match other late Cold War F-14 Tomcat, Mirage F.1, Mirage 2000, Viggen, MiG-23MLA, A-6E Intruder, A-7E Corsair, Su-17M, MiG-21bis, F-5E, Mi-24, Mi-8, Gazelle, Huey, F-15C, A-10A, Su-27S, Su-25A, L-39, C-101, Bolkov 105 etc.

[Furiz]

17 minutes ago, bies said:

9.12 obviously won't match "Hornet and Viper around 2005", but instead it will match other late Cold War F-14 Tomcat, Mirage F.1, Mirage 2000, Viggen, MiG-23MLA, A-6E Intruder, A-7E Corsair, Su-17M, MiG-21bis, F-5E, Mi-24, Mi-8, Gazelle, Huey, F-15C, A-10A, Su-27S, Su-25A, L-39, C-101, Bolkov 105 etc.

 

You forgot the community mods

Since you listed modules that are not even in EA and FC3 modules, you should have included the community mods too.

Edited August 23, 2021 by Furiz

[bies]

MiG-29 is not even officially announced yet - probably most of the modules currently being developed will be ready before the MiG-29. (Community mods are not available in most SP missions or MP servers so i didn't include them.)

 

1980s campaigns where Soviet MiG-21 and MiG-23 escorting Su-17 and Su-25 attacking NATO forces. MiG-29 and Su-27 intercepting Viggens, A-6 and A-7 escorted by NATO F-14 Tomcats and Mirages or fighting for air superiority against F-15s. With Bo-105, Gazelles, Hueys, Mi-24 and Mi-8 attacking ground forces.

Or Israeli-Syrian 1982 Lebanon war, or 1980s Iraq-Iran war, or Desert Storm.

Way more exciting than 2000s one sided mud hut bombing or USAF vs. USN fictional scenarios.

 

But that's the future. Many of this modules will be finished during the next 2-3 years, including MiG-29.

[Cmptohocah]

On 8/20/2021 at 3:49 PM, Lurker said:

 

...All of them pushing for "balance"...

 

 

Balance comes from LOMAC (FC). It was very well balanced. A2A was F-15C vs Su-27S and MiG-29S/A with either side having its own advantages (Eagle with TWS/AMRAAM; Flanker with DL; Fulcrum with acceleration and R-77)

I mean it would not be fun to fight against F-15A as it would be way inferior than the Flanker for example.

Problem is that ED started an open arms race with the 3rd party modules and Russian/Soviet planes stayed behind with very slimm chance of ever catching up.

Now we have a situation where only western airplanes are becomimg more and more modern and we (red drivers) are left in the dirt. Of course people are complainign and wanting better/newer platforms).

I am talking about multiplayer experience.

[GGTharos]

24 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Balance comes from LOMAC (FC). It was very well balanced. A2A was F-15C vs Su-27S and MiG-29S/A with either side having its own advantages (Eagle with TWS/AMRAAM; Flanker with DL; Fulcrum with acceleration and R-77)

I mean it would not be fun to fight against F-15A as it would be way inferior than the Flanker for example.

 

You're fighting something that's less than an F-15A.  The ability to shoot DCS 120s makes up for a lot of course.  The flanker was inferior to the F-15C the day it entered service, and it was more or less equivalent to the F-15A in terms of radar performance (except range) and maybe a little less computing power for the flanker but with the advantage of R-73s.

 

But I generally agree about the LOMAC balance, it happened because things aren't differentiated that much.

 

24 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Now we have a situation where only western airplanes are becomimg more and more modern and we (red drivers) are left in the dirt. Of course people are complainign and wanting better/newer platforms).

I am talking about multiplayer experience.

 

And that's a fair point, but the other point is that this sort of PvP is far, far from the only game in town.  Even with this imbalance there can be interesting scenarios, but you won't see those on airquake servers.

Edited August 24, 2021 by GGTharos

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

 

And that's a fair point, but the other point is that this sort of PvP is far, far from the only game in town.  Even with this imbalance there can be interesting scenarios, but you won't see those on airquake servers.

 

It's a shame when they are the more interesting missions to fly too, at least in my opinion. Though I guess to be fair, red really does need the upcoming IADS being developed for AI.

[Harlikwin]

6 hours ago, Cmptohocah said:

 

Balance comes from LOMAC (FC). It was very well balanced. A2A was F-15C vs Su-27S and MiG-29S/A with either side having its own advantages (Eagle with TWS/AMRAAM; Flanker with DL; Fulcrum with acceleration and R-77)

I mean it would not be fun to fight against F-15A as it would be way inferior than the Flanker for example.

Problem is that ED started an open arms race with the 3rd party modules and Russian/Soviet planes stayed behind with very slimm chance of ever catching up.

Now we have a situation where only western airplanes are becomimg more and more modern and we (red drivers) are left in the dirt. Of course people are complainign and wanting better/newer platforms).

I am talking about multiplayer experience.

 

Yeah, more or less the whole MP experience is negaively impacted by the lack of modern opfor. I guess in the near future we will be able to do the US vs Europe...

 

On 8/23/2021 at 6:00 AM, Lurker said:

 

You've missed the point I was trying to make. I'm not saying that they are bad. I'm saying that the particular variants were inferior to their contemporaries at the time of their introduction to service. 

 

I do agree that it's complicated though. How do you make a proper Mig29A simulation, without including the complex EWR and GCI systems that it was designed to operate with? 

 

 

Yeah, ED really needs to step up their game on the whole "enviroment" aspect of DCS, but of course improving the core game costs money so they need to recoup that with each module. 

[Gierasimov]

I am actually looking forward to BS3 as well. Which I will buy even though I might end up not flying it (like in A-10CII case), just to support ED. 

It is well known that the MiG-29 team will be formally assigned to the MiG project after BS3. Well, at least that was the plan when the beans spilled.

So, want MiG? Buy Ka-50.

[Furiz]

4 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

I am actually looking forward to BS3 as well. Which I will buy even though I might end up not flying it (like in A-10CII case), just to support ED. 

It is well known that the MiG-29 team will be formally assigned to the MiG project after BS3. Well, at least that was the plan when the beans spilled.

So, want MiG? Buy Ka-50.

 

I think BS3 was cancelled, I think I have read that somewhere, but I may be wrong.

[Northstar98]

On 8/25/2021 at 3:52 PM, Furiz said:

I think BS3 was cancelled, I think I have read that somewhere, but I may be wrong.

It hasn't been cancelled, they share WIP screenshots of it semi-regularly (once every few months or so).

See here, here and here. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[Gierasimov]

Sniper @Northstar98 thank you.

 

Let me put a little highlight as well:

 

This new version of the highly successful Ka-50 simulation should be available this summer and will be offered to existing owners of Black Shark II with a substantial discount.

[SharkWizard]

1 hour ago, Furiz said:

 

I think BS3 was cancelled, I think I have read that somewhere, but I may be wrong.

It was un-cancelled when they got a go ahead from the appropriate government ministries to model some newer avionics.

[Gierasimov]

Do you like digital camo patterns? To me this is looking awesome!