announced DCS MiG-29A

[Peter5on]

I wonder what they going to do with existing FC Mig-29, they will be practically the same planes. Its reminds me of VEAO Hawk flight model idea, having booth flight models for the same plane (simplified/professional) on the same server. I guess after release of full fidelity Mig-29 some server admins will ban simplified FC Mig-29. I personally think there is no point of doing the same plane. Make it K version for carrier operations otherwise it's a waste of time. Complaining about no redfor fully clickable planes have no sense because no one will fly it on the servers cos no one likes loosing every time. They should rather make Indian export version SU-30 or something, if they can't agree with Sukhoi.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Peter5on

[Wizard_03]

On 12/26/2020 at 3:34 AM, Lurker said:

Quick questions for those in the know how? How will the DCS Mig-29A compare to the FC3 Mig29A we already have in the game? Will it have "better" flight model? Different avionics? Different capabilities?

 

Is it just the inclusion of the clickable cockpit? Not sure why everyone is so excited for getting a module that we can already fly in game. Please, enlighten me.

The flight model we have is already PFM, so it won't change much, minus the aforementioned fixes/tweaks and there are a few AFCS modes that aren't implemented yet. Like approach mode and route following.

 

The WCS on the other hand needs a major overhaul, and the missiles need the new API. 

 

In other words nothing but good news, long overdue fixes. Plus ASM. 

[killkenny1]

22 hours ago, Peter5on said:

I wonder what they going to do with existing FC Mig-29, they will be practically the same planes. Its reminds me of VEAO Hawk flight model idea, having booth flight models for the same plane (simplified/professional) on the same server. I guess after release of full fidelity Mig-29 some server admins will ban simplified FC Mig-29. I personally think there is no point of doing the same plane. Make it K version for carrier operations otherwise it's a waste of time. Complaining about no redfor fully clickable planes have no sense because no one will fly it on the servers cos no one likes loosing every time. They should rather make Indian export version SU-30 or something, if they can't agree with Sukhoi.

 

 

Everyone I lot of people would love to see a K variant, but unfortunately beggars can't be choosers. As far as I understand A is the variant which ED received permission to do.

 

I would love to see even the first K (9.31) or M (9.31 was based on M), which didn't go into production. Still old tech (end of 80s), but is a bit more modern and has increased capability over 9.12 and 9.13.

 

-29M loadout:

http://airwar.ru/image/idop/fighter/mig29m/mig29m-2.gif

 

Its cockpit:

http://airwar.ru/image/idop/fighter/mig29m/mig29m-8.jpg

 

Mhhh, tasty

http://airwar.ru/image/idop/fighter/mig29m/mig29m-4.jpg

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by killkenny1

[Dragon1-1]

The MiG-29K would be interesting for one more reason: the ability to use it with the Kuznetsov. The K, after all, stands for "ship-borne" in Russian. Admittedly, for the timeframe DCS is mostly concerned with Su-33 would be more accurate, but the MiG was considered, too (and, in a modernized version, still is). 

[Wizard_03]

29K is also equipped with FBW.. 

 

Maybe someday Indian fighters like SU-30MKI and MiG-29K can get representation in DCS. In many ways they were the most advanced versions for a long time, and IMHO could provide both very realistic AND very competitive opponents for the mid 2000s hornet and viper.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Wizard_03

[Dragon1-1]

Unfortunately, we don't have any maps on which the Indian forces would, realistically, be found. While a Kashmir map would be awesome (JF-17 vs. Su-30MKI, anyone?), this isn't exactly something that a lot of people are asking for.

[killkenny1]

29 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Unfortunately, we don't have any maps on which the Indian forces would, realistically, be found. While a Kashmir map would be awesome (JF-17 vs. Su-30MKI, anyone?), this isn't exactly something that a lot of people are asking for.

 

Just give us the planes and we will find use for them. Viggen also doesn't have much to do in Caucasus region, yet there it is.

There shouldn't be much difference between Indian Navy MiG-29K and Russian Navy MiG-29K, and Su-30MKI and Su-30SM, apart from some avionics. So Indian variant ~ Russian variant.

[lmp]

20 hours ago, killkenny1 said:

Everyone would love to see a K variant, but unfortunately beggars can't be choosers.

 

Not everyone. I'm glad that we're getting a variant which saw widespread adoption and fits a lot of historical scenarios.

[bies]

Why some guys in this topic about "MiG-29A" are constantly go off topic spaming some super modern absolutely unrealistic totally classified MiG-29K produced in some tiny numbers which will never be possible to implement in DCS? Noone from ED mentioned some post-2010 Russian fighters as being even remotely possible. As for now even 1980s Su-27S is impossible.

 

Please open some other topic with this thing and not capture this one about MiG-29A, i understand mentioning it once or twice for some good reason but this is far too much.

Edited December 30, 2020 by bies

[TotenDead]

1 hour ago, bies said:

Why some guys in this topic about "MiG-29A" are constantly goes off topic spaming some super modern absolutely unrealistic totally classified MiG-29K produced in some tiny numbers which will never be possible to implement in DCS?

Well, people want a competitive red fighter

1 hour ago, bies said:

 

Noone from ED mentioned some post 2010 Russian fighters as being even remotely possible. As for now even 1980s Su-27S is impossible.

 

Not necessarily, it's just MiG-29 is a better known and more iconic plane

[Seaeagle]

22 hours ago, killkenny1 said:

I would love to see even the first K (9.31) or M (9.31 was based on M), which didn't go into production.

+ 1000

22 hours ago, killkenny1 said:

Still old tech (end of 80s), but is a bit more modern and has increased capability over 9.12 and 9.13.

It was a *lot* more modern - most of the features associated with the new MiG-29K(9.41) already existed with the old 1990 9.31 version.

 

[SharkWizard]

Now if we were ever to get a K, I for one would prefer the original K even if it wasn't mass produced. Much more beautiful lines and two nice CRTs  side by side in the cockpit.  It would surely open up lots of possibilities for use in DCS.

 

Still the original original 9.12 with those unnecessary fins that were later removed, and composite engine covers that could crack and fall off. Now that dream could only be matched by the pre-production model or was it prototype that had the forward landing gear right below the ejection seat.

 

Perfectly happy with a standard 80s 9.12 which would be wonderful.

[Northstar98]

On 12/30/2020 at 3:43 PM, TotenDead said:

Well, people want a competitive red fighter

If we get older BLUFOR aircraft, then this isn't as much of an issue. Just a shame nobody wants to do any. Fact is, we wouldn't be having this era disparity at all if we just picked an era that was doable for both sides and stuck with it until it was more fleshed out, instead of having maps modules and assets that are all over the place.

As of right now, the overwhelming majority of assets (that aren't WWII) are Cold War/Soviet era stuff, particularly mid-to-late Cold War, where a 9.12 fits absolutely fine, the issue is that our popular BLUFOR modules are much newer, and getting peer contemporaries most likely isn't going to happen (especially by ED) for the foreseeable future.

It would be much more feasible (and IMO make more sense given the era of most non-WWII assets, and the era of the map that comes with DCS) to do 80s and early 90s BLUFOR aircraft, which can even be variants of current aircraft.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting, spelling

[PE_Crni]

7 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

As of right now, the overwhelming majority of assets (that aren't WWII) are Cold War/Soviet era stuff, particularly mid-to-late Cold War, where a 9.12 fits absolutely fine, the issue is that our popular BLUFOR modules are much newer, and getting peer contemporaries most likely isn't going to happen (especially by ED) for the foreseeable future.

 

Well... the overwhelming majority of the current Russian assets are late Cold war stuff, and BLUFOR majority are much newer planes. Should a real confrontation occur, the mismatch wouldn't be any worse than in game.

[Northstar98]

On 12/31/2020 at 8:36 AM, PE_Crni said:

Well... the overwhelming majority of the current Russian assets are late Cold war stuff, and BLUFOR majority are much newer planes. Should a real confrontation occur, the mismatch wouldn't be any worse than in game.

Modules, sure. But as far as BLUFOR assets go, here are all the modern (post 2000s ones):

• Arleigh-Burke Flt.IIA 5"/62 class DDG (early 2000s+)
• Nimitz-Roosevelt CVN (early 2000s depending on when RAM and Phalanx Block 1B was installed)
• Ticonderoga-class CG (mid 2000s based on Mk38 Mod 2)
• Merkava IV MBT (mid 2000s)
• Stryker (M1126 ICV, M1128 MGS, M1134 ATGM - all early-to-mid 2000s)

Everything else is pre 2000s, including all of the air defence systems (MIM-104C is 1990, I-Hawk PIP Phase 1 is 1979, M163 VADS is 1969, M6 Linebacker is 90s (I think), AN/TWQ-1 Avenger is late 80s/early 90s and the M48 Chaparral is 80s).

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[lmp]

We actually do have peer contemporaries already in the excellent F-14 and solid Mirage 2000C. Also the Hornet, with some house rules (no 120s/9Xs, HMCS, maybe no datalink?) can represent a 80/90s bug pretty well. All these aircraft will have an advantage in the BVR arena, primarily due to better SA, but the MiG will eat them up close - as it should.

 

It's less a matter of having modules and more a question of whether people want to play such Cold War scenarios.

[Northstar98]

On 12/31/2020 at 11:51 AM, lmp said:

We actually do have peer contemporaries already in the excellent F-14 and solid Mirage 2000C. Also the Hornet, with some house rules (no 120s/9Xs, HMCS, maybe no datalink?) can represent a 80/90s bug pretty well. All these aircraft will have an advantage in the BVR arena, primarily due to better SA, but the MiG will eat them up close - as it should.

Apart from these very select 2 (the Mirage might be hazy depending on RADAR EDIT: this is 1989 at the earliest, most likely 90s), you'll have to restrict the weapons (no AIM-120s/9X, no ~JSOWS, no SLAM-ER) and no data-link; with the Hornet you're also flying with a maybe superior RADAR (APG-73 Phase II started in the late 90s (I think)) which means no SAR mode (EXP3) (and maybe NCTR) either. You'll also have to restrict the TGP (LITENING II is v. late 90s/early 2000s), we don't and won't be getting AAS-38A Nite Hawk.

Quote

It's less a matter of having modules and more a question of whether people want to play such Cold War scenarios.

Well, I'd argue that since the free map is Cold War (even if it's pretty unsuitable, given that it only has REDFOR airbases), and that the majority of assets (including every single land-based air defence unit). REDFOR modules (particularly full-fidelity, fixed wing ones) aren't going to get any newer than the mid-to-late Cold War either for the foreseeable future - the best we're going to get (out of ED at least) is a 9-12 MiG-29 from 1982.

As for what people want to play, it seems that most just want the latest and greatest possible, but there is at least a decent number who are interested in Cold War stuff. Only the former seems borderline impossible to get peer-to-peer, and the latter is much more feasible.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[lmp]

What I'm trying to say is we have a good base for 80/90s scenarios. There's already a bit of single player content set around the fall of USSR (the free Hornet campaign, the latest Tomcat campaign just to name two) that works well. In addition to the Mirage, Tomcat and restricted Hornet we have a few second rate aircraft like the F-5E and MiG-21bis, which are 70/80s versions, still very much in use in the early 90s. Hopefully ED return to the late F-4E Phantom after they do the MiG-29. That thing will sell great and hopefully get more people interested in the period. The Fulcrum will not be out of place at all.

[Dragon1-1]

Actually, with the Tomcat and Harrier we're pretty well set for a 90s scenario. Caucasus having no BLUFOR airbases is not a problem, because it has a great big chunk of the Black Sea. Naval aviation, anyone? The US Marines don't need no airbases.  

 

Also, ED expressed interest in an Afghan map. While not necessarily the greatest for competitive MP, we'd have it covered pretty well, from the Soviet period to Enduring Freedom. 

[Wizard_03]

Also the MiG-29 9-12 is not completely Helpless even against modern fighters, you still have R73, and 27T/ET and possibly the best TWR of any fighter in the game. 

 

It's a monster dogfighter. You have pretty much every tool you could possibly want for WVR, insane STR, high G, high Alpha control, And phenomenal acceleration. It's as forgiving as a jet with FBW while still giving you unbelievable performance. All that Plus HOBS, and IRST. 

 

120s are the biggest threat in the game for sure but IMO are really the ONLY thing the US jets have on it. Even the F-15. Take them away and it totally changes the balance. 

 

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by Wizard_03

[lmp]

The Western jets also have a huge SA advantage thanks to their RWRs, TWS radars, datalinks, superior human machine interface... It's not that visible in a straight up 1v1 or 2v2, but with multiple flights on both sides coming in at different angles, altitudes and ranges things will get very tricky for the Fulcrum. It will really benefit from a good human intercept controller.

[lmp]

1 hour ago, Wizard_03 said:

Also the MiG-29 9-12 is not completely Helpless even against modern fighters, you still have R73, and 27T/ET and possibly the best TWR of any fighter in the game. 

I don't believe the 9.12 supports R-27T/ET/ERs. Only R-27Rs.

[TotenDead]

4 hours ago, lmp said:

I don't believe the 9.12 supports R-27T/ET/ERs. Only R-27Rs.

Reality says it supports

[Dragon1-1]

8 hours ago, lmp said:

The Western jets also have a huge SA advantage thanks to their RWRs, TWS radars, datalinks, superior human machine interface...

TWS actually doesn't matter very much without AIM-120, because for a Sparrow launch you need STT anyway, and there's no reason to go for a radar lock with heaters if you have a HMS. In a guns-only or heaters-only fight, the MiG-29A would wipe the floor with most Western jets even with their RWRs and datalinks. In fact, in a dogfight, both the early MiG-29 and the F-16 would be superior to their later versions, thanks to being lighter and having more G tolerance. 

[TotenDead]

9 hours ago, lmp said:

The Western jets also have a huge SA advantage thanks to their RWRs, TWS radars, datalinks, superior human machine interface... 

You are comparing the very first MiG-29 to late 90s - 2000s aircraft, aren't you?