Su-30MKK Full fid or FC3 version?

[Oceandar]

For early acces with quite alot of guesses I'd only willing to pay 60 bucks tbh. Generally I'm ok with avionic assumptions. Look at what RB did with M2K. They did quite alot of wrong avionic implementations in M2K which they fixed it with the help of French Air Foce later on.
Most average players like me wouldnt know the real thing anyway. So... bring it on.

[AnarchyZG]

On 6/9/2021 at 11:46 PM, L0op8ack said:

Let's make it clear:

1. Su-30MKK is an internal project for self-challenge, to create a reusable multi-crew framework(not fully done) and multi-language support avoinics(done but need tweak),
2. FM is 90% done if not 95%. Thanks to our FM guys, TVC is considered, so FM code may be ported to MKI,
3. We had read some docs, but lacking many sub system docs(in details), we cannot reach the basic DCS FF standard ATM,

yes, it's started, more like a test bed of some ideas than a real project.
To DCS FF standard? we need 2 more weeks(TM)!

 

 

Does ED permit FC3 (or for the sake of the argument FC3+, FC3++) level modules by 3rd party developers? Maybe in MAC if it is interoperable with DCS...
Again, I have no idea how much info you guys actually have at your disposal but I'm convinced that a lot of "educated guesses" could and would be accepted gladly by the customers.

[Neoshot]

On 6/10/2021 at 3:16 AM, L0op8ack said:

Let's make it clear:

1. Su-30MKK is an internal project for self-challenge, to create a reusable multi-crew framework(not fully done) and multi-language support avoinics(done but need tweak),
2. FM is 90% done if not 95%. Thanks to our FM guys, TVC is considered, so FM code may be ported to MKI,
3. We had read some docs, but lacking many sub system docs(in details), we cannot reach the basic DCS FF standard ATM,

yes, it's started, more like a test bed of some ideas than a real project.
To DCS FF standard? we need 2 more weeks(TM)!

 

What do you mean by ported to MKI? how do you guys plan to access its avionics and confidential data. the manufacturers or the Indian Airforce will never declassify it 

 

Edited June 19, 2021 by Neoshot

[Riojano]

2 hours ago, Neoshot said:

What do you mean by ported to MKI? how do you guys plan to access its avionics and confidential data. the manufacturers or the Indian Airforce will never declassify it 

 

 

"FM code may be ported to MKI"

[Neoshot]

12 hours ago, Riojano said:

"FM code may be ported to MKI"

Exactly as they said may be that means they can try which again raises my question

[Riojano]

3 hours ago, Neoshot said:

Exactly as they said may be that means they can try which again raises my question

FM code can be done without access to avionics or confidential data, fuselage are the same, and the engines (al31f on mkk and al31fp in mki) have the same thrust, 122,6 Kn but the mki with TVC.

[bies]

What some guys are proposing is an absolute disaster, making UNREALISTIC Su-30 would undermine the DCS core. It would open Pandora's box to make fictional everything, it would massively decrease DCS standard for the future. Strive for realism is what constitutes DCS and what sets DCS apart from WT, Ace Combat and other medium level combat simulators.

 

As much as I love Su-27 there is no such thing as "educated guess" without documentation, it's a key word to justify everything, it would be just a fiction. Made up systems working totally different than the real ones, fictional avionics, fictional MFD pages, fictional modes, fictional flight parameters, fictional weapon systems logic and performance etc. 

 

When even developer himself said they don't have required documentation to make Su-30 they absolutely shouldn't make it, "educated guess" MODs are already here.

 

It would give me absolutely zero satisfaction to shoot down some enemy with my fictional Su-30 knowing my enemy's aircraft is on a completely different level of realism, simulation and documentation than my made up Su and I love DCS as it is, as as reasonably realistic as it can be - increasing it's standard with time, not decreasing it.

Edited June 23, 2021 by bies

[FoxAlfa]

On 6/11/2021 at 6:16 PM, LJQCN101 said:

I haven't checked. Is there any player tested data like level acceleration SEP in m/s? RL flight manuals have Vy charts for those figures.

There were few discutions on FC3 Su-27 page:

 

 

and third:

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/187047-low-engine-output-thrust/page/2/

 

 

 

Edited June 23, 2021 by FoxAlfa

[Riojano]

4 hours ago, bies said:

What some guys are proposing is an absolute disaster, making UNREALISTIC Su-30 would undermine the DCS core. It would open Pandora's box to make fictional everything, it would massively decrease DCS standard for the future. Strive for realism is what constitutes DCS and what sets DCS apart from WT, Ace Combat and other medium level combat simulators.

 

As much as I love Su-27 there is no such thing as "educated guess" without documentation, it's a key word to justify everything, it would be just a fiction. Made up systems working totally different than the real ones, fictional avionics, fictional MFD pages, fictional modes, fictional flight parameters, fictional weapon systems logic and performance etc. 

 

When even developer himself said they don't have required documentation to make Su-30 they absolutely shouldn't make it, "educated guess" MODs are already here.

 

It would give me absolutely zero satisfaction to shoot down some enemy with my fictional Su-30 knowing my enemy's aircraft is on a completely different level of realism, simulation and documentation than my made up Su and I love DCS as it is, as as reasonably realistic as it can be - increasing it's standard with time, not decreasing it.

 

LOL

[kseremak]

  

8 hours ago, bies said:

What some guys are proposing is an absolute disaster, making UNREALISTIC Su-30 would undermine the DCS core. It would open Pandora's box to make fictional everything, it would massively decrease DCS standard for the future. Strive for realism is what constitutes DCS and what sets DCS apart from WT, Ace Combat and other medium level combat simulators.

 

As much as I love Su-27 there is no such thing as "educated guess" without documentation, it's a key word to justify everything, it would be just a fiction. Made up systems working totally different than the real ones, fictional avionics, fictional MFD pages, fictional modes, fictional flight parameters, fictional weapon systems logic and performance etc. 

 

When even developer himself said they don't have required documentation to make Su-30 they absolutely shouldn't make it, "educated guess" MODs are already here.

 

It would give me absolutely zero satisfaction to shoot down some enemy with my fictional Su-30 knowing my enemy's aircraft is on a completely different level of realism, simulation and documentation than my made up Su and I love DCS as it is, as as reasonably realistic as it can be - increasing it's standard with time, not decreasing it.

 

If it would be non-documented questionable realism WAGuess (wild ass guess) Su-30 i would skip this one as well. Decreasing realism standard is not my cup of tea nor the direction i would like DCS to go. 

If they would have proper documentation on par with other DCS modules count me in. I simply don't believe Su-30MKK will be disclosed being a backbone of today's Chinese military. Especially in current situation.

 

By the way Su-30MKK is the poorest performer among Su-27 family, with worse acceleration, slower turn rate and climb rate, smaller speed, lower ceiling, even shorter range than legacy Soviet Su-27S from '80s. Only avionics would be way better - and avionics would be, as i understand what DEKA has, the least realistic part...

Edited June 23, 2021 by kseremak

[F-2]

3 hours ago, kseremak said:

  

 

If it would be non-documented questionable realism WAGuess (wild ass guess) Su-30 i would skip this one as well. Decreasing realism standard is not my cup of tea nor the direction i would like DCS to go. 

If they would have proper documentation on par with other DCS modules count me in. I simply don't believe Su-30MKK will be disclosed being a backbone of today's Chinese military. Especially in current situation.

 

By the way Su-30MKK is the poorest performer among Su-27 family, with worse acceleration, slower turn rate and climb rate, smaller speed, lower ceiling, even shorter range than legacy Soviet Su-27S from '80s. Only avionics would be way better - and avionics would be, as i understand what DEKA has, the least realistic part...

 

I think all the Su-30s would have less kinetic preformance than the Su-27s because they have the same power plant but are heavier. The MKK it a bit lighter then the MKI family.

[bies]

11 minutes ago, F-2 said:

I think all the Su-30s would have less kinetic preformance than the Su-27s because they have the same power plant but are heavier. The MKK it a bit lighter then the MKI family.

 

Yes, increased empty mass with heavier undercarriage, reinforced structure, additional tail fuel tanks, air refuel installation and probe, increased drag of enlarged vertical stabilizers and tall 2-seat canopy.

 

Not a Soviet hotrod like Su-27S/P anymore, but it would still be ok in kinematic department, on par with most classic 4th gen fighters except for pure fighters like Su-27S, F-15C or Eurofighter.

[AnarchyZG]

so, you don't have a problem with F-15 in DCS right?

[F-2]

Hey is their any talk of an MKK and MKI/SM AI asset? I think their is a N011m .lua in game if I recall.

[Etha2007]

21 hours ago, F-2 said:

Hey is their any talk of an MKK and MKI/SM AI asset? I think their is a N011m .lua in game if I recall.

The  N011M is for the Su-34, I believe.

[F-2]

1 hour ago, Etha2007 said:

The  N011M is for the Su-34, I believe.

Interesting, I never new it was on the 34, either way good for us.

[IcedVenom]

I just wish we had some kind of confirmation regarding what they are working on. I would love to see a J-7E in DCS or J-8 if not Su-30, but maybe it's just the case that not even DEKA knows that they want to do next.

[pepin1234]

There is a Su-30 mod on the way. They are doing amazing job in 3D art. Look really promising and I support all free mods around a simulator. If someone don't like it, just don't install it, don't play it and the community itself will judge the job made. 

[IcedVenom]

On 7/1/2021 at 12:24 AM, pepin1234 said:

There is a Su-30 mod on the way. They are doing amazing job in 3D art. Look really promising and I support all free mods around a simulator. If someone don't like it, just don't install it, don't play it and the community itself will judge the job made. 

I'm asking about official DEKA aircraft thanks

[Jester986]

Well on Facebook they said they don't have the documents to make MKK.

[IcedVenom]

1 hour ago, Jester986 said:

Well on Facebook they said they don't have the documents to make MKK.

Not yet. We'll see what happens.

[Badger1-1]

Their statement sounded more like: its not going to happen.. rather then: maybe soon we will see

[iyhan_spb]

On 6/10/2021 at 12:46 AM, L0op8ack said:

Let's make it clear:

1. Su-30MKK is an internal project for self-challenge, to create a reusable multi-crew framework(not fully done) and multi-language support avoinics(done but need tweak),
2. FM is 90% done if not 95%. Thanks to our FM guys, TVC is considered, so FM code may be ported to MKI,
3. We had read some docs, but lacking many sub system docs(in details), we cannot reach the basic DCS FF standard ATM,

yes, it's started, more like a test bed of some ideas than a real project.
To DCS FF standard? we need 2 more weeks(TM)!

 

 

Shut up and take my money!!! Where is preorder link?!?!

[Max1mus]

On the topic of SPO-32, there are SU-33 cockpit images with a clear picture of one (it is turned off though). Not sure if its integrated on the modern Su-30s or if they have it in the cockpit somewhere like the -33.

[F-2]

Would you guys consider a SU-30kn as an alternative to the MKK? It has the same cockpit as the standard su-30 but with the crt display replaced with a MFI-55. It uses a pesa radar and has a much larger array of weapons. It can also leverage work Deka has already done on multi crew. Of course it is the least sexy option, but it does seem to benefit from work done. Also I think this is what the DCS npc SU-30 is.