Deka Simulations announces the DCS: J-8II for DCS World!

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

5 minutes ago, jonny415 said:

Don’t think ED will let 3rd party make MiG-29 it’s ganna be a money maker for them

 

They make money either way. They've even said that a third party is free to do so.

[Bananabrai]

8 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

They've even said that a third party is free to do so.

Statement of the past, not true any more.

[Top Jockey]

On 2/21/2023 at 1:17 PM, bies said:

Still way more Chinese than Su-30.

J-8II PP is Chinese airframe with foreign avionics, when Su-30 is foreign Russian airframe with foreign Russian avionics.

 

Help me to understand over here :

Isn't the J-8II airframe, essentially a remake of the Russian's Su-15 "Flagon" airframe ?

Edited February 22, 2023 by Top Jockey

[LowRider88]

4 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Help me to understand over here :

Isn't the J-8II airframe, essentially a remake of the Russian's Su-15 "Flagon" airframe ?

 

I think the onus is on you to do the research confirm that assertion.

Why?  Because it looks like something?  Can you be more scientific?

[F-2]

16 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Help me to understand over here :

Isn't the J-8II airframe, essentially a remake of the Russian's Su-15 "Flagon" airframe ?

 

Similar roles, different dimensions, internals, etc. the details are all different. The Chinese further developed the J-8 beyond what the Soviets did with the Su-15.

[Top Jockey]

 

51 minutes ago, LowRider88 said:

I think the onus is on you to do the research confirm that assertion.

Why?  Because it looks like something?  Can you be more scientific?

No, it's not because it looks like something, it's because the two airframe's design, blueprint, form, silhouette, (call it what you want) really are very similar.

So don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about internals / hardware / etc, but my 'scientific assertion' is that anyone with 2 eyes can see the two airframes are highly identical, just that.

 

40 minutes ago, F-2 said:

Similar roles, different dimensions, internals, etc. the details are all different. The Chinese further developed the J-8 beyond what the Soviets did with the Su-15.

Very good, I fully understand.

Looking to photos of both jets throughout the web, indeed the J-8II looks more refined and maintained.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Top Jockey

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

9 hours ago, Bananabrai said:

Statement of the past, not true any more.

I know their reasoning for not, but I hadn't heard the third party one. Got that update? I'd like to read it in full, DM it to me if you can as to not derail.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

1 hour ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Help me to understand over here :

Isn't the J-8II airframe, essentially a remake of the Russian's Su-15 "Flagon" airframe ?

 

Nah. In oversimplified terms, the J-8 series has more in common with the MiG-21 as the J-8I (Called J-8A later on) was created out of a proposal to make the J-7 bigger and thus more capable. The J-7 was lacking in range and, given the size of China's territory, they needed something to cover a lot more land. The really simplified way to look at the J-8 is a MiG-21 that's been increased in size to accommodate more fuel for greater range and more power in the form of two engines. The J-8I, however, wasn't the most advanced fighter for its time. It did its job, but it became pretty clear that it was going to need improvements in terms of its sophistication by 1980.

So, it got better radar and that gave it the shape that bears some resemblance to the Su-15. In fact, sources typically cite aircraft like the F-4 Phantom and MiG-23 as inspiration for the Finback's shape, not the Flagon. In fact, one could say that the MiG-23 provided more to copy from than the Su-15. This development is what became the J-8II, what we're getting. Then, toward the end of the 1980s, the PLAAF wanted its J-8IIs to be more capable of intercepting Soviet bombers and so they went to the US for the Peace Pearl program, which is the exact variant we're receiving.

So, is the J-8 a remake of the Flagon? Nah, not even close. Is it a chimera? Kind of, but not much more so than any nation's first domestically designed and produced aircraft. Is it a MiG-21? An honest man would say it has MiG-21 roots at the most, but I am going to say it is because my bias is apparent!

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Top Jockey]

12 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Nah. In oversimplified terms, the J-8 series has more in common with the MiG-21 as the J-8I (Called J-8A later on) was created out of a proposal to make the J-7 bigger and thus more capable. The J-7 was lacking in range and, given the size of China's territory, they needed something to cover a lot more land. The really simplified way to look at the J-8 is a MiG-21 that's been increased in size to accommodate more fuel for greater range and more power in the form of two engines. The J-8I, however, wasn't the most advanced fighter for its time. It did its job, but it became pretty clear that it was going to need improvements in terms of its sophistication by 1980.

So, it got better radar and that gave it the shape that bears some resemblance to the Su-15. In fact, sources typically cite aircraft like the F-4 Phantom and MiG-23 as inspiration for the Finback's shape, not the Flagon. In fact, one could say that the MiG-23 provided more to copy from than the Su-15. This development is what became the J-8II, what we're getting. Then, toward the end of the 1980s, the PLAAF wanted its J-8IIs to be more capable of intercepting Soviet bombers and so they went to the US for the Peace Pearl program, which is the exact variant we're receiving.

So, is the J-8 a remake of the Flagon? Nah, not even close. Is it a chimera? Kind of, but not much more so than any nation's first domestically designed and produced aircraft. Is it a MiG-21? An honest many would say it has MiG-21 roots at the most, but I am going to say it is because my bias is apparent!

 

 

 

Thank you for the info, MiG21.

The part in bold, I can see 'combined' similarities with those 2 types also, but then there's always that impression: however it ends up highly resembling the Su-15.

But then again, for example when several times people say there are resemblances between the MiG-29 airframe and the Hornet ... I've always find the MiG-29 airframe much more similar with the F-15's airframe.

 

[Harlikwin]

21 hours ago, jonny415 said:

Looking at a different angle we are getting this variant later on we "might" get different variant with Chinese avionics. Hopefully after F15E release Razbam can release Mig-23MLA. Tease of FF Mig-29 from ED on TikTok. We are getting some non-NATO aircraft in the game. DCS World started to look like NATO exercises simulator.    

Ultimately, the future of DCS is cold war. DCS modern is basically a dead end. Currently we have like ~10 Cold war modules (F4/23/A7/A6/F100/G91/kfir/J8PP/mig29 (mig17 and su17 likely too)) in the pipe, and literally 1 modern module (EF). And really for modern what more can plausibly be done? ED likely will squirt out an F18E that will be a warmed over C model. You've got the Rafale (unlikely), Mirage2000-5 (maybe), And the grippen (again unlikely) and the F15C (maybe). Thats it for modern, likely only 1-2 more modules. Meanwhile for CW you have smorgasboard of 50's, 60's and 70's planes, I can think of like 20 off the top of my head.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

18 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Thank you for the info, MiG21.

The part in bold, I can see 'combined' similarities with those 2 types also, but then there's always that impression: however it ends up highly resembling the Su-15.

But then again, for example when several times people say there are resemblances between the MiG-29 airframe and the Hornet ... I've always find the MiG-29 airframe much more similar with the F-15's airframe.

 

You'll find that airframe development acts a lot like biological evolution; nature shapes its designs, so a lot of examples will fit certain niches and similarities will arise.

[Top Jockey]

42 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

You'll find that airframe development acts a lot like biological evolution; nature shapes its designs, so a lot of examples will fit certain niches and similarities will arise.

I know, you are describing: similar objectives often result in similar solutions.

Let's see if I can get my point across, regarding airframe designs :

 

example: JF-17 ; J-20 ... highly original / inovative airframe designs

example: J-7 / F-7 ; J-8II ; J-11 ; etc ... highly identical to already existing russian airframes

(No big surprise, as some of these aircraft were licenced production variants from Russia.)

 

Not intending to diminish in any way, just looking at airframe origins.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Top Jockey

[Exorcet]

36 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Ultimately, the future of DCS is cold war. DCS modern is basically a dead end.

I don't think modern is quite done. Modern aircraft share more hardware but are diverse in software for example, this allows for the possibility of add ons such A-10C II or BS3 for the existing aircraft. Then there are also export versions and modernized Cold War fighters. Export Hornets and Vipers have some nice features that our modules don't. I also personally want to see modernized F-4, F-5, MiG-21 etc to go along with their older counterparts. DCS also lacks anything from a few nations such as India, Japan, and the UK. Not to mention that looking at the long term, the list will expand as classified material expires.

[Harlikwin]

19 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I don't think modern is quite done. Modern aircraft share more hardware but are diverse in software for example, this allows for the possibility of add ons such A-10C II or BS3 for the existing aircraft. Then there are also export versions and modernized Cold War fighters. Export Hornets and Vipers have some nice features that our modules don't. I also personally want to see modernized F-4, F-5, MiG-21 etc to go along with their older counterparts. DCS also lacks anything from a few nations such as India, Japan, and the UK. Not to mention that looking at the long term, the list will expand as classified material expires.

Honestly you won't see that stuff because of documentation issues largely. Even the current crop of DCS stuff is missing huge swaths of capabilities. DCS modern, is literally modeling 4th gen jets as "super duper Gen3 jets". Most of what matters in modern combat is missing or badly modeled in DCS core and the modern planes. Thats just the way it is, and IMO will continue to be. With the older CW stuff, you actually have enough documentation to do a 90% job assuming ED fixes up the core engine well enough.

[jonny415]

China is selling the J-10c to Pakistan by going what is mentioned in the forum that’s how we got JF-17. India main fighter yet is SU-30mki same problem with Russian modern aircraft can’t be FF then they got few Rafale and MiG-29K or Hal Tejas. HB is making the Eurofighter. Japan got F-35 lol good luck, South Korea has been exporting KAI FA-50 maybe 3d parties take a shot at that

[Harlikwin]

5 minutes ago, jonny415 said:

China is selling the J-10c to Pakistan by going what is mentioned in the forum that’s how we got JF-17. India main fighter yet is SU-30mki same problem with Russian modern aircraft can’t be FF then they got few Rafale and MiG-29K or Hal Tejas. HB is making the Eurofighter. Japan got F-35 lol good luck, South Korea has been exporting KAI FA-50 maybe 3d parties take a shot at that

I very much doubt any of those are actually doable for DCS. And that fundamentally is another major issue for DCS modern. 

[LowRider88]

2 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

No, it's not because it looks like something, it's because the two airframe's design, blueprint, form, silhouette, (call it what you want) really are very similar.

So don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about internals / hardware / etc, but my 'scientific assertion' is that anyone with 2 eyes can see the two airframes are highly identical, just that.

 

Very good, I fully understand.

Looking to photos of both jets throughout the web, indeed the J-8II looks more refined and maintained.

 

Yeah, that’s my point.  Superficial vs Scientific.

Is the Su-7 essentially a copy of the MiG-21?
Why do they handle differently?

Of course J-8 and the Su-15 will look similar, they are both interceptors.

Maybe you should check if the Su-15 looks similar to the J-8E.

[F-2]

1 minute ago, Harlikwin said:

Honestly you won't see that stuff because of documentation issues largely. Even the current crop of DCS stuff is missing huge swaths of capabilities. DCS modern, is literally modeling 4th gen jets as "super duper Gen3 jets". Most of what matters in modern combat is missing or badly modeled in DCS core and the modern planes. Thats just the way it is, and IMO will continue to be. With the older CW stuff, you actually have enough documentation to do a 90% job assuming ED fixes up the core engine well enough.

This doesn’t really seem to bother most people. There is already an excellent selection of Cold War aircraft in DCS and flaming cliffs 3. If people want to take advantage of them great, if they don’t  see what’s going to change their mind that isn’t in the game today. Most people go into DCS with the expectation it’s not totally realistic but it’s the closest they will ever get to actually flying a military jet they like. Personally I don’t see a correlation between the age of an aircraft and its completeness. The mirage 2000 in a 80s airplane in a 90s configuration and the JF-17 a 2000s aircraft are some of the most complete aircraft in game, while other aircraft the on the surface seem like they would be easier, the Mig-21, F-5 linger in incompleteness for years.

[jonny415]

When the F-15E and Eurofighter are released PVP is dead. R-77-1

[Harlikwin]

56 minutes ago, F-2 said:

1. This doesn’t really seem to bother most people.

There is already an excellent selection of Cold War aircraft in DCS and flaming cliffs 3. If people want to take advantage of them great, if they don’t  see what’s going to change their mind that isn’t in the game today. Most people go into DCS with the expectation it’s not totally realistic but it’s the closest they will ever get to actually flying a military jet they like.

2. Personally I don’t see a correlation between the age of an aircraft and its completeness. The mirage 2000 in a 80s airplane in a 90s configuration and the JF-17 a 2000s aircraft are some of the most complete aircraft in game, while other aircraft the on the surface seem like they would be easier, the Mig-21, F-5 linger in incompleteness for years.

So, I think your first point can broken down into two components.

One. I don't think the various issues with DCS in terms of completeness or realism bother "new" players, since its largely a case they have no idea what they are missing or what modern air combat is. 

Two. It absolutely does bother more experienced players that know better. But aside from the sim that can't be named (now with VR) there really are no better options. 

On the second point. Ultimately that is a developer and standards problem in DCS. On the one hand you have a generally excellent module like the M2k evolved into. And say the mig21 which at the time was great, but needs serious updating. It isn't a documentation problem with the 21, its a dev resources problem, and eventually I Think they will fix it. 

42 minutes ago, jonny415 said:

When the F-15E and Eurofighter are released PVP is dead. R-77-1

Its a simple as they will be nerfed or banned from PVP. 

[Harlikwin]

4 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Help me to understand over here :

Isn't the J-8II airframe, essentially a remake of the Russian's Su-15 "Flagon" airframe ?

 

No, not at all, it does look similar though. Its basically an enlarged mig21, using 2 mig21 engines. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Harlikwin

[Top Jockey]

1 hour ago, LowRider88 said:

Yeah, that’s my point.  Superficial vs Scientific.

Is the Su-7 essentially a copy of the MiG-21?
Why do they handle differently?

Of course J-8 and the Su-15 will look similar, they are both interceptors.

Maybe you should check if the Su-15 looks similar to the J-8E.

 

It's explained in my previous post.

[Top Jockey]

19 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

No, not at all, it does look similar though. Its basically an enlarged mig21, using 2 mig21 engines. 

 

 

 

Yes, you mean the first J-8 variants airframe, sure they do.

But I was refering specifically to the J-8II, and airframe wise there is nothing more similar to an Su-15 Flagon than a J-8II.

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Top Jockey

[LowRider88]

46 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

It's explained in my previous post.

Not really.

Looking similar does not mean the designers set out to rebuild another aircraft.

Did the J-8 designers say to them selves “hey, I want the Su-15”?  No, they said “hey I need something that can intercept something faster and higher than what I can do now”. That’s called convergent evolution.

Did the Su-15 have a J-8I similar looking early version?

No, they just look superficially similar.

[FlankerFan35]

1 hour ago, jonny415 said:

When the F-15E and Eurofighter are released PVP is dead. R-77-1

Well, that wouldn't be very useful as nothing can carry the 77-1 currently except perhaps the 29S. As I always say, China is Red's future when it comes to modern, they develop faster at more advanced levels so it's more likely for us to get a J-10A/B for example than any Russia tech that isn't prehistoric.