gnomechild Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 1 minute ago, uboats said: 2 finished upgrade, 48 just in waiting list Do you have any source you can provide showing that two were actually completed? I am not able to find any information about the two sent to the US except that they were returned unfinished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snocc_ Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 is there any chance you could develop a more commonly used variant like the J-8B or the J-8I? low production prototypes of planes dont feel the best way el articulo 140 de la constitucion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 5 minutes ago, gnomechild said: Of all the aircraft available to make, Deka has decided to make a jet that never existed beyond a prototyping phase. Really not sure what the thought process is here. "Full fidelity" simulation of a fantasy I guess Does the number built really matter? How many combat scenarios in DCS are fantasy? I don't think it's much to ask for on the playerbase to just use a slight alternative history setting where J-8PP's were built in numbers. Also having any J-8 may make it easier to introduce other versions later on. 10 Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnomechild Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Just now, Exorcet said: Does the number built really matter? How many combat scenarios in DCS are fantasy? It matters that in all likelihood no aircraft ever actually existed in this configuration. There's fantasy conflict and fudging some details to get something into a flight sim and then there's just making something up. Where is the simulation aspect of a simulated conflict against a jet that doesn't exist? 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carss Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Curious, why not consider the Block 02? It was Improved J-8B with KLJ-1 (Type 208A) radar and improved avionics. Originally designated J-8 IIB. Would be nice to have a J-8 with Chinese systems and avionics instead of Western? 2 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Planes: FC3, P-51, F-86, F-5E, Mirage 2000, F/A-18, F-14, F-16, Mig-19P :joystick: ED pls gib A-4 and F-4 :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianL Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Most likely because they do not have the required documentation (at least stuff they allowed to use). 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falconeer Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Looks very promising Deka! Judging by what you have done when you delivered the awsome JF17, i'm sure this will be an great module aswell!! And haters gonna hate, don't let it get to you guys. You guys are awesome! 4 Planes: Choppers: Maps: Flaming Cliffs 3 Black Shark 2 Syria A-10C Tank killer 2 Black Shark 3 Persian Gulf F/A18C Hornet AH-64 Apache Mariana's F-16C Viper F-15E Strike Eagle Mirage 2000C AJS-37 Viggen JF-17 Thunder F-14 Tomcat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 6 minutes ago, gnomechild said: It matters that in all likelihood no aircraft ever actually existed in this configuration. There's fantasy conflict and fudging some details to get something into a flight sim and then there's just making something up. Where is the simulation aspect of a simulated conflict against a jet that doesn't exist? Before being built something has to be designed. The information defining the product can all be there even if there isn't a physical example. You can of course argue things like improvements or fixes being found during construction, but the errors in such a case sound more like fudging that you're OK with and less like making something up. Simulation doesn't have to follow history exactly, they are two different things. In the case of DCS we also have control over what level of historical accuracy we want to follow. Missions can ban the plane completely or they could only have 1-2 slots for it. You could even make a test and evaluation campaign for a single prototype. I feel like so long as the plane was defined in detail, it can fit pretty well in DCS. Although in this case they are saying it was built in small numbers anyway. 2 Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pavelheer Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 How does the gun in J-8 work? Does it still use pyrotechnical charges like in Mig-21/Jf-17, or is it reloaded pneumatically like in Flogger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jun Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 I believe this is the cockpit of one of the delivered Peace Pearls 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon1-1 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 I suppose that OK, although I'd have preferred if the J-8F was flyable, too. I guess domestic Chinese avionics are enough of a showstopper that PP is the only one we can get. I'm not particularly hyped for that one, but it's all right as far as aircraft go, I suppose. It is quite disappointing, though, since the way I see it, the only way they could have decided on the J-8PP is if making anything genuinely Chinese was outright impossible. It'll be unique and interesting enough, but I'd love to fly something with actual Chinese avionics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midair Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 How can they pretend to have accurate documentations about an aircraft that doesn't exist??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromthedeep Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Midair said: How can they pretend to have accurate documentations about an aircraft that doesn't exist??? Very likely hits the nail on the head. I highly doubt that detail documentation is available on a prototype, especially if integrating the avionics ran into all sorts of hurdles in the first place according to this article: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-15-mn-161-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester986 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Uboats and team, I’m sorry to see people complaining about the aircraft and variant we’re getting. You’ve done great work with the JF-17 and I’m excited for the J-8II. Keep up the hard work. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromthedeep Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Jester986 said: I’m sorry to see people complaining about the aircraft and variant we’re getting What's wrong with people expressing their thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midair Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, Jester986 said: Uboats and team, I’m sorry to see people complaining about the aircraft and variant we’re getting. You’ve done great work with the JF-17 and I’m excited for the J-8II. Keep up the hard work. What's wrong with that? DCS is a flight simulator. If you want to reproduce high fidelity product why do you select a fictionnal aircraft NEVER produced? DCS is not War Thunder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester986 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, Fromthedeep said: What's wrong with people expressing their thoughts? Developers are people too. They’re building the plane they can get enough information on. I imagine it would be disheartening to be excited to announce your new module and have people crap all over it. Are their planes I would have preferred? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean the J-8 won’t be a great addition. Of course everyone is welcome to voice their opinions. I’m just voicing some encouragement. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester986 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 2 minutes ago, Midair said: What's wrong with that? DCS is a flight simulator. If you want to reproduce high fidelity product why do you select a fictionnal aircraft NEVER produced? DCS is not War Thunder. It was a prototype. Is ideal? No but you work with what you have. Like the KA-50 vs the 52 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midair Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Just now, Jester986 said: It was a prototype. Is ideal? No but you work with what you have. Like the KA-50 vs the 52 That's why I refuse to buy the KA-50 BS3 and for the J8 II PP it's not a prototype, it's a project of prototype and it never flew. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudel_chw Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Fromthedeep said: What's wrong with people expressing their thoughts? Expressing negative thoughts, you say? what do you gain? .. if the aircraft doesn't appeal to you then simply dont purchase it. 7 For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1 Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-2 Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Didn’t they only build three Su-25T that we have? Seems fine, the airframe was mass produced and the later versions had similar radar capabilities. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmidtfire Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 Prototype or not. It’s not really the main issue here (I think) This is really no different from the approach of the JF-17. West and East tech in the same airframe. Hardcore ”Redfor” fans don’t like it because it’s too close to Blufor jets. It was the same with the JF-17. It’s a bit niché that targets players who enjoy both East and West modules. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromthedeep Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 15 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said: Expressing negative thoughts, you say? what do you gain? .. if the aircraft doesn't appeal to you then simply dont purchase it. You don't gain anything from expressing positive thoughts either. Expressing your thoughts is the point of a forum. (Within the rules) If all you could do is praise the developers you wouldn't have a forum, you'd have an echo chamber. 22 minutes ago, Jester986 said: Like the KA-50 vs the 52 That's also far from ideal, as you put it. 12 minutes ago, F-2 said: Didn’t they only build three Su-25T that we have? It's a Legacy FC3 module, doesn't even deserve to be mentioned. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pavelheer Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 If we want to have anything red equivalent or newer than Flogger we're going to have to accept some concessions, that's for sure. While J-8 PP definitely pushes it with the whole never being build thing, there is also the "what if nothing didn't happen in 1989" aspect. What is more, later versions kinda achieved the same results as Peace Pearl, just with Russian/indigenous/probably Israeli derived avionics. While I'll personally most likely buy this module I'm not surprised some people find it too fictional, I don't want to see DCS go down that road as well 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudel_chw Posted February 10, 2023 Share Posted February 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Fromthedeep said: ... Expressing your thoughts is the point of a forum. (Within the rules) If all you could do is praise the developers you wouldn't have a forum, you'd have an echo chamber. OK, knock yourself out critizicing a just announced module ... however, I will avoid you as best I can, as I don't share your attitude towards developers. 3 For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1 Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now