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

[Mike_Romeo]

25 minutes ago, Arisugary said:

IRC, HB's typhoon is also a fantasy aircraft, which mixes avionics from different variants

Thats actually how the real Eurofighter is. Its a frankjet as well. Each nation got their Eurofighter in the configuration they want and they can upgrade and or downgrade many parts of it as much as they want. Its extreme modular platform.

[Bremspropeller]

Can the J8II be used as a believable "upgraded" Su-15 stand-in? HUD and avionics aside.

They seem to be fairly close overall.

[GGTharos]

1 hour ago, PLAAF said:

Really? Not even a prototype?

Pretty much every Ka-50 was a prototype.   And it's sort of irrelevant anyway; the deeper you get into creating what-if's, the more you deviate from reality.   May as well start sticking those PAC-3s on F-15s because Raytheon said they could.

I agree here with the sentiment that DEKA has no access to actual Chinese avionics etc to model.  The JF-17 and J-8PP are either export variants or have little native hardware.  Seems like a trend.

[fragal]

Exciting, a little confusing but exciting, had a lot of fun with the JF over the years looking forward to another Deka module. 

 

[R.Z.]

So great for Deka to officially announce their next module! Looking forward to it!

Although J-8II family is not my no.1 favourite PLAAF plane, it's probably a close 2nd or 3rd. Finally this would give me an opportunity to show support for Deka when it's released for purchase (JF-17 kinda not my cup of tea), and in the hopes that they or any other dev team might take the endeavor to make a full fidelity Q-5 module in the future 

[R.Z.]

On 2/11/2023 at 7:14 AM, yngvef said:

Someone hops into the forum for this plane and starts criticising Deka Ironworks for choosing this plane. What is the best case scenario you are expecting? That they drop their three years of research and progress because some random user on the forum don't have an interest in this particular type? Or do you want someone to comfort you?

The best case scenario? Apparently he wants this to be banned by ED, hahaha :

On 2/11/2023 at 6:31 AM, Nahen said:

I'm not attacking ED or anyone in this case. I'm just trying to understand what's the point of working on something like this to eventually want to put it in DCS? Just enough. I even secretly hope that ED will block this thing in case ... 

Edited February 16, 2023 by R.Z.

[Teknetinium]

Interesting model, best wishes with the process. I wish though someone or all who work with ED could squeeze out a Flanker. Flanker is so widely used by so many Air Forces. Best wishes to try to find a loophole for a Flanker comrades, I know you try! 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Teknetinium

[Ash Lynx]

The only question i ask about all this is, does Deka have all the relevant documentation to faithfully represent the proper integration of these western avionics. The fact were 2 were built and the project was cancelled provides a scenario of which operational documentation and design docs are lost/discarded. I am sure Deka chose this version because this was the only way of bringing the J8 to dcs. Im fine with the fact that only 2 were built, only one of these aircraft being built is the minimum to say that this aircraft existed. But its to be expected with such limited numbers also the surround reasons as to why the program was cancelled its understandable to assume data pertaining to the integration of the avionics were lost.

To summarize:

Does Deka have the relevant documentation on how these systems were specifically integrated with each other, or is Deka taking the approach of using documentation of each avionic system and using that to put everything together in the peace pearl package.

I am asking this to better understand Deka's approach to this project and this hopefully would answer a lot of questions and clear up a lot of other peoples misconceptions.

[Dr_Pavelheer]

Considering the current tensions between US and China Peace Pearl J-8 is a very fitting and historically relevant choice

[ams999]

Pretty much my thoughts tbh...

[AdrianL]

Because it is the only way you will get any Chinese aircraft.

Unless you would like to go talk to the Chinese government to try change their current information policies.

[Schmidtfire]

It is what it is. Im intrigued and will buy based on the work Deka did on JF-17. Unique and interesting for sure.

And yes, everyone that plays DCS wants a Flanker (or Fulcrum). But that is really for ED to solve with a deluxe semi-full fidelity FC3 DLC or maybe requesting a 3rd party to do a Full Fidelity module. But  Deka is well underway since years back with the J8PP development. They want to do it. So lets embrace their choice for what it is or let it go.

If we want flyable ”Redfor” aircraft in DCS, we need to get comfortable with a little bit of creative liberty while keeping it as plausible as possible.

Edited February 11, 2023 by Schmidtfire

[Mike_Romeo]

8 hours ago, Ydjslm said:

Can't understand why ED approved J-8PP.

Laughs in KA-50 Blackshark 3. Also dont forget that with every sale, ED also get some money. And we all know how much a new redfor plane is wanted. Especially by the chinese DCS community.

[Exorcet]

8 hours ago, Capn kamikaze said:

Ok, so DCS needs to change its name to DCG then, and allow anything.

The definition of simulator needs to be pinned somewhere on this forum since no one seems to know what it means.

[F-2]

Their are a number of prototypes or very low production run aircraft in game, that line in the sand is long passed.

[diego999]

It is a welcome addition, to balance things (somewhat).

Instead of yet another western aircraft. 

[Jun]

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm personally looking forward to this aircraft. It's not like prototype modules or features are anything new, so I'm not sure what the point of this post is.

[ak22]

Why not ? I see it as even more reason to have it in game. We get to fly something that was so close to be serial product, If deka ironworks has the data on it why not.

 

It's game after all. 

Edited February 24, 2023 by ak22

[Coxy_99]

What does it even matter? Let the cope seeth. Good luck to them.

[Dr_Pavelheer]

It's not like it was a completely new design that never went into production, they were modifying already existing aircrafts. Their flight parameters were unchanged, maybe slightly moved center of gravity but that's it.

It's more like putting AMRAAMs on F14 than making F111B or F16XL module

[Dragon1-1]

3 hours ago, Ash Lynx said:

But its to be expected with such limited numbers also the surround reasons as to why the program was cancelled its understandable to assume data pertaining to the integration of the avionics were lost.

What made you come to that conclusion? Data being available has nothing to do with whether a project panned out or not. It's a project from the 90s, it was built and then ended up in museum, likely together with all associated documentation. A project being canceled doesn't mean "throw all the data in the trash and forget about it forever", not unless it was deliberately destroyed, such as what happened to Avro Arrow. It can mean the data in question was filed away in some warehouse and forgotten, or that some documents were destroyed as no longer needed, but this doesn't have to be the case, and a canceled project's data is often still useful due to work done on it being applicable to other things.

Assumption that all the data was destroyed is baseless. SMEs might be hard to come by, but at the same time, the whole thing may be less classified than an aircraft that actually made it into service.

[Ash Lynx]

9 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

What made you come to that conclusion? Data being available has nothing to do with whether a project panned out or not. It's a project from the 90s, it was built and then ended up in museum, likely together with all associated documentation. A project being canceled doesn't mean "throw all the data in the trash and forget about it forever", not unless it was deliberately destroyed, such as what happened to Avro Arrow. It can mean the data in question was filed away in some warehouse and forgotten, or that some documents were destroyed as no longer needed, but this doesn't have to be the case, and a canceled project's data is often still useful due to work done on it being applicable to other things.

Assumption that all the data was destroyed is baseless. SMEs might be hard to come by, but at the same time, the whole thing may be less classified than an aircraft that actually made it into service.

I only said those assumptions to provide context as to why I was asking the questions I am in my original post. I am mealy commenting on possibilities and did intend to put what I've said as fact, just background context.

[Enigma89]

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Can the J8II be used as a believable "upgraded" Su-15 stand-in? HUD and avionics aside.

They seem to be fairly close overall.

Brother...

[jackmckay]

a study sim does study. what's wrong with that? like there's minimum number of production models needed to reach DCS? ease out man. lets have some fun.

[Mars Exulte]

I can barely see through this cloud of Doritos dust.