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

[Bananabrai]

On 8/16/2023 at 6:07 PM, Ben27603 said:

I need to add the J-8 but looks like fertile ground ahead.

I wonder:

- How you assumed our TOR as modern. It's a CW plane and we do the non-modernized CW version of it, which we stated.
- And then the iCH-47 we are getting (w/ MFDs and modernized systems etc., like the AH-64D) as CW instead of modern (besides, there was an ingame video of that)
- Same for the C-130J with MFDs glued everywhere as CW?
- And in general the difference between 'Nam and CW (e.g.: F-4E -> CW ?)

For your question: the J-8 probably is still some time away. But you'll rate it somehow.

[Dr_Pavelheer]

@F-2 Keep in mind before they got their hands on East German Migs 23 US thought all Floggers represent level of 23MS, while in fact one of the most produced variants was not only lighter and had more powerful engine, but also was redesigned to handle better and had actually pretty good radar with LDSD. Also R23R already had monopulse seeker like Aspide or Skyflash, while Sparrows at the time still used conscan which meant that even if radar was able to keep track of the target in clutter missile would likely go stupid anyway.

Mig 23 MLA vs J-8PP in DCS is going to be interesting, Aspide/PL11 should be more or less in the same class as R24R, both use SPO-10 RWR (though MLA will have option to use SPO-15), Flogger will have Lazur but F16A radar should be better in LD

[F-2]

5 hours ago, Dr_Pavelheer said:

@F-2 Keep in mind before they got their hands on East German Migs 23 US thought all Floggers represent level of 23MS, while in fact one of the most produced variants was not only lighter and had more powerful engine, but also was redesigned to handle better and had actually pretty good radar with LDSD. Also R23R already had monopulse seeker like Aspide or Skyflash, while Sparrows at the time still used conscan which meant that even if radar was able to keep track of the target in clutter missile would likely go stupid anyway.

Mig 23 MLA vs J-8PP in DCS is going to be interesting, Aspide/PL11 should be more or less in the same class as R24R, both use SPO-10 RWR (though MLA will have option to use SPO-15), Flogger will have Lazur but F16A radar should be better in LD

However by 1986 when the CIA wrote this report they knew a lot about the aircraft’s avonics. Billion dollar spy explicitly mentions Tolkachev has turned over extensive documentation on

Quote

At first, Phazotron produced an airborne
radar known as the RP-23, or Sapfir-23,
  
471/795 which provided limited look-down capability for MiG fighters. Then the institute was ordered to develop a more sophisticated model to be deployed on the MiG-31, a planned supersonic interceptor. But the task proved too difficult for Tolkachev’s institute to complete. By one account, the institute made lavish claims for a new radar that it simply could not bring to fruition. Despite a wealth of experience, Phazotron was unable to solve the problem of tracking and destroy- ing a low-flying object against the ground clutter of earth, nor had it been able to track multiple targets at once. Phazotron was forced in 1971 to transfer the plans to a com- peting institute, the Scientific Research Insti- tute of Instrument Engineering, or NIIP. After years of work, the competing institute and several others solved most of the prob- lems in a new radar, called ZASLON. Weighing a half ton, it was twice as heavy as the largest airborne U.S. radar, but it worked—and
  
472/795 carried the first-ever Soviet airborne com- puter. The ZASLON was flight-tested for the first time in 1976 and by 1978 had been shown to track ten targets at once. The first MiG-31 aircraft carrying the ZASLON radar were entering service in the Soviet air de-
fense forces in the autumn of 1981.26
By that time, Tolkachev had already de- livered to the CIA hundreds of pages of blue- prints and design specifications of Sapfir-23 and five circuit boards. He gave them plans
and drawings of the ZASLON, too.

According to this declassified memo

 

 

 

Quote

 

documentation on several new models of airborne missile systems and technical characteristics of other Soviet fighter and fighter/bomber aircraft to be deployed between now and 1990.

It seems they had excellent intelligence on the the MLA/D’s radar and missiles when they wrote that. They also mention having a lot on the Mig-25PD which uses a scaled up version of the same radar.

[F-2]

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80T01355A000100800001-9.pdf

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/north korea-ussr[15345275].pdf

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP86T00590R000400600002-4.pdf 

 

I did some more digging. The CIA seems to have been aware of the Mig-23ml Kinimatic improvements as early as 1979 as well as the radar improvements.

[Harlikwin]

6 hours ago, Dr_Pavelheer said:

@F-2 Keep in mind before they got their hands on East German Migs 23 US thought all Floggers represent level of 23MS, while in fact one of the most produced variants was not only lighter and had more powerful engine, but also was redesigned to handle better and had actually pretty good radar with LDSD. Also R23R already had monopulse seeker like Aspide or Skyflash, while Sparrows at the time still used conscan which meant that even if radar was able to keep track of the target in clutter missile would likely go stupid anyway.

Mig 23 MLA vs J-8PP in DCS is going to be interesting, Aspide/PL11 should be more or less in the same class as R24R, both use SPO-10 RWR (though MLA will have option to use SPO-15), Flogger will have Lazur but F16A radar should be better in LD

As you say, but DCS doesn't model any differences between different SARH seekers, so its kinda pointless. The R3R is just as good as an AIM-7M or P.

 

[F-2]

APG-66 

F-4EJ vs F-16

 

i wonder if the J-8PP has a larger dish as well. Almost an exact contemporary of the F-4EJ.