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

[YoYo]

For me it could be ok, however why Deka took version with western avionics? This is wrong decision according me.

JH-7 or J-10 could be better decision. J-8 is an air Frankenstine .

[Billy]

I count many times people said it doesn't matter if Mudhen gets released with inaccurate avionics: "It doesn't matter as long as the capabilities are correct. " HB is honest that the EF2000 is going to be a mashup of the docs they can get on Trenche 1 and 2. J-8 gets the different treatment because it's not the pop star. For me, it's no different than the previous 2:

1. It's impossible to get documents to accuately depict the service version

2. Devs tries their best with current documents to make a capability-matching, full-fidelity variant. The J-8PP isn't even a made up variant

As long as Deka is transparent enough I don't see a problem. I bet making a prototype J-8 isn't their first choice either. As I've said, if it's Razbam, they would just announce it as J-8II, and maybe somewhere in discord say that it's the Peace Pearl. 

[Dragon1-1]

50 minutes ago, WinterH said:

This isn't like RAH-66 where most systems probably weren't even completed.

RAH-66 fired weapons in tests and AFAIK was mostly done. I actually wouldn't mind the Commanche, mostly because I'm really fond of the old Commanche 4 game (not much of a sim, that one, but really fun either way). Both prototypes still exist and are in a museum, although there's probably some classified tech onboard. The J-8PP is in the unique position of being a canceled project made for a foreign customer in first place, so the US couldn't really classify its documentation the way they do damn near everything else, because it would be shared with a non-NATO country anyway.

2 minutes ago, YoYo said:

For me it could be ok, however why Deka took version with western avionics? This is wrong decision according me.

This is the only decision, according to them. Chinese avionics were vetoed by the Chinese government.

[YoYo]

Also Q-5 is nice, however we have MiG-19 so partially Q-5 ;). Guys, its a long way still! Maybe 2-3 years so relax. Its Sunday :), and …. we take everything there is or what will be in the future ! We take all! 

Edited February 12, 2023 by YoYo

[Wyvern]

I'd like to say 2 things,

 

1. Nineline is a little bit more than just a moderator here xD

 

2. It's just like Yoyo said. It's sunday, get your asses into growling so i have some targets for my R-27ET.

Edited February 12, 2023 by Wyvern

[Delta-canard]

I clearly remember an enthusiastic post from Deka about this plane, it's enormous fin and American radar, from a few years ago. That means they are just sticking with what they have been intending to do all that time. Can we assume they do so because they know what they are doing?

Honestly, I don't remember the reactions when the JF was announced but even now plenty AF people don't care because it's obscure, or too Chinese. And the module is great (by the way, the first aircraft in dcs I landed).

So, good luck and keep up the great work, I'd surely fly this bird at some point...
 And yes, I was hoping fot the Q-5.

[Bremspropeller]

7 hours ago, Torbernite said:

If you just want a rough succedaneum in your mission to dress up as a Su-15, I think J-8 could be a choice. But the mission must be edited carefully to avoid the goof.

The radar from J-8, either APG-66 or the J-8F ones, is better than Su-15, at least the early variants (I don't know whether the later Taifun radar uses envelop-detection or doppler method). But J-8 doesn't have a datalink or GCI system like Su-15 (that doesn't matter, it's not very possible to reproduce such a system in DCS). And J-8 uses better medium range missiles (PL-11/12) than old AA-3. J-8 doesn't have double-delta wings, but it has the leading-edge conical camber so the subsonic performance could be different.

If you want to make such a mission, J-8's interception must be limited to lower range (better if you could get a mod to use downgraded old missiles or even tune the radar performance, or just remove the med-range as a J-8B) and also avoid its dogfight. Then maybe it could be a good actor in your mission.

Those are all good points, but remember I said "upgraded Su-15", as in "the Soviets took some cash and put more modern hardware onto it". I'm thinking of it as a fictional third generation Su-15 (much like the MiG-23MLA and -MLD were to the Flogger family).

The J-8 has about 15% more wing-area in the first place, so it should be outperforming the Su-15TM in all categories that count on the wing-department.

Interesting piece of info on the LE camber, thanks!

[Delta-canard]

12 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

 The J-8PP is a multirole jet with Western avionics, much closer in concept to the MiG-23.

I completely missed the multirole aspect. I was seeing it as a lardmge interceptor, rather unwilling to dogfight. Well, that gets more interesting. What kind of a/g capability can we expect?

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Wyvern said:

I'd like to say 2 things,

 

1. Nineline is a little bit more than just a moderator here xD

 

2. It's just like Yoyo said. It's sunday, get your asses into growling so i have some targets for my R-27ET.

 

Nineline has a moderator and ED team member... please.

[Wyvern]

5 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Nineline has a moderator and ED team member... please.

Yes, thats what i said, just with a bit more sarcasm.

[Bremspropeller]

52 minutes ago, Delta-canard said:

What kind of a/g capability can we expect?

Literally in the first post of this thread.

It's about as "multirole" as a microwave oven.

[Torbernite]

 

I completely missed the multirole aspect. I was seeing it as a lardmge interceptor, rather unwilling to dogfight. Well, that gets more interesting. What kind of a/g capability can we expect?

Not so much. The one we would get should have modern but limited fire control for AG mission, but only uses dumb bombs and rockets according to the newsletter and the historical background, reasonable to assume maybe LGBs under buddy-lasing in the future but no more. 1553B data bus is used but more equipment would be too far from the historical design and documents.

The real J-8 in PLAAF has some version for other missions like SEAD (J-8H, partially could be regarded as multirole) or recon. But that's not a multirole or it would not be a new subtype. Neither the J-8 is designed to do these jobs. Exactly it is an interceptor, although not very weak in dogfight compared with its counterparts.

It has enough space for the extra avionic modification and the high-altitude and high-speed performance could be useful in recon missions, but the most important reason is that it's nearly the only well tested platform in 1990s and early 2000s. J-10A first flight was in 1998, and domestication and modification of J-11 was in limited level, while J-7 and Q-5 were not big enough for more modification. So, during that period many tests and modifications were done on J-8/8II or JH-7 platform. It used to be the testbed of FBW, aerial refueling and new weapons. The integration test of PL-12 was even accomplished earlier on J-8II than J-10.

[Silver_Dragon]

surely only no guided bombs and rockets. By my available info (China Navy):

J-8 II [Finback B] Fighter
Man Rtng: 3.0/1.5  Damage Value: 26
Size/Signature: Small/Small  Bombsight: Computing

Counterm: 2nd Gen D  Inflight Refuel: P
Sensors: Radar (see Remarks), 1st Gen RWR (090-270° only)

Throttle Setting/Speed in knots
Altitude Cruise Full Mil Reheat
Low: 520 580 700
Med: 520 670 1010
High: 520 760 1262
VHigh: -- -- 1262

Ceiling: 20000 meters Engine Type: TJ
Cruise Range: 675 nmi Int Fuel: 4320 kg

Additional Fuel Fuel Wt. Range Add.
800 L drop tank 650 kg 145 nmi
1400 L drop tank 1135 kg 255 nmi

Ordnance Loadouts: Payload: 4500 kg
Off Guns: 1 Type 23-3A 23mm (3.3)
• 1 1400 L DT, 2 800 L DT, and either:
• 4 PL-5B/C/E (J-8II, J-8IIA)
• 4 PL-8 (J-8D)
• 2 PL-8, 2 PL-11 (J-8H)
• 2 PL-8, 2 PL-12 (J-8F)
• 2 PL-8 (JZ-8F)
• 4 HF-7D or 4 HF-25 rocket pods
• 2 800 L drop tanks, and either:
• 8 Type 250-3 bombs, 2 PL-5B/C/E
• KG-300G ECM pod, 2 YJ-91 (J-8G) (2010)
• KG-300G or KZ-900 ELINT (2017) or SLAR pod, 2 PL-12, 2 PL-8 (JZ-8F)
• 1 1400 L drop tank, 2 PL-11, 4 PL-8 (J-8C)
• 1 1400 L drop tank, 2 R-27R, 4 PL-5 or PL-9 (F-8IIM)

Remarks: In Svc: 1992
All weather. PL-4 AAM canceled. J-8F/G/H have computing bombsight. J-8C/D/F/H and JZ-8F have removeable inflight refueling probe. J-8F/H can carry KG-300G ECM pod replacing 1400 L drop tank.
• J-8II: SL-5A (Type 208) radar. Not fitted with bombs. 54 delivered 1992-95. NTC 35th at Gaomi last unit from 2003- 17.
• J-8IIA/J-8B: JL-8A radar, all aspect 1st Gen RWR. 50 delivered 1993-00. In service 1996. Later converted to J-8BH and J-8BF. J-8II or J-8B units - 2nd Anshan till 2003, 3rd Qiqihar, 25th Longshui, 34th Shanding till 2012, 76th Chongming, 87th Quzhou.
• J-8III/J-8C: Israeli EL/M-2035 radar. Four prototypes, test flights 1992. Replaced by J-11B.
• J-8IIB/J-8D [Finback B Mod]: J-8B fitted with inflight refueling probe, provision for KZ-900 and KG-300G. In service 1995. Some later updated to J-8DF and F-8DH. 25th Longshui.
• J-8F: Type 1492 radar, HMS, can engage 2 targets at once with PL-12. 56 delivered 2005-09 plus J-8BF and J-8DF upgrades. In service 2003 with one PLANAF (15th NTC Jiaozhou 2007, later to J-8H?) and PLAAF regiments - 2nd Anshan 2003, 3rd Qiqihar 2003-2018 NTC, 4th Foshan J-8DF/DH, 9th Changji WTC 2006-2020 J-8F/H, 15th Qingdao, 76th J-8DF Chongming ETC 2017, 89th Zhoushuizi?
• J-8G: J-8H standard with cannon replaced by 2nd Gen ELS. Used for trials only in 2001.
• J-8H: Converted Air Force J-8Ds (2004, -8DH) and J-8Bs (2005, -8BJ), plus new-build J-8H with KLJ-1/2 radar, HMS, PL-11. 109th Air Brigade Changji, WTC 2004-20. 25th Longshui, 63rd Mudanjiang, 76th Chongming till 2017, 87th Quzhou.
• JZ-8F: Recon version of J-8F with internal cameras replacing cannon. 20-30 delivered. In service 2006. Renamed JC-8F in August 2012. 93rd Suzhou ETC, 60th Xinzhou STC, 46th Yu Hung Tun NTC.
• F-8IIM: Export proposal with Zhuk-8 (1996) or JL-10A (2004) radar, can engage 2 targets.

• Apr 90: Peace Pearl deal canceled. Would have had APG-66 radar, computing bombsight and Aspide AAM. 50 were planned to be delivered between 1991-95.
• Systems: PL-8 in 1994, KG-300G ECM pod in 2010, KZ-900 ELINT pod in 2017.
• 1 Apr 01: J-8B lost in collision with USN EP-3E over South China Sea.
• 2002: WTC 109th equipped with J-8H, also J-8F in 2006, replaced by J-11B in 2020. STC 4th equipped with J-8DH and J-8DF, replaced by J-11 in 2017.
• 2003: NTC 35th equipped with J-8B.
• 2007 - 08: STCN 25th with J-8B/D converted to J-8BH/J-8DH. Converted to J-11B in 2013.
• 2010: PLAAF has 108 J-8B, 36 J-8D, 24 J-8F, 49 J-8H, 24 JZ-8F. PLANAF has 48 all versions.
• 2013: J-8B possibly retired from PLANAF.
• 2018: J-8II and J-8B retired by this date. PLANAF - NTC 15th Air Regiment, 5th Naval Air Division at Jiaozhou has 24 J-8F/FH, est.4 JC-8F.
• 2019: 96 PLAAF, 47 PLANAF.

Edited February 12, 2023 by Silver_Dragon

[Delta-canard]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

It's about as "multirole" as a microwave oven.

Must be the reason why I missed that.

Thanks for the info @Silver_Dragon

[RogguDoggu]

How does it affect you if a third party developer has sought to develop a product they think will sell?

If you don't like it, don't buy it - why all the hate?

[kotor633]

vor einer Stunde schrieb RogguDoggu:

How does it affect you if a third party developer has sought to develop a product they think will sell?

If you don't like it, don't buy it - why all the hate?

And that would actually say everything. 

[Volator]

1 hour ago, RogguDoggu said:

How does it affect you if a third party developer has sought to develop a product they think will sell?

If you don't like it, don't buy it - why all the hate?

I wouldn't call it hate, just disappointment, as there are few developers out there and development of a new module takes ages, so people were hoping for something more relevant from one of the few and one of the best developers than a J8II PP. With a decision like that, people realize they won't see their favourite REDFOR DCS module in their lifetime. Even though I don't care about fourth-gen REDFOR fighters at all, even less Chinese ones, I can understand the disappointment.

This part of the world is free, so I think people are ok to voice that disappointment, especially in a forum that is meant to exchange thoughts and talk about certain topics. I haven't seen any hate in the threads I read so far.

 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Those are all good points, but remember I said "upgraded Su-15", as in "the Soviets took some cash and put more modern hardware onto it". I'm thinking of it as a fictional third generation Su-15 (much like the MiG-23MLA and -MLD were to the Flogger family).

The J-8 has about 15% more wing-area in the first place, so it should be outperforming the Su-15TM in all categories that count on the wing-department.

Interesting piece of info on the LE camber, thanks!

For a quick and dirty comparison, the Su-15TM's Taifun-M has a detection range of 70km max and the APG-66(V)'s is 150km.

The Flagon's radar guided missile, the R-98M1, seems to have a max range of about 20km while the PL-11 is a clone of a Sparrow-clone with a range of about 60km?  Kind of hard to find info with some basic googling, it'll probably require some proper publications for a better comparison.

That said, this is what you'll be working with if you wanted to fly the J-8 as a stand-in for the Su-15. The concessions I'd, personally, make in crafting a mission of this nature would be honestly to not bring along the PL-11. I wouldn't even make it available. The K-8s are a pretty short range missile, so I'd have the J-8s accessing the PL-8 instead. Similar range to the K-8 series, albeit IR guided. The J-8 also seems to be not as quick as the Su-15, 2.2 vs. 2.5 mach, so another thing to factor in.

Again, this is a quick and dirty comparison. If someone here has better information on the performance of the systems involved, I'd be happy to make corrections.

I'm honestly happy to get a proper old interceptor.

[Silver_Dragon]

Data of Su-15TM.... From Russian Aircrafts...
Su-15TM [Flagon F] Interceptor
Man Rtng: 3.0/2.0 Damage Value: 27

Size/Signature: Small/Small Bombsight: Manual
Sensors: RP-26M Taifun-M radar, Gen 0 RWR (90°-270° only)

Throttle Setting/Speed in knots
Altitude Cruise Full Mil Reheat
Low: 490 550 700
Med: 530 730 950
High: 570 920 1200
VHigh: 570 920 1200

Ceiling: 17450 meters Engine Type: TJ
Cruise Range: 520 nmi Int Fuel: 5550 kg

Additional Fuel Fuel Wt. Range Add.
600 L supersonic drop tank 485 kg 65 nmi

Ordnance Loadouts: Payload: 1700 kg
• 2 drop tanks, 1 R-98R, 1 R-98T
• 2 drop tanks, 1 R-98MR, 1 R-98MT, 2 R-60 (1979)
• 2 UPK-23-250 gun pods, 1 R-98MR, 1 R-98MT, 2 R-60

Remarks: In Svc: 1973 - 1993
Late production have provision for two UPK-23-250 gun pods replacing drop tanks. First 20 were Su-15T [Flagon E] with RP-26 radar, and only used for testing and trials.
• Oct 71-75: 421 a/c delivered to 12 PVO regiments - 11 1972, 12 1975, 9 Dec 79, 10? 1987.
• 21 Jan 75: R-98M series operational, probably replaces R-98.
• 1978: Modified to engage targets at Low altitude while flying at Low altitude.
• 1979: Upgraded with two inner wing HP - adds two R-60.
• 1980: Standard QRA is two aircraft - one with drop tanks, one with gun pods.

Radars: 
Country / Name / Type / Gen / Radar Range Large, Med, Smal, VSmall, Stealthy / Engagement Targets / Arc / IOC / Remarks
Russia RP-26 Taifun [Twin Scan] AI 3 28 27 19 8 2 1 120° 1973 Interim version
Russia RP-26M/N-004 Taifun-M [Twin Scan] AI 3 32 32 23 9 3 1 120° 1973 Also known as N-004
USA APG-66 LD/SD 4 74 52 37 15 4 1 120° 1978
                         SS        80 62 35 20 11

Weapons:
Air to Air missiles: Country / Name / Guiadance, Gen / ATA Rating / Max Range (Nm) / Hang wt (kg) / Speed (kts) / Aspect / Dogfight? / Snap U/D? / Ceiling Alt Band / IOC / Remarks
Russia R-60, R-60K [AA-8 Aphid] IRH/1 1.0 3.9 44 1721 W Y N VHigh 1975
Russia R-98R [AA-3c Anab] SARH/1 1.0 9.7 292 1434 A N N VHigh 1967 D
Russia R-98T [AA-3d Anab] IRH/1 1.5 5.2 272 1434 N Y N VHigh 1967 D
Russia R-98MR [AA-3 Anab] SARH/2 2.0 13 300 1434 N Y N VHigh 1975 M
Russia R-98MT [AA-3 Anab] IRH/2 2.0 8.6 300 1434 N Y N VHigh 1975 M
(D): Min target altitude band Medium
(M): 1/2 ATA against targets in Low band; Cannot engage NOE & Vlow targets.

Italy Aspide SARH/3 2.0 27 220 2295 A N Y VHigh 1988 PRC IOC 1995
PRC PL-5B IRH/2 1.5 2.7 87 1260 N Y N High 1991
PRC PL-5C IRH/2 1.5 3.5 85 1260 W Y N High 1997
PRC PL-5E IRH/3 2.0 7.5 83 1434 A Y N VHigh 1999
PRC PL-8 IRH/3 3.0 8.1 120 1721 A Y N VHigh 1983 Israeli Python 3
PRC PL-8B IRH/3 2.5 8.1 115 1721 A Y N VHigh Late 90s
PRC PL-8C IRH/3 3.0 10.8 115 1721 A Y N VHigh 2005?
PRC PL-11 SARH/2 2.5 13.5 220 1721 Y Y Y? VHigh 2003
 

 

[carss]

On 2/11/2023 at 10:20 AM, F-2 said:

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

The only one I can think of is the Su-25T. Are there any others?

[F-2]

31 minutes ago, carss said:

The only one I can think of is the Su-25T. Are there any others?

The KA-50 is a very low production run aircraft and almost all the individual aircraft are quite unique.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

33 minutes ago, F-2 said:

The KA-50 is a very low production run aircraft and almost all the individual aircraft are quite unique.

The Eurofighter we'll be getting, while not a low production run, will be a bit of a Chimera as well. Apparently, the EF Fleet has little commonality.

[VIKBELL]

Make what you can it is the same with Russian government which is difficult,  to get any advanced flight model aircraft..   I hoped  to have a good aircraft to fly against in F-4 Phantom.   The red force need more aircraft for red players.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

5 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Data of Su-15TM.... From Russian Aircrafts...
Su-15TM [Flagon F] Interceptor
Man Rtng: 3.0/2.0 Damage Value: 27
 

 

 

Damage value of 27? I didn't know the Soviets had health bars.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

8 minutes ago, VIKBELL said:

Make what you can it is the same with Russian government which is difficult,  to get any advanced flight model aircraft..   I hoped  to have a good aircraft to fly against in F-4 Phantom.   The red force need more aircraft for red players.

This. It would've been preferable to get a J-8 with domestic avionics, but we play with the hand we're dealt, not the hand we want.

If you'd rather them do something that saw frontline service and such, that could mean H-5s or early marks of Q-5. I have no problem with that, I'd rock both of those, but that's basically what it'd mean.

At the end of the day, a lot of people forget these are pieces of national defense and the governments responsible are going to be cagey about a lot of things. This is something has to be contended with, especially by a company selling to an international audience.