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

[Aries144]

I understand the disappointment. I believe the issue here is that there was an expectation that ED only allows aircraft that were actually deployed by a military force, and that expectation has led to disappointment with ED's acceptance of a prototype aircraft.

Considering this was apparently the only way for Deka to get any version of the J-8II in game, and it was a real small production aircraft that very well could have gone on to large scale production (much like a favorite aircraft of mine that suffered the exact same fate, the Northrup F-20), I'm personally fine with it. I hope it leads to the inclusion of more interesting low production number aircraft. Remember, just because a module is made doesn't mean a mission maker can't exclude it from his mission.

I think it will be an interesting module, just like the Ka-50 and the Su-25T, and I hope the OP can find his way to a point of view that allows him to be more satisfied with the situation.

[carss]

25 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

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.

Yes I agree with you, however aren't there slightly older models of the J-8 with Chinese home built avionics and weapons that should be more readily available?

Don't get me wrong, i am very hyped for this too, but just saying, I felt like there could have been a chance of an older model that could be more available

Edited February 13, 2023 by carss

[F-2]

28 minutes ago, Aries144 said:

I understand the disappointment. I believe the issue here is that there was an expectation that ED only allows aircraft that were actually deployed by a military force, and that expectation has led to disappointment with ED's acceptance of a prototype aircraft.

 

Yea but, what war was the Christen Eagle in?

Edited February 13, 2023 by F-2

[NineLine]

1 hour ago, carss said:

Yes I agree with you, however aren't there slightly older models of the J-8 with Chinese home built avionics and weapons that should be more readily available?

Don't get me wrong, i am very hyped for this too, but just saying, I felt like there could have been a chance of an older model that could be more available

 

Don't count on older version being more available, even with Russian military they do not allow the development of even older platforms. I have always found Deka to strive to show of the Chinese air force the best they could, this is not a short cut on their part of lack of effort, I believe they would do whatever they could be allowed to do. 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

2 hours ago, carss said:

Yes I agree with you, however aren't there slightly older models of the J-8 with Chinese home built avionics and weapons that should be more readily available?

Don't get me wrong, i am very hyped for this too, but just saying, I felt like there could have been a chance of an older model that could be more available

 

Just what 9L said, bureaucracy is typically nonsensical. Just because something is out of service, doesn't mean it's unrestricted. There needs to be a concerted effort to actually do that, otherwise it just gets filed away and forgotten, the restriction staying in place.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

2 hours ago, F-2 said:

Yea but, what war was the Christen Eagle in?

 

The one that broke out in comments over it.

You know the type? Where everyone thinks they're clever by pointing out that DCS is, infact, an acronym. "Oh it's Digital COMBAT Simulator!" Now we have "Oh it's Digital Combat SIMULATOR"

Now, ED just needs to develop something for punch-cards so we can question the "Digital" part and we'll have the sweep.

[Mars Exulte]

On 2/11/2023 at 2:05 AM, Capn kamikaze said:

The project was cancelled, so why is this being brought to DCS?

You needed your own thread? With all the obvious answers repeated just for you?

On 2/11/2023 at 2:08 AM, Capn kamikaze said:

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

Everytime somebody places the three letter semantics bs, a puppy somewhere in the world starts crying. Seriously, everytime I see this nonsense, I want to

 

 You're playing a videogame, just like the screeching twelve year olds on Xbox, it doesn't matter some of us spent $3000 on peripherals, it's still a videogame.

2 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

The one that broke out in comments over it.

You know the type? Where everyone thinks they're clever by pointing out that DCS is, infact, an acronym. "Oh it's Digital COMBAT Simulator!" Now we have "Oh it's Digital Combat SIMULATOR"

Now, ED just needs to develop something for punch-cards so we can question the "Digital" part and we'll have the sweep.

We need to have a weekly Eagle Dynamics Bingo card

[Lurker]

Can someone please clarify for me, we are actually getting a variant with US avionics? 

[Falconeer]

14 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Can someone please clarify for me, we are actually getting a variant with US avionics? 

How is this question still not clear?

[AdrianL]

17 minutes ago, Lurker said:

we are actually getting a variant with US avionics

Yes.  From the Peace Pearl program

 https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40396/the-u-s-once-helped-china-develop-a-modern-jet-fighter

[Lurker]

33 minutes ago, AdrianL said:

Yes.  From the Peace Pearl program

 https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40396/the-u-s-once-helped-china-develop-a-modern-jet-fighter

Thank you. 

[LowRider88]

Wow, that’s a lot of comments in a short amount of time.

Deka sneezes and everybody jumps to attention, that’s a tribute to its fan base for sure.

I was also originally disappointed for not getting an all Chinese plane.

But Thanks to Nineline and UBoats for informing this is the only way to make another Chinese plane happen.

Thanks to Jun for sharing the PP cockpit pic.  There’s still enough retro aspects of it that it still feels red, so I am good.

I hope “Step By step” from UBoats means when it is possible, the F will be flyable.

Thanks Deka for sticking to the plan and giving us Chinese, and something original, and long overdue.

And Thanks for taking the time to deliver good products out of the box.

Just like the 90s, and none of that agile, piece meal business.

I just hope the pilot model is Chinese too.

Some potential 3rd party talk up multicultural pilots, then go back on their statement.

Any dates yet?  I already have my wallet out.

[BIGNEWY]

Thread cleaned. 

Please ensure 

1. treat everyone with respect

2. no politics 

thanks

[PLAAF]

11 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Just what 9L said, bureaucracy is typically nonsensical. Just because something is out of service, doesn't mean it's unrestricted. There needs to be a concerted effort to actually do that, otherwise it just gets filed away and forgotten, the restriction staying in place.

 

14 hours ago, carss said:

Yes I agree with you, however aren't there slightly older models of the J-8 with Chinese home built avionics and weapons that should be more readily available?

Don't get me wrong, i am very hyped for this too, but just saying, I felt like there could have been a chance of an older model that could be more available

 

Not really, the older model you are referring to shares the same flight character with J-8BF and DF which are still in service.
BF and DF were B and D variants upgraded into the F standards. As I mentioned before in my J-8 variants thread, those older ones have structure difference and they can't just be turned into a J-8F. That's why they are called BF and DF.

[LowRider88]

On 2/11/2023 at 1:16 AM, Wyvern said:

Damn... Give them a bite and they steal the entire meal...

Thats really sad to see...

I'll probably make an Flyable mod (just default SFM and Su-27 cockpit) for anyone interested.

Now, all that J-8 is amazing, but i've heard Rumors about multiple things regarding the J-11A, will we get any news anytime soon?

 

Maybe the MiG-19P cockpit is a better match.  PLAAF posted a pretty detailed thread showing an early J-8 cockpit which looks strikingly similar to the 19.

[uboats]

9 hours ago, LowRider88 said:

I hope “Step By step” from UBoats means when it is possible, the F will be flyable.

 

F is still in service, so definitely no go :(.

We also considered and checked BH/DH or even D (which was just a domestic upgrade following 8PP, domestic INS and radar or russian zhuk-8-II radar) still no go unfortunately :(((

Per 82 program office, 2 finished upgrade and many test (i.e. EMC, INS (around Edwards AF) etc, but no weapon), along with 4 extra avionics upgrade pack (radar, etc) were sent back to China later. It's first time for China to learn how to design a modern fighter and all following variants and others were benefitted from this (in the same time , engineers from Chendu were also in Grumman's site but neighboring office for super-7 ;)), so 82 program office had all info well doced and summarized. Thus no worry for that.

We are also preparing a detailed intro to 8PP and Q&A, as well as loadout table, and will post it once ready.

Edited February 13, 2023 by uboats

[FlankerFan35]

10 hours ago, Lurker said:

Can someone please clarify for me, we are actually getting a variant with US avionics? 

Yes

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

4 hours ago, LowRider88 said:

Maybe the MiG-19P cockpit is a better match.  PLAAF posted a pretty detailed thread showing an early J-8 cockpit which looks strikingly similar to the 19.

J-8A is, supposedly, derived from a scaled up J-7/MiG-21 concept. Looking at the cockpit framing and the like, the MiG-19 would actually be a pretty good fit for it.

10 minutes ago, uboats said:

We are also preparing a detailed intro to 8PP and Q&A, as well as loadout table, and will post it once ready.

 

That'll be interesting to see.

[Wyvern]

7 hours ago, LowRider88 said:

Maybe the MiG-19P cockpit is a better match.  PLAAF posted a pretty detailed thread showing an early J-8 cockpit which looks strikingly similar to the 19.

I could use it, but i'm too lazy to try and match up the MiG-19 pit with FC3

[LowRider88]

2 hours ago, Wyvern said:

I could use it, but i'm too lazy to try and match up the MiG-19 pit with FC3

Does this have to involve FC3?  Could it just be a “reskin” of the 19, with the J-8 model and SFM?

[Mars Exulte]

On 2/12/2023 at 6:51 PM, Aries144 said:

I understand the disappointment. I believe the issue here is that there was an expectation that ED only allows aircraft that were actually deployed by a military force, and that expectation has led to disappointment with ED's acceptance of a prototype aircraft.

 The primary criteria all along is whether or not there is enough available data, a professional team actually capable of doing it, and somebody who wants to.

 In the example of the F-20 mentioned above? Is there enough data? If so, then it's feasible to do, is their a team available and capable? If so, then it's feasible. Does that team WANT to do it? If not, then the other stuff doesn't matter.

 Just because something is a popular wishlist item doesn't mean it's feasible or that anyone who does this for a living WANTS to.

 I see the COMMUNITY pitch bitch fits about certain models and whether somebody ''should or shouldn't'' but ED is generally pretty openminded to aircraft, including civilian or non-combat, if somebody wants to and can. No matter what gets built, nobody is forced to buy it or use it in their missions, and a team making ''*insert plane I don't like because reasons*'' isn't necessarily ''wasting resources'' because by doing something they WANT to do.

 The ''view endorsed by certain vocal segments is not indicative of the reality which is readily observable''

Edited February 14, 2023 by Mars Exulte

[LowRider88]

5 hours ago, uboats said:

F is still in service, so definitely no go :(.

We also considered and checked BH/DH or even D (which was just a domestic upgrade following 8PP, domestic INS and radar or russian zhuk-8-II radar) still no go unfortunately :(((

Per 82 program office, 2 finished upgrade and many test (i.e. EMC, INS (around Edwards AF) etc, but no weapon), along with 4 extra avionics upgrade pack (radar, etc) were sent back to China later. It's first time for China to learn how to design a modern fighter and all following variants and others were benefitted from this (in the same time , engineers from Chendu were also in Grumman's site but neighboring office for super-7 ;)), so 82 program office had all info well doced and summarized. Thus no worry for that.

We are also preparing a detailed intro to 8PP and Q&A, as well as loadout table, and will post it once ready.

 

Thanks for all of this UBoats

Can’t wait for that post!

[F-2]

5 hours ago, uboats said:

F is still in service, so definitely no go :(.

We also considered and checked BH/DH or even D (which was just a domestic upgrade following 8PP, domestic INS and radar or russian zhuk-8-II radar) still no go unfortunately :(((

Per 82 program office, 2 finished upgrade and many test (i.e. EMC, INS (around Edwards AF) etc, but no weapon), along with 4 extra avionics upgrade pack (radar, etc) were sent back to China later. It's first time for China to learn how to design a modern fighter and all following variants and others were benefitted from this (in the same time , engineers from Chendu were also in Grumman's site but neighboring office for super-7 ;)), so 82 program office had all info well doced and summarized. Thus no worry for that.

We are also preparing a detailed intro to 8PP and Q&A, as well as loadout table, and will post it once ready.

 

Hey by any chance did you find any information on the Zhuk-8 radar itself? Might be useful down the road.

[uboats]

14 minutes ago, F-2 said:

Hey by any chance did you find any information on the Zhuk-8 radar itself? Might be useful down the road.

[F-2]

28 minutes ago, uboats said:

Hey man thanks either way for answering