Would you like more modern weapons on russian 4th gen fighters even if its not realistic?

[Rewis.C]

To use a old saying about 12GA Shotguns. If it chambers, it shoots.

Basically, if you can strap it on and light it off it should be in there at some capacity on every module. 64/Stinger hint hint. I can custom restrict munitions in so many ways in the editor even by era so why not make it a choice for mission builders? I'd say ED's job is to get the weapons systems real-world accurate performance-wise, complete, and plentiful in variety with the tools to implement them as the mission maker sees fit. That's my opinion on what weapons should go where. Easy.

[Smith]

Glad to see that i m not the only one who thinks ED should give us a little bit more options about the weapons.
 

On 8/29/2023 at 10:23 PM, Rewis.C said:

To use a old saying about 12GA Shotguns. If it chambers, it shoots.

Basically, if you can strap it on and light it off it should be in there at some capacity on every module. 64/Stinger hint hint. I can custom restrict munitions in so many ways in the editor even by era so why not make it a choice for mission builders? I'd say ED's job is to get the weapons systems real-world accurate performance-wise, complete, and plentiful in variety with the tools to implement them as the mission maker sees fit. That's my opinion on what weapons should go where. Easy.

This is somehow the same i think about it.

MiG-29 with AGM-88 HARM or Su-33 with Kh-31P would be a gamechanger for me. I would only fly the russian planes

[Seaeagle]

On 8/25/2023 at 10:46 PM, Silver_Dragon said:

You need build a MiG-29KR [Fulcrum D] Fighter (9.41R) from 2017...

Why?

On 8/25/2023 at 10:46 PM, Silver_Dragon said:

The old Mig-29K (9.31) from 1998, never past from testing.

So what?- the Ka-50 and Su-25T didn't either. 

I would much rather see FC level replication of such test aircraft that actually had the weapon's capabilities the OP is seeking, than ruining the current FC3 aircraft by applying fictional capabilities they never had.

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Seaeagle

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, Seaeagle said:

Why?

So what?- the Ka-50 and Su-25T didn't either. 

I would much rather see FC level replication of such test aircraft that actually had the weapon's capabilities the OP is seeking, than ruining the current FC3 aircraft by applying fictional capabilities they never had.

 

 

Yup, but sounds like its not gonna happen. FC3 is slowly dying as new FF modules get built, and if I'm honest I'm not all that sad. Gimme a FF mig23 and 29 and su17 and I'm good. Hopefully we see the 23 in the next year or so. 

Edited September 20, 2023 by Harlikwin

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Why?

So what?- the Ka-50 and Su-25T didn't either. 

I would much rather see FC level replication of such test aircraft that actually had the weapon's capabilities the OP is seeking, than ruining the current FC3 aircraft by applying fictional capabilities they never had.

About Su-25T

Quote

Su-25T
The Su-25T (Tankovy) is a dedicated antitank version, which has been combat-tested with notable success in Chechnya.[19] The design of the aircraft is similar to the Su-25UB. The variant was converted to one-seater, with the rear seat replaced by additional avionics.[129] It has all-weather and night attack capability. In addition to the full arsenal of weapons of the standard Su-25, the Su-25T can employ the KAB-500Kr TV-guided bomb and the semi-active laser-guided Kh-25ML.[19] Its enlarged nosecone houses the Shkval optical TV and aiming system with the Prichal laser rangefinder and target designator. It can also carry Vikhr laser-guided, tube-launched missiles, which is its main antitank armament. For night operations, the low-light TV Merkuriy pod system can be carried under the fuselage. Three Su-25Ts prototypes were built in 1983–86 and 8 production aircraft were built in 1990.[130] With the introduction of a definitive Russian Air Force Su-25 upgrade programme, in the form of Stroyevoy Modernizirovannyi, the Su-25T programme was officially canceled in 2000.[131]

About Ka-50
 

Quote

Ka-50: 18–19

Second Chechen War
The Ka-50 took part in the Russian Army's operations against separatists in the Chechen Republic during the Second Chechen War. In December 2000, a pair of production Ka-50s arrived in the area. With the Ka-50s was a Ka-29 to provide reconnaissance and target designation. On 6 January 2001, the Ka-50 used live weapons against a real enemy for the first time. On 9 January, at the entry into a mountain gorge in the area of a settlement named Komsomolskoye, a single Ka-50 accompanied by an Mi-24 used S-8 unguided rockets to destroy a warehouse full of ammunition belonging to Chechen insurgents. On 6 February, in the forest-covered mountain area to the south of the village of Tsentoroj, a strike group composed of two Ka-50s and the sole Ka-29 discovered and, from a range of 3 km, destroyed a fortified camp of insurgents using two "9K121 Vikhr" guided missiles. On 14 February, a similar strike group carried out a "hunting" mission in the area of Oak-Yurt and Hatun. In difficult conditions, pilots found and destroyed eight targets. These missions tested the type's airframe, as well as its on-board systems and armament. Its successful performance in difficult, mountainous terrain confirmed the usefulness of the many advanced features of the Ka-50's design, and its power and maneuverability.[17]

 

[Seaeagle]

5 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

About Su-25T

About Ka-50
 

 

The Su-25T and Ka-50 both fall in the exact same category as MiG-29M/MiG-29K, Su-27M, MiG-31M etc as developments of the late eighties, for which only a small batch of test aircraft were built. In some cases test aircraft were sent to frontline units for operational testing and evaluation, but that did not change their status to operational aircraft.

The fact is that neither the Ka-50 nor Su-25T made it past testing. If anything  they were actually further from this than the other test types I mentioned above - because while those were suspended/cancelled in the early 90'ies for purely finansial reasons in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, the Ka-50 and Su-25T were rejected for technical/operational reasons.

[Nickkerkwijk]

7 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

About Su-25T

About Ka-50
 

 

 

I'm not 100% sure but it seems like this video here describes what you posted. 4:20 you'll see a pair of Ka50's with a Ka29. Also the rocket attacks + vikhr launches are visible

 

Edited September 20, 2023 by Nickkerkwijk

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

The Su-25T and Ka-50 both fall in the exact same category as MiG-29M/MiG-29K, Su-27M, MiG-31M etc as developments of the late eighties, for which only a small batch of test aircraft were built. In some cases test aircraft were sent to frontline units for operational testing and evaluation, but that did not change their status to operational aircraft.

The fact is that neither the Ka-50 nor Su-25T made it past testing. If anything  they were actually further from this than the other test types I mentioned above - because while those were suspended/cancelled in the early 90'ies for purely finansial reasons in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, the Ka-50 and Su-25T were rejected for technical/operational reasons.

The Su-25T and the Ka-50 was build by ED with colaboration of russia previously to the "Military secret Law" on others times at begining of 2000, with the situation was "open" to get propper data about aircraft and modules. And remember the Ka-50 module was build with Kamov alonside to help on the develop (kamov corporate mark on the Ka-50 cover). That projects was alive on the times of appears them on Lomac and Ka-50.

[Seaeagle]

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

The Su-25T and the Ka-50 was build by ED with colaboration of russia previously to the "Military secret Law" on others times at begining of 2000, with the situation was "open" to get propper data about aircraft and modules. And remember the Ka-50 module was build with Kamov alonside to help on the develop (kamov corporate mark on the Ka-50 cover). That projects was alive on the times of appears them on Lomac and Ka-50.

Sure Silver_Dragon  . I know the circumstances  and I am not suggesting that because ED was  able to do the Su-25T and Ka-50 earlier, that they could necessarily also do other test aircraft.

I was merely saying that as far as operational status is concerned, there would be no difference, and that those other test aircraft wouldn't be any less "valid" candidates for DCS in this regard. Besides, there are lots of discrepancies with both the Su-25T and Ka-50(and even the Su-33) implementation in sim, where lack of information meant that either omissions or "best guesses" had to be made.

[Silver_Dragon]

8 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

I was merely saying that as far as operational status is concerned, there would be no difference, and that those other test aircraft wouldn't be any less "valid" candidates for DCS in this regard. Besides, there are lots of discrepancies with both the Su-25T and Ka-50(and even the Su-33) implementation in sim, where lack of information meant that either omissions or "best guesses" had to be made.

What "dicrepances"? the 2003 LOMAC Su-33 was some weapons with only was fantasy on that times, mockups show on a MAKS... and no, never was a Kh-41 on active or guided weapons on a Su-33, as a "claimed" Su-32NF with torpedoes, MAD and Sonobouys. That fantasy weapons and capabilites was deleted on FC-3.

[Seaeagle]

2 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

What "dicrepances"?

Cockpits and systems - e.g. the Su-33 never had the SPO-15 RWR. 

2 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

the 2003 LOMAC Su-33 was some weapons with only was fantasy on that times, mockups show on a MAKS... and no, never was a Kh-41 on active or guided weapons on a Su-33, as a "claimed" Su-32NF with torpedoes, MAD and Sonobouys. That fantasy weapons and capabilites was deleted on FC-3.

I know and that wasn't what I was talking about(see above) - in fact bringing back such unrealistic armament for the Su-33 was exactly what I was refering to earlier;

15 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

I would much rather see FC level replication of such test aircraft that actually had the weapon's capabilities the OP is seeking, than ruining the current FC3 aircraft by applying fictional capabilities they never had.

 

[okopanja]

21 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

Cockpits and systems - e.g. the Su-33 never had the SPO-15 RWR. 

null

[falcon_120]

I really think DCS is taking too long to add a FC3 level of some of the latest flankers (su27sm, su30 at least), in fact they are more than 20 years old already and operatives around the globe. A su30mki would be wonderful

For other existing planes like the J11, ED is taking too long to give them Modern chinese fox 3 like the PL12. Thanks god several servers;including DDCS as a not gamey example, are already bypassing this limitation and adding the PL12 to them.

I like simulating modern scenarios and currently this is hard


Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Seaeagle]

17 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

Yup, but sounds like its not gonna happen.

No probably not.

17 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

FC3 is slowly dying as new FF modules get built, and if I'm honest I'm not all that sad.

Well I am not so sure - I think the poll posted on this forum section clearly indicates that FC3 still has its attraction as long as those new FF modules don't involve the Su27, Su-33, F-15C or even the MiG-29S.

17 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

Gimme a FF mig23 and 29 and su17 and I'm good. Hopefully we see the 23 in the next year or so. 

One does not exclude the other .Ideally the current FC3 aircraft would all be brought to FF standard along the way, while FC3/MAC(or whatever it will be called) could be used for simpler replication of more "exotic" types, where there is no hope of FF modules. 

 

3 hours ago, okopanja said:

null

....and not that one either until quite recently  .

[upyr1]

On 8/28/2023 at 4:05 PM, exhausted said:

The rule should be simple: If it's been mounted on a Su- or MiG- in Ukraine, then it should be included. Period.

Unless we have the data for the interface it might work for ai.

[okopanja]

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

One does not exclude the other .Ideally the current FC3 aircraft would all be brought to FF standard along the way, while FC3/MAC(or whatever it will be called) could be used for simpler replication of more "exotic" types, where there is no hope of FF modules. 

The stuff present in red FC3 would not be much different from what would FF equivalent be. Missing are things like radio, more detailed DL modeling including command interface for DL, detailed navigation system modeling, but from the VCS point of view it can not disclose more than what was disclosed so far.

Somebody will say this is a matter of their national security, but...

Su-27/Mig-29 in the 80s variants are already de-facto heavily compromised aircrafts due to:

1. Manuals circulating online for Su-27SK
2. Slides from UKR detailing some of the radar operation. These bastardized slides are far cry from actual documentation, but provide certain insight in basic operation.
3. Fact that Belarus sold 2xSu-27 to USA in 1995 as well as Ukraine which also sold 2xSu-27s from it's inventory around 2009. We can safely assume that along airframes, weapons spare parts and maintenance documentation also got delivered

So in practical sense FF 80s flanker would not jeopardize them more then they already are now. Now logic and politics does not always go the same way, so this remains a taboo theme, despite the beans were spilled long time ago.

As for modern airframes, we can safely forget them. Even the existing ones are modeled with relatively large part of imagination in places where documentation is confidential.

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

....and not that one either until quite recently  .

I am well aware that these air-frames were originally delivered with an empty space for RWR, but the image I located does not look recent, but you are free to correct me with more reliable source.  

2 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

Well I am not so sure - I think the poll posted on this forum section clearly indicates that FC3 still has its attraction as long as those new FF modules don't involve the Su27, Su-33, F-15C or even the MiG-29S.

I think it's safe to conclude that all mentioned airframes would sell very well, even if they were done in their early 80s states. I speculate that probability of having Mig-29A is rather high. One day ED will simply announce: surprise we got the new module for you.

[FlankerKiller]

5 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

A su30mki would be wonderful

It isn’t going to happened but that one needs to be a full fidelity bird. 

[FlankerKiller]

No, mod it if you want. But as for DCS itself no. Also FC seems totally dead at this point. Cold War is going to be where it’s at for balance. The Eurofighter will bring some new weapons to the modern sky’s. Unfortunately that’s about it. There still are not that many Fox3 out there even today. The best Redfor is about to happen anyway. The F-4E will give us a facsimile of Irans Air Force. It sucks, but that was also the 2000s for you. What we need are better smarter SAMs. It was and is more about fighting an IADS anyway. 

[F-2]

I wonder if ED’s research team could help me with this.

[Harlikwin]

5 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

No probably not.

Well I am not so sure - I think the poll posted on this forum section clearly indicates that FC3 still has its attraction as long as those new FF modules don't involve the Su27, Su-33, F-15C or even the MiG-29S.

One does not exclude the other .Ideally the current FC3 aircraft would all be brought to FF standard along the way, while FC3/MAC(or whatever it will be called) could be used for simpler replication of more "exotic" types, where there is no hope of FF modules. 

 

....and not that one either until quite recently  .

IDK, I very much understand the desire of the "modern 2000+ gang" to have something to shoot at even if its FC3 stuff in MP. But it sounds like its not happening, and honestly my position on "modern" AC in DCS is that they are generally done poorly due to lack of documentation and/or lack of understanding on ED's part. And I'm sure with "redfor" planes that situation is gonna be far worse. The more complex the systems the more detailed the modeling needs to be and its pretty clear its not happening on a variety of ED modules. Then you get to the "balance" problem for MP with alot of this as well which is where the desire for FC3 level stuff comes from IMO. 

My prediction is that the 70s/80's modules are gonna become the "core" of DCS and thats where the focus should be with as much fidelity as possible. There is documentation generally available for both blue and red jets. And in that time period stuff was "balanced" pretty well as opposed to the various "modern ~2005" scenarios where you have to have serious stretches of imagination to have some sort of plausible opfor that "might be" balanced. 

 

[FlankerKiller]

11 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

My prediction is that the 70s/80's modules are gonna become the "core" of DCS and thats where the focus should be with as much fidelity as possible. There is documentation generally available for both blue and red jets. And in that time period stuff was "balanced" pretty well as opposed to the various "modern ~2005" scenarios where you have to have serious stretches of imagination to have some sort of plausible opfor that "might be" balanced. 

That’s just it the mid 2000s we’re not “balanced.” You want that get an IADS module in game. It is frustrating for me that the FC birds that I used to love playing a stuck in the FC state. But that’s not because of a desire to balance the modern jets. The modern stuff is just so difficult to do as you pointed out. It’s getting better but it takes forever. Honestly I agree the Cold War is where it’s at. The late Cold War gives you enough sensors to find each other and a good mix of weapons when you do. Fox1 fighting leads to lots of merges and there are jets galore to model. Not to mention everything at some point did or could have fought everything. We need some more attackers on all sides. There already is good representation in DCS but the F-4E especially the newer one is going to kick that up a good bit allowing for the full range of mission sets to be flown. Hopefully we get a good Mig-23, and Su-17 at some point we have the Reds modeled pretty well. The A-7E will be great and give us the full range of missions off the boat. Then there are the one offs like the Kafir and the AJS37. Put all that together and you have a ton of different fights possible that are balanced and fun all without the need for fantasy load outs 

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

IDK, I very much understand the desire of the "modern 2000+ gang" to have something to shoot at even if its FC3 stuff in MP. But it sounds like its not happening, and honestly my position on "modern" AC in DCS is that they are generally done poorly due to lack of documentation and/or lack of understanding on ED's part. And I'm sure with "redfor" planes that situation is gonna be far worse. The more complex the systems the more detailed the modeling needs to be and its pretty clear its not happening on a variety of ED modules. Then you get to the "balance" problem for MP with alot of this as well which is where the desire for FC3 level stuff comes from IMO. 

My prediction is that the 70s/80's modules are gonna become the "core" of DCS and thats where the focus should be with as much fidelity as possible. There is documentation generally available for both blue and red jets. And in that time period stuff was "balanced" pretty well as opposed to the various "modern ~2005" scenarios where you have to have serious stretches of imagination to have some sort of plausible opfor that "might be" balanced. 

 

There is a reason that I was more excited about the F-4E than the F-15E. Unless you use mods or flaming cliffs the late-model F-teens are limited to PvP against each other in Red Flag scenarios or PvE.  Meanwhile, the Phantom will complete 3 echo systems: the Persian Gulf, Sanai, and Syria as the F-4 is the ideal op for for the Mig-21.   

[FlankerKiller]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

the F-4 is the ideal op for for the Mig-21.   

And the Mirage F1. If you think about it the F-14A, F-4E, F-5E will be able to give a pretty good fight if they have the Numbers to the F-16 and F-18. 

[Exorcet]

A checkbox to remove weapon restrictions and such would be very welcome. As a sim with limited resources behind it (all software has limited resources), shortcuts like this to allow us to use stand ins for planes we may not get or for plausible hypothetical/experimental versions of aircraft would be a great addition. It needs to be clearly labeled though so players can choose when they want to limit things to historically accurate scenarios only. Make it a mission checkbox like historical units.

 

  

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

There is a reason that I was more excited about the F-4E than the F-15E. Unless you use mods or flaming cliffs the late-model F-teens are limited to PvP against each other in Red Flag scenarios or PvE.  Meanwhile, the Phantom will complete 3 echo systems: the Persian Gulf, Sanai, and Syria as the F-4 is the ideal op for for the Mig-21.   

The teen series aren't limited at all. Historically, they've fought the red forces we have in game. They're not really lacking for anything when it comes to reasonable adversaries, they just require some more attention to setting up the combat situation.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Exorcet

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Exorcet said:

The teen series aren't limited at all. Historically, they've fought the red forces we have in game. They're not really lacking for anything when it comes to reasonable adversaries, they just require some more attention to setting up the combat situation.

The Jeff is the only FF redfor plane that isn't at least a generation behind the the F-teens meanwhile the F-4 is a contemporary to the MiG-21 and takes a lot less effort to get a more balanced fight. The problem wouldn't be as bad with an A model F-teen or even a storm bird. In short I think pvp is more interesting with fighters of the same generation.