Next (RED) cold war fixed wing in DCS

[Iron_Man]

12 минут назад, Bremspropeller сказал:

Most wanted to least wanted:

Su-15TM (for people who like the Foxbat, but who also know how to use a fork and a knife)

MiG-25 (for the rest)

MiG-27 (because BRRRRRT!)

Su-25 (it's already there, but clickety-click)

Yak-38 (meh, lots of work for an aircraft that's mostly gonna be shnizzeled)

Ok, but what is so radical about the Su-15TM? The 25 is a revolutionary aircraft IMO. Phantoms and Mirages over Sinai couldn’t even get to the Foxbat. 

[Nipil]

12 minutes ago, Iron_Man said:

But all in all, I think MiG-25 as a high speed/altitude interceptor with R-40 missiles maybe a very special project, considering that now at least we have 19 and 21 capable of working at low altitudes.

So do I. If someone could find enough data, it sure is going to be a very interesting beast to fly. I just don't have much optimism in this regard.

5 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Need a ED or 3rd party get propper info, SME, etc and build a propper DCS hardcore module

Not really sure Su-25 would require 3rd party though. Mi-24P was done by ED themselves, being of the same era and similar level of complexity and fullfilling quite similar roles. Both are still in Russian service, although CW vesions of both are mostly relegated to training and reserve roles. So it might be possible, unless there was a statement about Su-25 specifically saying otherwise. It's not really like MiG-29 or other fighters, which have very high flying perfomace, relatively complex radars, datalinks, FLIR etc. It's a tier lower on complexity ladder.

[Bremspropeller]

2 hours ago, Iron_Man said:

Ok, but what is so radical about the Su-15TM? The 25 is a revolutionary aircraft IMO. Phantoms and Mirages over Sinai couldn’t even get to the Foxbat. 

Nothing. It looks better. Capability-wise (real-world), they're pretty similar.

null

 

 

 

They're both cool aircraft and the MiG comes with the added benefit of having a recce variant and dropping some bombs (plus it actually saw some pew-pew conflict, apart from shooting at unarmed vehicles like the Flagon).

Both aircraft only make sense, if we actually could build a proper PVO campaign, including battling the (sub-) arctic weather. Which means: We need weather-presets with sh1ttier weather (lower clouds, less visibility and more rain/ snow). /opinion

Edited September 27, 2023 by Bremspropeller

[Iron_Man]

1 минуту назад, Bremspropeller сказал:

Nothing. It looks better. Capability-wise (real-world), they're pretty similar.

Absolutely NOT! Please do the research why MiG-25 was created, primarily to counter the XB-70, also how many absolute world records were set by Ye-166. Besides, MiG-25 was capable of intercepting and even locking on the SR-71. Come on!!

[Logan54]

40 минут назад, Nipil сказал:

Although I still hold that Su-17/22 and MiG-27 are easier to do

Not sure about MiG-27. Seems to me this is top secret SEAD aircraft that u can see only in dreams. Anyway we have some real work on Su-22M4 by SVK Sniper. Also we have Su-25. Not clickable, but it do his work very good. But what we see by BLUE?  F-5E, F-1CE/EE, Viggen, Sabre, Tomcat, seems like not too much A/G jets, isn`t it? And what will we get in close future? Super Sabre, F-4 Phantom, Kfir, Tornado, Intruder, Corsar ll, and MiG-23MLA and MiG-17F (and probably Su-22M4) for RED. This would be awesome if all 3 ships comes, but what will u do with 15 Tigers (Phantoms) walking around the map and searching some tasty bombers for breakfast? How to fight with attack aircraft against dogfighters? And yes, MiG-25RBT is strategic bomber, it means it can go thrue the map at 60k feet at 2.5M and to bomb enemy strategig objects/airbase behind enemy lines. Tanks and farposts not his deal.

Anyway, I`m absolutely sure DCS should to do clickable Su-25. Very much ppl fly it. But if any dev decide to do MiG-27K, it will be Cold War`s terminator, no doubt.

Why MiG-25? Seems because we have a lot of data about systems. It can provide air superiority for bombers`s/froggy`s work and also to perform a breakthrough to strategic objects. If this way bad for red, then ok

[Iron_Man]

In real world, the pilots were instructed not to push the envelope on a regular basis, which does not mean the Foxbat was not capable to easily rip through the skies above 20km and reach Mach 2.8

Every 25 upon delivery was test flown to meet the strict performance criteria for deployment to PVO. 

[Steph]

Su 25 TM .. ( Su 39 ) .

[YoYo]

Easy task MiG-25 .

[Bremspropeller]

39 minutes ago, Iron_Man said:

Absolutely NOT! Please do the research why MiG-25 was created, primarily to counter the XB-70, also how many absolute world records were set by Ye-166. Besides, MiG-25 was capable of intercepting and even locking on the SR-71. Come on!!

Yeah, right. Please don't assume you're the only person who's read a book or two.

I don't care about world-records, unless they've been achieved by line-jets. That's precisely why I wrote "real-world" in brackets.

So have Viggens and a duckton of other aircraft. Being able to maneuver into a position from where you'd be able to squeeze off a missile successfully, is a different story altogether. Even for a Foxbat.

 

 

 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

Both aircraft only make sense, if we actually could build a proper PVO campaign, including battling the (sub-) arctic weather. Which means: We need weather-presets with sh1ttier weather (lower clouds, less visibility and more rain/ snow). /opinion

The two aircraft working only (interceptor version) under strict GCI control as Tu-128 and others on dedicate sectors / intercept presset targets. They never got on "solitarie wolf" under Pacvar / URRS / 3rd countries rules. Meanwhile, the weather has always a win-win...

[WinterH]

Among the listed, my preference in order:

• MiG-27K
• MiG-25PD or PDS + RBT and/or BM. If we'll only ever get one variant, I guess interceptor is the most iconic. I would enjoy having some MiG-25s anyway.
• Su-15: Interesting-ish but I'd rather see other things not on this list before it.
• Su-25 full fidelity: I love the froggy, full-fi would be nice, but can do without too.

Yak-38: Don't care, don't want. One of the very few red aircraft I wouldn't buy.

However, there are other red-jets I prefer over all of them, maybe other than MiG-27.

For me a Su-17M4 or if that's not possible Su-17M3, or their Su-22 equivalent, is at the top of the list. There have been multiple signs of it being considered by various people, but they all amount to nothing for now. I do personally hope we'll get it from OctopusG as a full fidelity module eventually, but we'll see.

Following that, I'd love either MiG-21F-13 or it's J-7 equivalent, but also a very late J-7 too. Latter is sadly not likely to happen I think though, and with us already having the Bis, it may be doubtful that another dev would go for another Fishbed variant.

Su-24 I'd really love, but I don't think it is likely at all sadly. Any Flanker would be amazing too, but again, don't see it happening.

I'd also love a few of the Chinese types, especially Q-5, but seeing Deka had to go for a semi-Western prototype variant, I don't think we will be getting any domestic Chinese fighters, especially notthing this side of Cold War.

[YoYo]

It's just worth adding so as not to get horny . In general, there is not much to count on on the eastern side models. It's a long way, and I don't think there will be anything from ED, maybe only a 3rd party (nearest MiG-23, 17 and Su-22 maybe).

[Beirut]

IL-10.

 

I don't care if the era is wrong, I want it. 

[YoYo]

Id like to see IL-28 too 

[WinterH]

14 hours ago, Beirut said:

IL-10.

 

I don't care if the era is wrong, I want it. 

Well since the thread is about jets, I didn't add my prop and helo wishes.

Il-10 is cool and all, but honestly I'd rather have Il-2 of some description, iconic, served in WW2 in a huge capacity etc. I'd also love I-153, Yak-9s and maybe Yak-3 too, Pe-2, Mi-2, Mi-6 or Mi-26, and while rather impossible Ka-52 and/or Mi-28N.

[Snappy]

18 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Su-25 has a FC-3 aircraft, they never get a overhaul.

Need a ED or 3rd party get propper info, SME, etc and build a propper DCS hardcore module

I don’t think this is true. AFAIK Mig-29 was overhauled (new 3D model) quite a while ago, it was shortly before the announcement of MAC.

But that doesn’t mean they will do it again with FC3 aircraft.

[Beirut]

1 hour ago, WinterH said:

Well since the thread is about jets, I didn't add my prop and helo wishes.

 

You should feel free to add your props and helos.

 

1 hour ago, WinterH said:

Il-10 is cool and all, but honestly I'd rather have Il-2 of some description, iconic, served in WW2 in a huge capacity etc. I'd also love I-153, Yak-9s and maybe Yak-3 too, Pe-2, Mi-2, Mi-6 or Mi-26, and while rather impossible Ka-52 and/or Mi-28N.

 

Yes please.

[upyr1]

My list,

first anything from the early Cold War and World War II that would work with the I-16 and Mig-15. As far as DCS is concerned the documentary from the 1980s was correctly named as Korea has been forgotten. Thanks to the presence of the I-16 we need assets and modules that will cover 1935 onward. 

We have a nice lineup as far as air to air is concerned for the 1960s and 70s. The MiG-25 and Su-15. The MiG-25 would work with more maps. The Su-7, MiG-27, Su-22, and if possible the Su-24 would be quite welcome as would the SU-25 and Mig-29. 

[Iron_Man]

16 часов назад, YoYo сказал:

In general, there is not much to count on on the eastern side models.

What do you mean?

[Iron_Man]

20 часов назад, Bremspropeller сказал:

Yeah, right. Please don't assume you're the only person who's read a book or two.

I don't care about world-records, unless they've been achieved by line-jets. That's precisely why I wrote "real-world" in brackets.

So have Viggens and a duckton of other aircraft. Being able to maneuver into a position from where you'd be able to squeeze off a missile successfully, is a different story altogether. Even for a Foxbat.

 

 

 

 

I do not assume, I’m absolutely sure. It’s quite myopic to assume that we’re all here bookworms or nerds. How can you even put some Viggens for comparison here? The only plane to mention here by performance is the SR-71, however the Foxbat was multi role plane. It’s just very hard to accept for some category of people that indeed the Foxbat was a bad ass interceptor, about 1200 units were made. There’s a popular trend now to diminish Soviet technological achievements in the times of Ru***phobia now, however you want to hide it, whatever you say. 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Iron_Man

[Iron_Man]

A big part of the DCS is the Cold War planes lineup, red vs blue. And that’s ok because it’s a sim game. That’s what makes it so exciting to put them one against the other in the simulation in recreation of historically accurate campaigns. Flying mind-blowing high fidelity F-14 with fantastic AIM-54C doing BVR magic on any existing plane in DCS, shooting red units developed in the times of Lock-On sim, and stroking own ego - that’s not how the Cold War really went. 
I have most of the bluefor jets, and am fascinated how much work and passion dev teams put into them. Can only guess why redfor jets, aside from modules like MiG-21, not getting enough love and support. 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Iron_Man

[Silver_Dragon]

39 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

My list,

first anything from the early Cold War and World War II that would work with the I-16 and Mig-15. As far as DCS is concerned the documentary from the 1980s was correctly named as Korea has been forgotten. Thanks to the presence of the I-16 we need assets and modules that will cover 1935 onward. 

We have a nice lineup as far as air to air is concerned for the 1960s and 70s. The MiG-25 and Su-15. The MiG-25 would work with more maps. The Su-7, MiG-27, Su-22, and if possible the Su-24 would be quite welcome as would the SU-25 and Mig-29. 

Su-24 has very unlikely, by russian secret laws. My list:

SCW-WW2

• Ilyushin DB-3
• Ilyushin Il-2
• Ilyushin Il-4
• Ilyushin Il-10
• Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov LaGG-3
• Lavochkin La-5
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-1
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3
• Petlyakov Pe-2
• Petlyakov Pe-3
• Petlyakov Pe-8
• Polikarpov I-15/Bis
• Polikarpov I-153
• Polikarpov Po-2
• Polikarpov R-5
• Polikarpov R-Z
• Sukhoi Su-2
• Tupolev SB
• Tupolev TB-3
• Tupolev Tu-2
• Yakovlev UT-2
• Yakovlev Yak-1
• Yakovlev Yak-3
• Yakovlev Yak-7
• Yakovlev Yak-9

Cold War

• Ilyushin Il-28
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-9
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23B
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-27
• Sukhoi Su-7
• Sukhoi Su-9
• Sukhoi Su-15
• Sukhoi Su-17/22
• Tupolev Tu-4
• Tupolev Tu-16
• Tupolev Tu-22
• Tupolev Tu-95
• Yakovlev Yak-25
• Yakovlev Yak-28

[draconus]

43 minutes ago, Iron_Man said:

Can only guess why redfor jets, aside from modules like MiG-21, not getting enough love and support. 

You don't have to guess. Devs said multiple times that anything modern-ish from redfor is very hard or impossible to model with high enough quality that DCS require. Problem is the Russian law, government unwilling to cooperate, licensing, publicly available and legaly obtainable data, SMEs - not the lack of will from developers.

[Iron_Man]

Только что, draconus сказал:

You don't have to guess. Devs said multiple times that anything modern-ish from redfor is very hard or impossible to model with high enough quality that DCS require. Problem is the Russian law, government unwilling to cooperate, licensing, publicly available and legaly obtainable data, SMEs - not the lack of will from developers.

With all due respect - we all know by now (*not planned*) the ED is not interested - for whatever reason, and that’s totally fine. They don’t want to deal with it during these turbulent times. But let me ask you, do you live in Russia to make all these statements about their law, government etc?

[Bremspropeller]

39 minutes ago, Iron_Man said:

I do not assume, I’m absolutely sure. It’s quite myopic to assume that we’re all here bookworms or nerds. How can you even put some Viggens for comparison here? The only plane to mention here by performance is the SR-71, however the Foxbat was multi role plane. It’s just very hard to accept for some category of people that indeed the Foxbat was a bad ass interceptor, about 1200 units were made. There’s a popular trend now to diminish Soviet technological achievements in the times of Ru***phobia now, however you want to hide it, whatever you say. 

 

What?

Not quite multirole, but multipurpose. It was an interceptor, that could also drop a couple of bombs. Not neccessarily during the same mission. It's more useful than being a single-purpose jet like the Tu-128 or Su-15, though.

I like the Su-15 better, because I like the aircraft better. That hardly makes me a russophobe. But if you want to play the victim-card here, go ahead, whatever you say.

The MiG-25 couldn't intercept the SR, because it evidently didn't. Had they been able to squash a Blackbird, they'd done it and we'd know about it as they'd have run the propaganda game, thumping their chest over that achievement. There's only two reasons why they'd not shoot somebody down:

1) They legally couldn't. Ask KAL how well that rule turned out.

2) They physically couldn't. Like Mr. Rust in his R172, who wasn't shot down because "he wasn't deemed a threat" and yet PVO proceeded with some personnel-shuffling in the aftermath.

Everybody who wasn't in their airspace by invitation, got an explosive memo.

Intercepting an enemy with an aircraft that's slower than the target and with missiles that are only for a fraction of their flight-time faster than the target itself isn't quite a child's play. It requires an orchestra of GCI and command-control assets to work just right. It only takes one person to mess up and the intercept goes to hell.

Just look how much of a clusterduck the KAL007 intercept was - and that was a plain vanilla 747-200, not trying to evade anybody, jamming or chaffing.