Cobra360 Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 I just watched a video off patricksaviation.com It featured a video called Russian Test Pilots. In this video they were flying the Su-27P and the Su-30. When they refueling mid air it showed the HUD display for a few seconds. And to my suprise it looked more like the F-15 HUD than the SU-27 HUD will all know from lockon. THe HUD had a Western style pitch ladder and a lot of other navigation information. It would appear the SU-27 modeled in Lomac is very simplifid in comparason. Here is the link to the vid. http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos.php?action=view&id=110&go=download It about 12megs but it will only download at around 30kbps unless you are a subscriber. Take a look for yourselves.
Kevlon Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 i've stoped going to Patricks aviation site, since he started to charge money for the "fast" download. And the regual download speed sux's .. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Gazehound Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Looks like normal LO pitch ladder to me. Theres some more stuff that isnt on LO HUD though, but then this is a different model plane. Im not saying that the LO HUD is 100% accurate though - ED never claims that. VVS504 Red Hammers
Cobra360 Posted October 1, 2005 Author Posted October 1, 2005 If you look you will see a pitch ladder which the Su-27 does not have instead it has a +/- number readout beside the FPM. Also the FPM is of Western style in that vid aswell. The one in Lomac does not move, only spins on it's axis. And yes the pitch ladder is normal if you fly the F-15 and A-10.
britgliderpilot Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Will download the video over lunch - but depending which model it is, then the HUD symbology may be very different. The newer versions of the Su30 are marketed with westernised avionics - after all, they're often being sold to operate alongside other western aircraft. Having said that, there are features of the Russian fighter avionics that aren't modelled in Lomac. The reasons for that boil down to time and information. Since the time of original avionics modelling for the Russian fighters (they've hardly changed since Flanker 2.0, so that's a while), much more information has become available . . . . . but right now the dev team has other priorities. The navigation symbology in the Russian aircraft is pretty much guesswork. It should not be the same in the MiG29 as it is in the Su27, and in several cases the HDD should be acting much more like a HUD repeater than the current MFD-lite we have at the moment. It's not perfect. But until ED have both properly documented information on how the real thing works, AND the time and inclination to rewrite the game to allow for it, we won't see the game working in exactly the same way as the real thing. That's reality, unfortunately. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Cobra360 Posted October 1, 2005 Author Posted October 1, 2005 True that it is a different model and that it is commom for Western avonics to be fitted to the Su-30MKx series fighters. The Su-27P is basically a standard Su-27 fitted with a IFR probe and even more internal fuel than the standard Su-27s. It is an early first gen Flanker not a second gen Su-30MKI/35UB. I'm just a little suprised at ED. They have the some of the best sources on Russian hardware, and real Su-27 pilots testing the flight models and we end up with a more accurate HUD for the A-10 and F-15. It's just after years of Falcon 4. I'd love to have a Russian cockpit as accurate as the F-16 had in Falcon. If you think about ti ED have being modeling the Su-27 since Flanker 1 and still there is a bit of a way to go yet. Maybe someone from the ED team and say for sure, if corners were cut and where and why. And if there are plans to correct/modify them in the future.
Guest IguanaKing Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Well...if it weren't for waypoints being displayed on the HUD, navigation in the Western aircraft would be guess-work as well. The NAV instruments in the pit don't quite function like they do IRL, which makes it almost impossible to do much more than intercept an ILS. This is very basic information that is all over the place out there, so I think they could have done better. We'll see what they come up with in the future.
Cobra360 Posted October 1, 2005 Author Posted October 1, 2005 In saying all of the above, the MiG-29 HUD appears to be just about spot on.
britgliderpilot Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Ah, it was the Su27P with the IFR shot then? I have a Russian Test Pilots video with no in-flight refuelling in it . . . . will check Patricks vid. I'm just a little suprised at ED. They have the some of the best sources on Russian hardware, and real Su-27 pilots testing the flight models and we end up with a more accurate HUD for the A-10 and F-15. It's just after years of Falcon 4. I'd love to have a Russian cockpit as accurate as the F-16 had in Falcon. If you think about ti ED have being modeling the Su-27 since Flanker 1 and still there is a bit of a way to go yet. Maybe someone from the ED team and say for sure, if corners were cut and where and why. And if there are plans to correct/modify them in the future. Well, the most basic answer is that F4 only had one jet to work on ;) ED have limited time to spend on improvements - the Flanker has been left out of further developments since Flanker 1, unfortunately. Flanker 2.0 introduced the Su33, Flanker 2.5 introduced the MiG29K, Flanker Attack would have introduced the Su25/Su39, then they were working on the A10, then they were working on the F15, then they were ironing out the bugs in all of that, then they were working on the Su25T and the AFM . . . . . When you look at it like that, we should probably be glad that we've seen the improvements to the avionics and FM that we have :p Anyway, right now they're focussing on things that will make them money. Which is fair enough, I suppose. New avionics for an existing jet just aren't sexy. I've mentioned this to ED before - mostly about the MiG29 and the HDD, which shouldn't be as advanced as it is - and they've basically shrugged and said that they know it's wrong, they want to change it, but right now they're pushing for other developments. It's not a priority right now, but one day they'll get around to it. 1 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
LaRata Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Yes some many HUD for differend vercions :) My only questions ?? is " The Su- and Mig have the same radar operations and simbology ?? only chance the range ??? By now we have some different display in the Navagation area :) this will be nice :) some shot from video of Su-33 diferent Hud and HDD The new Su..look nice :)
britgliderpilot Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 I've just downloaded the video, and I think that HUD shot is from the Su30, not the Su27P. Note the formation - the single seater leads, and the Su30 is off the right wing. The refuelling HUD shots are on the right side of the tanker, and the shot of the single-seater refuelling are out of the left side of the canopy. Looks like they're maintaining formation while refuelling . . . . . so I reckon the new HUD is from the Su30. Still leaves us with the problem of the HDD being wrong :p Nice shots of the Su33 HDD, LaRata . . . . think thats in one of the CAC modes, have never seen a shot of the HDD in any Russian fighter in BVR mode. Either way, I'd quite like to. The new Sue cockpits look very shiny indeed . . . . http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Guest ThomasDWeiss Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 i've stoped going to Patricks aviation site, since he started to charge money for the "fast" download. And the regual download speed sux's .. I support Patrick’s site with banners and articles. Last month I ran out of bandwidth and had to buy more – this things cost money you know? And Patrick’s site does consume HUGE amounts of bandwidth – and that costs hundreds of dollars a month. He is not charging out of sadistic pleasure, but out of necessity. $5 a month is not that much money for a unique site.
Cobra360 Posted October 1, 2005 Author Posted October 1, 2005 Here is the old Su-35 pit And below is the one off Su-37 pit which became the standard Su-35 pit after the Su-37 was returned to Su-35 standard and crashed at an airshow a year later.
Guest ThomasDWeiss Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Imagining it in Lock On makes you drool, doesn't it?
Dudikoff Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Still leaves us with the problem of the HDD being wrong :p Nice shots of the Su33 HDD, LaRata . . . . think thats in one of the CAC modes, have never seen a shot of the HDD in any Russian fighter in BVR mode. Either way, I'd quite like to. Is it really wrong or does it merely lack the HUD repeater mode? As I understand, the HDD we have now is shown when the "TAKT" (stands for tactical, I think) button you see on the top of the HDD is turned on. But it's function depends on having the much debated Lazar datalink equipment. I don't see the function of the HUD repeater except being a backup in case the HUD fails.. i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Trident Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 The Su-27 HUD in LOMAC is probably reasonably accurate. The Testpilot's Sukhois are used for testing new avionics and other systems (most recently TVC engines), so I'd be carefull about accepting their avionics fit as representative of a VVS Su-27. About the HDD, yes the one we have now isn't totally wrong but the HUD repeater is missing and the symbology isn't accurate.
192nd_Erdem Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 Imagining it in Lock On makes you drool, doesn't it? That would be a beast,taking down everything in front of it :)
S77th-GOYA Posted October 1, 2005 Posted October 1, 2005 My only questions ?? is " The Su- and Mig have the same radar operations and simbology ?? only chance the range ??? The Su and MiG (flyables) use different versions of the same radar. The Slotback1 and Slotback2. The F-15's TEWS will not be able to tell the difference between the weaker and stronger versions in the 1.11 patch.
Recommended Posts