what to expect from Su-27 module?

[Frostie]

I have spent far more time in the Flanker than in the F-15C, but whenever I've had an R-27ET shot off at me, I have never NOT seen it, because I am always carefully looking out for IR or TWS guided missiles.

Hop by on the 51st server sometime, i'll try and wrong that right for you. :D

ET's are one of the biggest killers in FC, why, because a lot of the time you don't even know that you're being engaged.

[Pilotasso]

Wouldn't have said it better myself. :)

 

A good pilot knows when not fire too soon.

[karambiatos]

Hop by on the 51st server sometime, i'll try and wrong that right for you. :D

ET's are one of the biggest killers in FC, why, because a lot of the time you don't even know that you're being engaged.

 

firing and ER and ET after each other its quite a problem to dodge them, and turning and running after the Su is in ET range, will almost surely get you killed.

 

but thats just my experience.

[Night]

Frostie and Teknetinium, do you guys use IRST in the FC3 Su-27? I have found it to be very unreliable and inconsistent. But I am not sure if it is accurately modeled in game or not, if the real-life Su-27 IRST is really that poor. You would think that as long as you were not looking at someone who was heading directly head-on, you would be able to see them on IRST, because surely even if they are not using afterburners, the contrast of their exhaust against the cold sky at 7,000M would be apparent. But it isn't in FC3.

 

I similarly like to use the R-27ET, but I find it is only effective if I am firing from a position outside of the enemy pilot's field of view.

[Frostie]

Frostie and Teknetinium, do you guys use IRST in the FC3 Su-27? I have found it to be very unreliable and inconsistent. But I am not sure if it is accurately modeled in game or not, if the real-life Su-27 IRST is really that poor. You would think that as long as you were not looking at someone who was heading directly head-on, you would be able to see them on IRST, because surely even if they are not using afterburners, the contrast of their exhaust against the cold sky at 7,000M would be apparent. But it isn't in FC3.

 

I similarly like to use the R-27ET, but I find it is only effective if I am firing from a position outside of the enemy pilot's field of view.

Hopefully the IRST will be fixed back to FC2 functionality soon, that is with elevation of +60/-15° instead of a fixed gyro stabilised FOV we have now.

 

As it is now you're relying on bandits being less than +/-1000m altitude with you when within 20km range of you to be able to acquire them. When looking for someone within this range Vertical acquisition mode with only EOS active is far more efficient. In FC2 you could build a pretty good picture within 60km no matter the contacts altitude using a combination of radar and IRST.

 

Now it seems that cold targets are easier to pick up at longer ranges than before as long as they appear within the 4 degree angle that limits your EOS. Remember pitching the nose up or down doesn't change where the EOS points because it is gyro stabilised meaning it will always look at the horizon, you want to see contacts which are at 6000m then you need to be up there unless he's over 60km away.

 

If the contact is within your scan zone then an approaching contact in afterburners can be seen with IRST in FC3 relatively easy, and an ET in the face can come as a nasty surprise if they are busy chasing a friendly.

[IvanK]

"remember pitching the nose up or down doesn't change where the EOS points because it is gyro stabilised meaning it will always look at the horizon, you want to see contacts which are at 6000m then you need to be up there unless he's over 60km away."

 

Well I am not so sure about it currently being horizon stabilised.(it certainly was when slew able in pitch as it was in FC2) I believe in FC3 it is fixed on the aircraft's For aft axis. The technique I now use its a slow proposing flight path between 10deg nose down to 15deg nose up.The IR paints I get directly correspond with nose position. I regularly get high level contacts whilst at lo level but with 10-15deg nose up.So the scan volume is fore aft axis referenced not Horizon stabilised ... imo.

[verana_ss]

 

The first F-15C's came in to existence in 1979, the first AMRAAM's entered service in 1991.

 

The first Su-27SM came in to existence around 2002.

 

If ED is intent on only modeling aircraft in existence in the early 1990's, then I can understand why they wouldn't include the Su-27SM.

 

Radar on FC Eagle should be APG-63v1 and was widely produced sometime around but after 200X.

[Weta43]

Also why not build a russian hotas. i would pay even 1000$ for one.Not joking.

There's one already available out of Russia - bit hard to get it shipped though....

[Night]

"remember pitching the nose up or down doesn't change where the EOS points because it is gyro stabilised meaning it will always look at the horizon, you want to see contacts which are at 6000m then you need to be up there unless he's over 60km away."

 

Well I am not so sure about it currently being horizon stabilised.(it certainly was when slew able in pitch as it was in FC2) I believe in FC3 it is fixed on the aircraft's For aft axis. The technique I now use its a slow proposing flight path between 10deg nose down to 15deg nose up.The IR paints I get directly correspond with nose position. I regularly get high level contacts whilst at lo level but with 10-15deg nose up.So the scan volume is fore aft axis referenced not Horizon stabilised ... imo.

 

Frostie is correct here. Try it some time. Find a target with IRST flying at a level altitude, but don't lock him up. It doesn't matter if you point your nose up or down, the only thing that will change his position on the HUD will be if you gain or lose altitude. That means he's correct it has to be gyro stabilized.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Night

[mytai01]

The Cobra maneuver wouldn't last long enough to make a difference to radar. The Su-27 would lose speed and it's own radar lock as well. It might make a good defensive move in a dog fight...maybe! In the original Flanker v1.5 I used it several times to aim my R-73 and kill in a turning dog fight. It was very effective in that game.

[Pyroflash]

Radar on FC Eagle should be APG-63v1 and was widely produced sometime around but after 200X.

 

Or it could be the AN/APG-63. Doesn't necessarily have to be the (V)1.

 

Point is, the RADAR doesn't behave like it should, and we end up with a made up RADAR which is neither the AN/APG-63 or the (V)1. It would be more accurate to call it "FC3 F-15C RADAR imitator".

Edited August 19, 2013 by Pyroflash

[Udat]

I actually successfully used the cobra once back in 1.12b. Don't quite remember how I got into the situation, but I got into a low and slow vertical (meaning I was slow) against an eagle driver. I was beneath him, and could see him going over the top and starting to turn into me with way superior energy while I was desperately trying to get my hms on him. I pulled a cobra, managed to get off 2 73s and barely had enough airspeed to avoid smearing my plane all over the mountainside, eagle parts raining all around me. It was lucky and desperate, but it still worked. Not something I'll forget :-)

[FlankerNation]

Idea to have a Modern Flanker Module for DCS World !

 

Ok I believe we can do a like this.... ED can make flight dynamics in advanced model and the avionics in Standard model.... i mean for example model the the cockpit on assumption. ED has done it before like that so why not now. Also F15c and its missile 120c amraam is also model 50 percent on assume data so why not go with Su35s or Su-27sm on the same basis.

 

Check out this Flanker video.....FLANKA !!! ACTION. by WWW.SUKHOI.ORG

WWW.KNAAPO.COM

 

[YOUTUBE]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/AmYHZ7UtU5E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[/YOUTUBE]

 

http://youtu.be/AmYHZ7UtU5E

 

And for to more information on the best fighter in the world go visit this link:

http://nordsky.blogspot.ru/search/label/%D0%A1%D1%83-27

 

I hope this helps to at least model the semi-AFM module for the dcs world so we can have a modern flanker to fly in dcs world.

[FlankerNation]

I Respect Russia for their Flankers !

 

http://youtu.be/eU6l67mtI8g

 

We need modern Flankers in DCS World......

 

Flanker is a pilots plane....Flanker is the under dog !...... Flanker is trance music !..... Flanker is the name of the game !......... with FLANKER you can DANCE in the sky and you will not shy to shoot down Eagle fly by !....

 

Hell yeah, Flanker is the style you fly.... with R-VV style missiles you snipes with... making all those Eagles players to loose with.... N SAY ...

.... I MA FLANKA FAAAAAANAA .... AYE !

[Vibora]

Forgive me but I find this all a bit confusing.

 

The Su-27 will be sold with an upgraded flight model, but it will not have accurate avionics like the A-10C? Is that right?

Hi Gavagai:

AFM means exactly that, flight model (flight dynamics), not avionics or anything else.

Best regards,

Víbora

Edited August 19, 2013 by Vibora

[*Rage*]

Someone's been taking their happy pills.

[verana_ss]

Or it could be the AN/APG-63. Doesn't necessarily have to be the (V)1. The only sure thing we know is that the FC3 Eagle is post MSIP, however, it doesn't really have all of the MSIP upgrades that would indicate such a modification. As such, the RADAR doesn't behave like it should, and we end up with a made up RADAR which is neither the AN/APG-63 or the (V)1. It would be more accurate to call it "FC3 F-15C RADAR imitator".

 

I'm not sure about that.. I currently believe TWS is the key factor in identifying which one we've got and neither 63 nor 63PSP seemed to have TWS mode implemented.

 

I haven't looked into the detail feature of the v1 radar(would like to know if there is a good reference) but if it's not working the way is supposed to work, I guess it's because of the lockon fidelity at the time they first released it.

[GGTharos]

The F-15 radar was constantly upgraded. It's not about MSIP, v(Whatever), etc. It has always been receiving upgrades. The TWS upgrade happened sometime in '87 (if not earlier - AMRAAM was delivered in '87), and this capability in the '88 eagle -34.

 

I'm not sure about that.. I currently believe TWS is the key factor in identifying which one we've got and neither 63 nor 63PSP seemed to have TWS mode implemented.

 

I haven't looked into the detail feature of the v1 radar(would like to know if there is a good reference) but if it's not working the way is supposed to work, I guess it's because of the lockon fidelity at the time they first released it.

[Maximus_G]

I actually successfully used the cobra once back in 1.12b. Don't quite remember how I got into the situation, but I got into a low and slow vertical (meaning I was slow) against an eagle driver. I was beneath him, and could see him going over the top and starting to turn into me with way superior energy while I was desperately trying to get my hms on him. I pulled a cobra, managed to get off 2 73s and barely had enough airspeed to avoid smearing my plane all over the mountainside, eagle parts raining all around me. It was lucky and desperate, but it still worked. Not something I'll forget :-)

 

From the good ol' 4:3 screen days

Actually there's a handful of Cobra tricks in this vid.

[verana_ss]

The F-15 radar was constantly upgraded. It's not about MSIP, v(Whatever), etc. It has always been receiving upgrades. The TWS upgrade happened sometime in '87 (if not earlier - AMRAAM was delivered in '87), and this capability in the '88 eagle -34.

 

That's interesting to know, thankyou for the input.

[FlankerNation]

From the good ol' 4:3 screen days

Actually there's a handful of Cobra tricks in this vid.

 

Yes Maximum G you are the MAN !

 

Cobra is Useful......

 

Flanker is a pilots plane....Flanker is the under dog !...... Flanker is trance music !..... Flanker is the name of the game !......... with FLANKER you can DANCE in the sky and you will not shy to shoot down Eagle fly by !....

 

Hell yeah, Flanker is the style you fly.... with R-VV style missiles you snipes with... making all those Eagles players to loose with.... N SAY ...

.... I MA FLANKA FAAAAAANAA .... AYE !

[FlankerNation]

Su35s Module

 

I think we can make a Su-35 Semi-AFM module with this information.

 

All this info I had from a blog that I posted before.

 

There's is a official booklet from Sukhoi and Knaapo about the Su-35s in pdf format found here: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B8N7CyMPV7hMZGRZWV9kY3VpMDQ

 

The flight model Advanced but the cockpit functions & operations can be modeled on assumptions example: A/G mode, selecting targets etc.

 

That goes for all sub modes.

 

For me an advanced flight model with clickable cockpit functions on assumptions will be perfect !

 

They (ED) can do it but the questions remains why not ? or if they don't why not help some one do it ?

[Esac_mirmidon]

I preffer i high fidelity Su-27S than a assumption Su-35 or incomplete Su-27SM.

[Flying Penguin]

I preffer i high fidelity Su-27S than a assumption Su-35 or incomplete Su-27SM.

 

+1

 

If you are going to just make stuff up, I can't see any point in doing anything more complex than a Flaming Cliffs level fighter. The attraction of full fidelity is that it's as close to what happens real life as you can get in desktop form, not 'we think this might happen but we can't really tell'.

 

Much as I would love a full fidelity Flanker, if you are going to just make stuff up from a pamphlet, why not just go whole hog and give it 50 missiles and call it 'SU 35 - Ace Combat Edition'?

 

Personally I'm hoping for an accurate S...

 

Cheers

 

Jamie

[neoshi]

From the good ol' 4:3 screen days

Actually there's a handful of Cobra tricks in this vid.

 

I have to admit that I'm a bit afraid to meet you on a server while flying an Eagle now... :joystick::helpsmilie: