what to expect from Su-27 module?

[FLANKERATOR]

Don't agree those being threats for multiplayer since most servers are owned by red squads. I doubt the F-22/35 will be used for much more than aerobatics or guns server since there is no BVR possible for those :D

 

I doubt people will select a Raptor to draw 8's in the sky when they can shoot bandits down miles away. F-22 was born to fight. Server owners could restrict modules and weapons to come up with playable MP missions which may also lead others to go for blue vs blue scenarios as there won't be any matching red opponents. Why don't we bring the battle to the next level by upgrading both sides instead of putting limitations to top quality modules that took years to develop?

[FlankerNation]

Feel YAAA man but don't really care share ya point maaan.

 

I would donate no more than 10$ for a nonclickable LOMAC .lua mod, maybe less or even nothing. After BS and A10C I am not willing to go back to anything nonclickable, only reason I supported FC3 was because of the promise of AFMs and the ability to continue BVR online. I am against of milking a near dead cow...Sorry but this is how I personally feel...

 

Your feelings are welcome that's why I put this point for survey. Don't know yet but thinking to put a poll.

 

Still what I have learned from here in the ED forum that people need this awesome bird Modernized in DCSW.....

 

Until then checkout this song I am making :D UKF Dubstep STYLE !...:pilotfly:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Red is gonna glow one day.....

 

When the sun rise from the east....

 

and the FLANKERNIZATION will show the HEAT ! ....

 

Clicking or no clickabilty till you finish clicking in the pit... you will be ejecting under Flanker Dynasty ! .... Bob Marley wanna fly this plane... Stig have an affair with plane... COBRA venom in its DNA !

 

Oh yeah !

 

Flanker is the UNDERDOG... SUPER DODGE ! .... Flanker is a pilots plane.... Flanker is TRANSGENIC 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 ! :joystick:

Edited September 6, 2013 by FlankerNation

[Pilotasso]

I'd agree with you Sir. The future of the Russian 'air superiority' fighters is compromised in DCS to say the least. More advanced opponents are in development (F-22/35/18, EF2000...) while at the same time a single and much less capable MiG-21 appears to be the only planned reinforcement for Red pilots. One more threat to multiplayer IMO.

 

I am not counting on it, any server running F-22's VS anything else in a realistic scenario is going to result in people playing alone after the other side has left the game.

[Grigs]

One more threat to multiplayer IMO.

Even though I agree with that conclusion, I still do not understand why so many people see things in black&white, or rather red&blue.

 

Of course soviet/russian jets were built to face the american (maybe European) ones and vice versa. But this occults another aspect of air combat: confrontation of one model (vs. dissimilar).

 

I am not aware of any server offering that kind of experience. Of course some of them will allow same model on both side. But let's face it, you rarely see a F15vF15 battle. Nontheless, I think this is interesting.

 

Edit: My bad, I have just went a little further and noticed you brought that up

 

I doubt people will select a Raptor to draw 8's in the sky when they can shoot bandits down miles away. F-22 was born to fight. Server owners could restrict modules and weapons to come up with playable MP missions which may also lead others to go for blue vs blue scenarios as there won't be any matching red opponents

Edited September 6, 2013 by Grigs

[Flying Penguin]

OK if had to say that someone is trying to make a Su-35s FC3 style module, how much will you pay for it ? knowning that it will have a payload of R-VV AA missiles and Smart A/G weapons plus it will have extreme maneuverability with 3D vector nozzles (including cobra) and some more detail will also take notice as follows:

 

* Accurate external 3D model.

* Advanced flight model ( Same as Su27s but little tweak to match the 35s characteristic ) Also need ED support on this one because they are making AFM for S version only.

 

So, again how much would you pay for a Su35s fc3 style module ? :thumbup:

 

Like TaliG, little to zero.

 

Partly because, as a mostly offline player, I'm not going to pay just for some mp balance and if I need my Flanker vs Eagle fix the 27S will do me just fine, and partly because I'm not convinced enough data is available to get it right, even to FC3 standards, which to me means simplified systems, not guesswork.

 

Now if it ever became possible to do a full fat 35 to proper DCS standards, that's a whole different wallet threatening kettle of fish

[FlankerNation]

Like TaliG, little to zero.

 

Partly because, as a mostly offline player, I'm not going to pay just for some mp balance and if I need my Flanker vs Eagle fix the 27S will do me just fine, and partly because I'm not convinced enough data is available to get it right, even to FC3 standards, which to me means simplified systems, not guesswork.

 

Now if it ever became possible to do a full fat 35 to proper DCS standards, that's a whole different wallet threatening kettle of fish

 

 

Not enough data is available for DCS F35A it is modeled after youtube vids so why not Su35s... ;) not a convincing answer Penguin :D

[Night]

I would happily pay $100 for a DCS level Su-35. Hell, I would pay $100 for a DCS level Su-27SM! Hell, who am I kidding, I'd pay just to get an FC3 level Su-27SM!!! I love Flankers. And Fulcrums. Pretty much anything the Soviet Union put in to the sky I find interesting.

[Flying Penguin]

Not enough data is available for DCS F35A it is modeled after youtube vids so why not Su35s... ;) not a convincing answer Penguin :D

 

I'm not going to buy the F35. Just because there is no data doesn't stop someone with the talent and interest making a flying stealth unicorn that shoots rainbow lasers from it's eyes.

 

You want an SU35 based on best guess and conjecture, there's nothing stopping you either making it yourself or persuading a similarly minded developer to take it on. I'm not going to be buying it though, and that was your question.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Flying Penguin

[FlankerNation]

I'm not going to buy the F35. Just because there is no data doesn't stop someone with the talent and interest making a flying stealth unicorn that shoots rainbow lasers from it's eyes.

 

You want an SU35 based on best guess and conjecture, there's nothing stopping you either making it yourself or persuading a similarly minded developer to take it on. I'm not going to be buying it though, and that was your question.

 

 

:D That's the spirit ! I agreed with your input but still it is 50/50...

 

.... lets see more people what they have to say:book:

Edited September 7, 2013 by FlankerNation

[Harpoon]

You gotta love it when your SFM aircraft stalls and starts shaking and freezing pointing up about 60 degrees in the air. :megalol:

 

Basically me when I stall in a non-AFM aircraft: :joystick:

[verana_ss]

JTIDS appeared on the MPCD.

 

http://vnfawing.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2447&sid=9c4782f261220e689dd4e72d97b94c3f

 

 

 

 

 

MSIP didn't have TWS it was MSIP II which had TWS. MSIP II came with the improved APG-63 named the APG-70 which was installed on 40+ F-15C, that is the F-15C in FC.

 

The APG-63(v)1 without AESA was fitted on 180 F-15's between 1998 and 2005, the APG-63(v)2 with AESA has been fitted on 18 F-15's. The rest have the basic APG-63 without TWS and are still operational.

 

In the last 5 years 180 F-15C's have been fitted with the APG-63(v)3 with AESA radar.

 

Actually the panel I was referring to was the one below throttle.

You can clearly see "JTIDS" text in there.

 

Not to mention the F-15E stick that seemed to be delivered to 15C with JITDS implementation, judging from the document I posted.

Edited September 8, 2013 by verana_ss

[Rotorhead]

I would happily pay $100 for a DCS level Su-35. Hell, I would pay $100 for a DCS level Su-27SM! Hell, who am I kidding, I'd pay just to get an FC3 level Su-27SM!!! I love Flankers. And Fulcrums. Pretty much anything the Soviet Union put in to the sky I find interesting.

 

Yeah, I'd have no problems paying for any Flanker in full DCS-standard, especially one of the later models.

 

Not that much for FC3 level, as I like my cockpits clickable. Ka-50 has spoiled me. But I must admit that playing around with thrust vectoring & AFM would be lots of fun. :)

 

Sadly, I don't believe that DCS: Su-35 will happen before 2076. :cry:

[jbrking]

yes please

 

i'm excited for an su-27 in DCS fidelity. would be great.. since the original dos su-27 game on the pc is what perked my interest in flight simulators to begin with.

 

got a lot of love for that bird and i'd i'm sure a lot of people would agree it deserves to be made into a proper DCS module.

[whitehot]

Cobra is demonstration of Su-27 limits of AOA, its all about maintaining control at very low speeds and AOA.You don't need to take it to cobra attitudes but having in mind that you have the possibility, I would say that cobra is very useful in a merge if you have helmet-mounted sight and R-73.

 

 

don't forget that the most impressive thing about the cobra is the ability of the engines not to stall at a velocity around 0 knots

 

also, i dont understand why some ppl talk about the cobra "being modeled in the simulator". When there will be a DCS-level SU-27, it would have full AFM. That alone should mean that said maneuver will be possible - being its parameters inside the flight envelope of the AC. I remember that in FC1 there was a keybind especially destined to the cobra, but the result looked kinda "scripted" to me. With the present flight model / phisycs, I guess it's gonna be just a matter of disabling the AoA limiter and abruptly pull the stick downwards, while staying inside certains flight params.

Edited October 29, 2013 by whitehot
added 4 lines

[Rikus]

i'm excited for an su-27 in DCS fidelity. would be great.. since the original dos su-27 game on the pc is what perked my interest in flight simulators to begin with.

 

got a lot of love for that bird and i'd i'm sure a lot of people would agree it deserves to be made into a proper DCS module.

 

Till DCS F18C is out, they wont add big efforts to develop DCS Su27, and actually we don´t know NOTHING about F18C...

 

so you will be excited for years and years :P

[ShuRugal]

Cobra's can be executed without T.V., it has nothing to do with it.

 

The Maneuver itself is nothing more than a bleed off of speed

 

 

Not quite. Pugachev's Cobra is a classic example of a phenomenon called Supermaneuverability. That is, the ability to maintain at least some attitude control with all lifting surfaces in a condition of stall without loosing altitude. This is something that is extremely difficult to design into an aircraft, because when the lifting surface is stalled, the control surfaces attached will become ineffective due to airflow separation.

 

fifth-generation fighters like the F22 and SU27 achieve this control with vectored thrust. This is the 'easy' route. However, a number of older aircraft demonstrate certain degrees of supermaneuverability even without this feature. The oldest aircraft i am aware of which can perform the Cobra is the

.

 

The cobra does have some value in a combat situation. In the event that the defending is pursued by an aircraft which has a speed advantage in all flight regimes, the Cobra provides a means to shed airspeed at a rate which no other manuever (short of flying into mountain) could ever achieve. This gives the defender a chance to assume the aggressor role from an ideal kill position (assuming the former aggressor fails to evade), or a chance to break contact while the other aircraft comes around to re-acquire.

[GGTharos]

Not quite. Pugachev's Cobra is a classic example of a phenomenon called Supermaneuverability.

 

No, it isn't.

 

That is, the ability to maintain at least some attitude control with all lifting surfaces in a condition of stall without loosing altitude. This is something that is extremely difficult to design into an aircraft, because when the lifting surface is stalled, the control surfaces attached will become ineffective due to airflow separation.

 

Without losing altitude is nothing but an attempt to cut off older aircraft that could accomplish the same but did not have the thrust to accelerate out of the stall as fast. In any case, there is an altitude change when performing the Cobra.

 

fifth-generation fighters like the F22 and SU27 achieve this control with vectored thrust. This is the 'easy' route. However, a number of older aircraft demonstrate certain degrees of supermaneuverability even without this feature. The oldest aircraft i am aware of which can perform the Cobra is the

.

 

The F-100 could do it. Neither of the above is 'super maneuverable'.

 

The cobra does have some value in a combat situation. In the event that the defending is pursued by an aircraft which has a speed advantage in all flight regimes, the Cobra provides a means to shed airspeed at a rate which no other manuever (short of flying into mountain) could ever achieve. This gives the defender a chance to assume the aggressor role from an ideal kill position (assuming the former aggressor fails to evade), or a chance to break contact while the other aircraft comes around to re-acquire.

 

Is that before or after he gets gunned to pieces by his pursuer? See, in BFM slow=peeled grape. And if for some reason the guy behind you misses (he was too close maybe?) all he has to do is climb. What's the guy doing the cobra going to do? Go to warp 9 to 'break contact'?

 

About the only useful way to apply the maneuver is across the turn circle ... if you want that guy's wingman to eat you.

[blackbelter]

I think it is great the way it is. We first have FC3 and its predecessors, in which we are rid of most of the buttons and switchs, and are left with the most basic and essential controls. In this way we can focus on learning to fly, and to maneuver (where most fun lies. To me at least). Then there comes the official DCS module for each plane, with which we learn the full mechanics of the aircraft.

 

To a newbie like me, spending hours on the ground just to learn to click buttons and switches in the correct order, without going to the sky, is the fastest way to turn one off.

[CypherGrunyev]

55 pages later, and the whole of wag's 1st grade class won't shut the hell up about combat application of the cobra.

 

Does it really matter? If the cobra CAN be used in combat we'll just get a stream of solid shit on youtube about how l33t it is. If it doesnt whoop de friggin do.

Edited October 30, 2013 by CypherGrunyev

[ShuRugal]

No, it isn't.

I'm sorry, but how does this not count as a supermaneuver? you don't get any more high-alpha than 90-degrees AoA, and a stable flightpath does not naturally tend to maintain itself under those conditions.

 

 

Without losing altitude is nothing but an attempt to cut off older aircraft that could accomplish the same but did not have the thrust to accelerate out of the stall as fast. In any case, there is an altitude change when performing the Cobra.

 

 

better watch that video again, the maneuver was performed twice with no altitude change relative to the other aircraft in the flight.

 

 

The F-100 could do it. Neither of the above is 'super maneuverable'.

 

Could it? I've never head this before, but if it can, then that puts the airframe age of capable craft back 2 years. and what do you mean "both"? you only mentioned one plane there.

 

Is that before or after he gets gunned to pieces by his pursuer? See, in BFM slow=peeled grape. And if for some reason the guy behind you misses (he was too close maybe?) all he has to do is climb. What's the guy doing the cobra going to do? Go to warp 9 to 'break contact'?

 

I did say it gives the defender a chance. In any fight, there is no such thing as "a sure thing". slowing down a-la cobra would require the aggressor to either be very close, or closing at a high rate of speed. Under those conditions it would force the aggressor to at the very least abort the current attack, in the same way that suddenly closing with your opponent in any other form of close combat requires them to change what they are doing.

 

If attacking with guns (with would, obviously, only be useful in guns range) from directly behind, the aggressor would have to maneuver to avert a collision. A pilot with excellent reflexes may be able to score a hit before breaking off, but in the chase position i wouldn't be betting -my- life on my ability to do two things at once.

 

If making a guns attack from off-angle, the cobra would spoil the aim of the agressor, and allow the defender to turn in to the attack, dive, and make for friendly air cover, or attempt to engage their opponent in a turning fight.

 

About the only useful way to apply the maneuver is across the turn circle ... if you want that guy's wingman to eat you.

 

How does that make any sense? the cobra is a straight-line maneuver. Correctly executed, it only serves to rapidly reduce airspeed. You could, theoretically, use the same maneuver in a different plane of flight to bring your nose around to the inside of a turn long enough to squeeze a shot off, but i wouldn't care to try it as anything other than a last-ditch effort to keep from loosing a superior position against a more maneuverable opponent. Especially since a more maneuverable opponent will likely be able to do the exact same thing, and then you'd just end up with Pugachev's Scissors...

 

Now, i'm not trying to claim this is a 'cure-all' maneuver. But in a close-range fight, it provides a defending pilot with a unique option to force an overshoot, which is the entire goal of the defensive side of air combat maneuvering.

 

If your enemy is behind you, you can't do jack shit except get shot until you get him somewhere else. Every maneuver ever devised has the aim of either A: getting your ass out of your enemy's gunsight, or B: keeping him in yours. Each is effective only within a narrow set of parameters dependent on relative position, aircraft performance, and available kinetic energy to spend on maneuvers. Under 90% of combat conditions, the ability to perform a cobra is useless, just like every other ACM maneuver. All of them are only useful in a close-range turning fight. None of them will get you out of the way of a missile or make you invisible to radar, and those are the two biggest threats.

[lunaticfringe]

How does that make any sense? the cobra is a straight-line maneuver. Correctly executed, it only serves to rapidly reduce airspeed.

 

No, it's not, and no, it doesn't; there is a discrete altitude change which is dependent on how long the maneuver is "held" for, tied to the absolute decrease in speed; hold it longer, and the altitude offset is higher. The net altitude change is dependent on the position of velocity versus gravity.

 

As to shooting across the circle using the Cobra AoA excursion, given that it can be entered in to at any time the aircraft is within the correct speed parameters, it exists as an option from within a turn (ie, all you're doing is pulling the stick back further and invoking the correct inputs on the stick and rudder to maintain control once begun).

 

Now, as to whether or not it's actually useful (or possibly hides lapses in the turn performance of the Flanker's primary short range stick), note #99 and 110.

[FLANKERATOR]

@ShuRugal: The problem with the Cobra maneuver is inherent to what is was designed for; a rapid loss of speed and the time it takes to recover from that low energy state.

 

It could provide you with a snap shot, yet extremely difficult to execute, in a nose to tail situation. Nevertheless, you'd sit completely naked afterwards if you miss your target or even worse at the mercy of other bandits.

 

Now if you're defending with a Cobra, the only way it could work is when the bandit tries to decelerate to stay behind you and end up overshooting. Otherwise, he will recognize the maneuver, keeps his cool, goes vertical and comes back all guns blazing.

Edited October 30, 2013 by FLANKERATOR

[Boberro]

Long time ago I've read that making Cobra does damage to your plane, no you won't lose a wing, but material is being under such stress that plane drastically loses its life span.

 

For airshows there are better versions of those planes which can do it much longer.

[ZaltysZ]

The problem is not the low speed after execution of cobra. The problem is before that - the low entry speed for cobra. If you are not too fast for cobra, you are probably already having problems in general.

[Teknetinium]

How hard is it to accept that it is better to have the Cobra maneuver at ur disposal then not. Su-27 pilots do know what saving energy means. Su-27 doesnt need the cobra maneuver in RL, it can fly slower and have higher AOA than any other fighter of 4th generation. Su-27 makes a Barrel roll when F-15 or F-16 on the six and they both fly by like in top gun.

 

I remember someone was telling the engines with vector was no needed because the missiles will do all the job, still you see vector engines on F-22, execute maneuvers that Su-27 did in 80s :)

 

There are many technical issues as well, as the load on the wings, engines flameout and so on. I have not seen F-18 do the bell maneuver.

Do someone have a video of that?

Edited October 30, 2013 by Teknetinium