what to expect from Su-27 module?

[volk]

Real life F-15 exercises had F-15's doing point defense in 2v8 scenarios, 4 fighters, 4 strikers. I'd say that says something about the USAF's confidence in their aircraft and that was before AMRAAM - noting of course, that point defense may be augmented by SAMs etc.

It's poor scenario. May be some ballistic missiles (with nukes or no) hit to AWACS airbases, ground radar centres for first in cold war era? Then will look.

[GGTharos]

Both sides were ready to throw nukes. It doesn't matter, because it doesn't interest us in the A2A arena. Unless you want to talk actual total war instead of A2A scenarios, in which case there have been a lot of papers declassified lately on the subject.

[GGTharos]

Could it be that Soviets made mistake about being able to go WVR then? This is a two-edged sword. As for AIM-7 in vietnam, that has its own history.

 

The trick is, 'A working AIM-7 launched in parameters has a Pk of 0.7'. Today, they also include known failure rates in Pk.

 

US view on subject, not Soviet or Russian.

Before Vietnam action they thought that AIM-7 Pk is 0,7 or like this. Everyone make mistake.

[volk]

Both sides were ready to throw nukes. It doesn't matter, because it doesn't interest us in the A2A arena.

But A2A arena contains such key components, like AWACS and ground radar and data centres. They destroyed by the first blow. Saddam could not do it, US could and took out Iraqui EWR at first night of war by Apaches. And Soviets could. It doesn't matter, with AH or BM you could do this. The war have't any template. Edited August 21, 2013 by volk

[Teknetinium]

Either stirring the pot, or being all philosophical about it - I'm not sure which, but it seems to me - People want what people want.

 

Some people want the best US gear they can - from patriotism, interest in the technical side of it, aesthetics, whatever ... & if it makes for a one sided fight - well that's either 'good and as the world should be' in that it reinforces their world view, or it's beside the point.

 

Some people want the best Russian gear they can - from patriotism (anti-patriotism), interest in the technical side of it, aesthetics, whatever ... & some of them are sure this will lead to a one sided fight - which is'good and as the world should be' & reinforces their world view, and others see it as beside the point.

 

And some people want to pick and chose the equipment from both sides that leads to the most interesting 'gameplay' - where the skill of the pilot is more important in determining the outcome of an engagement than the coalition that the end up flying on or the particular plane they jump into.

 

It seems to me that the first 2 speak the same language, but want diametrically opposed results, and so understand each other, but disagree about what they should see when they hit 'Fly', while the third group speaks another language, where 'fair', 'interesting', 'fun' and a whole swag of other ideas have meanings that are completely unintelligable to the first 2 groups, and what they want to see in the sim seems a negation of the 'reality' the other two groups want portrayed.

 

There is no mutually intelligable resolution to the argument.

 

Personaly - I'm in camp 3.

 

 

Changing the subject slightly, with regards to the '1 vs 1 F-15C always kills Su-27S' comments...

 

I seem to remember that in the battle to get the F-22 funded, the US published (the airforce or M.D. itself) a study saying that with 2 good pilots of equal skill, 1 on 1, the Su-27S with R-27ER had the advantage over the F-15, because the additional range of the R-27ER (apparently they hadn't read enough of this forum to know that it has no range advantage) meant they could force a single F-15 pilot defensive & then take advantage of that.

 

My memory of the response to the study was that, while people were prepared to accept that 1 on 1 this was true, as soon as there were 2 or more Eagles, the advantage swithced to them, and the Su-27S needed a clear numerical advantage to overwhelm the eagles.

 

GG which camp are you in?

Let me put it this way, If information was available would you like to fight against Mig-21 or Su-27SM3 in your F-15E? I'm talking about DCS not realife.

I'm supporting real data, but I don't support aircrafts from different timeframes to compete. If you fight Su-27 from 86 it would be great if you could play by same rules where F-15 should be based on same year. Don't make it political by saying Su-27 never had updates anyway so it doesn't matter we can fight it with F-22 since US have it. That would be in RL but I do not support that for a simulator. I believe most people want aircrafts that can match each other. GG this is a simulator not a real war where you always want your oponen to be weaker.

 

Nato and russian fighter pilots show great respect to their opponents, since there is a lot of aspects that are not aware of.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

What if US was able to destroy most of Soviet nuclear arsenal with the first blow? How about that GCI, too? ;)

 

We can go round and round talking about this part of a real war, but that's not what the subject is, the subject is really aircrafts fighting it out.

 

Like I said again, if you want to know about the entire war, there are plenty of papers that have been declassified on the subject. Both sides had force escalation policies and nuclear weapons were involved. I don't know who would win, but I do believe that I know which fighter jet is superior and in what way, which is all I care about in this context ;)

 

But A2A arena contains such key components, like AWACS and ground radar and data centres. They destroyed by the first blow. Saddam could not do it, US could and took out Iraqui EWR at first night of war by Apaches. And Soviets could. It doesn't matter, with AH or BM you could do this. The war have't any template.

[GGTharos]

I wouldn't want to fly an F-15E, it's an air to ground plane. F-15C is what I'd rather have. I don't know why you want to mention F-15E's, it's sort of pointless as an argument. I also don't care what I'd face - MiG-21's might be boring if they attempt to fight a 'fair' fight, but there are definitely ways to use them for certain purposes where their disadvantages can be diminished. While the Su-27SM3 will be more dangerous, the real dangerous opponents are the new Chinese flankers and other jets, and the Su-35, as well as the Indian flankers, not the 27SM series IMHO.

 

And guess what, Su-27S' would still have to face F-15C's with AIM-120C's. By the time the SM started getting into service, they would have even had to face off with Raptors.

 

And FYI, if you want a Su-27S from '86, then you would have very few Su-27's, and no ERs either.

 

Face the facts: You're not going to be facing a 1986 F-15C in DCS. Like I said, if you really want 'same rules' and 'balance', give everyone the same plane, and same armament.

 

If you want to do DACT, live with the fact that your chosen ride is disadvantaged and work tactics that will help you.

 

GG which camp are you in?

Let me put it this way, If information was available would you like to fight against Mig-21 or Su-27SM3 in your F-15E? I'm talking about DCS not realife. :)

I'm supporting real data, but I don't support aircrafts from different timeframe. If you fight Su-27 from 86 it would be great if you could play by same rules where F-15 should be based on same year. But you like to make it political by saying Su-27 never had updates anyway so it doesn't matter we can fight it with F-22 since US have it. that would be in RL but I do not support that for simulator whwre you have mig-21 and su-27S.

Edited August 21, 2013 by GGTharos

[NineLine]

Why pick on the Mig 21 all the time, it really has nothing to do with the discussion, it was chosen not for its relation to any other current aircraft in DCS World but by the 3rd Party group that wanted to develop it. Find or found a group that wants to put together a Su-27SM module, or whatever aircraft you would like to have. You can easily start this by collecting data to build it... to be honest, with what is available in World, I think a reasonable effort would only be needed to make a FC3 version of the Su-27SM if you could replicate the systems/weapons of that plane reasonably enough... which is the part that seems to be the stumbling block.

 

GG which camp are you in?

Let me put it this way, If information was available would you like to fight against Mig-21 or Su-27SM3 in your F-15E? I'm talking about DCS not realife. :)

I'm supporting real data, but I don't support aircrafts from different timeframe. If you fight Su-27 from 86 it would be great if you could play by same rules where F-15 should be based on same year. But you like to make it political by saying Su-27 never had updates anyway so it doesn't matter we can fight it with F-22 since US have it. that would be in RL but I do not support that for simulator whwre you have mig-21 and su-27S.

[Teknetinium]

if you really want 'same rules' and 'balance', give everyone the same plane, and same armament.

 

GG that what you will have when we get F-18C, :megalol:

[GGTharos]

You tell me - are you going to stop flying flankers? ;)

 

I'd expect the F-18C to have a lot of trouble if it has the older APG-65. Yes, it's a more advanced radar, but AFAIK it was compromised (of course, EW environment is not really modeled, so this doesn't matter in the game). If it's an APG-73, then it should do okay-ish, but detection and track ranges won't be all that great.

 

It's a small radar dish :)

 

GG that what you will have when we get F-18C, :megalol:

[Teknetinium]

You tell me - are you going to stop flying flankers? ;)

 

I'd expect the F-18C to have a lot of trouble if it has the older APG-65. Yes, it's a more advanced radar, but AFAIK it was compromised (of course, EW environment is not really modeled, so this doesn't matter in the game). If it's an APG-73, then it should do okay-ish, but detection and track ranges won't be all that great.

 

It's a small radar dish :)

 

I fly P-51 more than I fly Su-27S whit all its buggs.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

Then it's going to be even less fair for you when I bring my F-15C :P

[Teknetinium]

Then it's going to be even less fair for you when I bring my F-15C :P

 

Don't worry by then Ill fight you in EF-2000.

[Frostie]

Balls to 27SM I want an Su-35S with IBRIS-E and 240 degree azimuth scan, 2 of these in a wide spread and datalink would make F-35's light up like 747's. Bye bye frontal notch. :D

[GGTharos]

Bring it :D

 

Don't worry by then Ill fight you in EF-2000.

[GGTharos]

Very conservatively speaking, the range to detect an F-35 will be 1/8th the detection range of a contemporary fighter ... just FYI. :D

 

Balls to 27SM I want an Su-35S with IBRIS-E and 240 degree azimuth scan, 2 of these in a wide spread and datalink would make F-35's light up like 747's. Bye bye frontal notch. :D

[Frostie]

Very conservatively speaking, the range to detect an F-35 will be 1/8th the detection range of a contemporary fighter ... just FYI. :D

Notching contemporary fighters don't show up on radar too well either. ;)

[Teknetinium]

240 degree azimuth scan,

LOL, we could lunch ER-27 and almost extend while supporting our missile like real man do:)

[lunaticfringe]

Why pick on the Mig 21 all the time, it really has nothing to do with the discussion, it was chosen not for its relation to any other current aircraft in DCS World but by the 3rd Party group that wanted to develop it.

 

See, this is the fascinating part. I'm *excited* by the premise of a MiG-21 in DCS. A number of potential threat nations still fly the Fishbed- the type of places that terrain/environments could be modeled for. For the era of aircraft being modeled (mid to late 90s), it fits given the number of machines on hand and still in use by the CIS/former Soviet states.

 

And it's a natural fit over Nevada (along with a Su-27S) with its usage by the 4477th in the DACT role. I'm hoping that it's FM is to the point where the MiG-21s vertical maneuvering speed is properly modeled to preclude groveling in such a way as to challenge the Blue Air fliers up against it to engage it appropriately, even when up against singletons (rather than packs).

 

Era-appropriate aircraft, people complain. They want to institute arbitrary restrictions against other types and development in fear of having to model tactics and employment correctly in a dissimilar environment, instead of using it the right way.

 

People need to be honest with themselves and admit they don't want "simulation" and "realism"- they want a *game*. And that's fine. Just don't lie about it.

[GGTharos]

Yep, but you don't need huge scan azimuth to deal with them ... just a pair of datalinked eagles - but anyway ... not that we're talking non-sense now, just ... really not relevant.

 

 

In any case, I doubt any of the really soul-destroying things (Electronic Warfare) will be modeled here.

 

PS: I've seen papers on how to deal with notching aircraft. I don't know what radars, if any, they apply to, but I hear those AESAs are pretty hard to notch. The notch just keeps shrinking as processing power to do things other than doppler filtering increases.

 

Notching contemporary fighters don't show up on radar too well either. ;)

[Frostie]

LOL, we could lunch ER-27 and almost extend while supporting our missile like real man do:)

You can keep them whizz bangs i'd be taking RVV-BD's.

[GGTharos]

I'll bring PAC-3's:

 

 

(not going to happen, but I found some of the concepts interesting :) )

[PFunk1606688187]

PS: I've seen papers on how to deal with notching aircraft. I don't know what radars, if any, they apply to, but I hear those AESAs are pretty hard to notch. The notch just keeps shrinking as processing power to do things other than doppler filtering increases.

 

Is there any available knowledge on what the future would be then for BVR tactics? Are there going to be exploits in the 5th gen that lead to new tactics or is it going to be come a bit more bland and a game of rock, paper, radar?

[GGTharos]

From what I've heard it's a bland game of rock, jammer, radar for now.

 

Raptor pilot stuff is 'not as fun' as the F-15 stuff used to be, so sayeth some AWACS guy :)

[Grim_Smiles]

From what I've heard it's a bland game of rock, jammer, radar for now.

 

I have a feeling that when it comes to DCS servers, very few will allow F-22/F-35 to be a playable fighter.