DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM

Yeah the Western equivalent would be something like SAGE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-Automatic_Ground_Environment,

It won't work with EWR or an AI for sure. Probably needs to be controlled by a human GCI, since literally what you do is give guidence commands onto a target. And even then it's kinda limited in its use in DCS for the most part - unless it always tries to home in onto the closest contact a EWR or AWACS sees. I'd personally consider the 23 a much better and capable 21 - same tactics, better results.

A simple implementation that made the HUD pointer say "fly here for nearest bad guy" based on existing EWR and AWACS data would be plenty, still a world of difference to spamming "bogey dope".

That's basically all Russian plane (plus Mirage) tactics at the moment though, with varying results. You could also say the 23 would be a slightly less capable 29A but at least full fidelity so more immersive and fun to fly (that cockpit looks amazing).

The problem is that the indications you would get in the real world aren't directly towards the boogie because that's dumb, but it's towards a point where you can turn on the boogie and start your attack.

The video I linked shows this pretty well, and this functionality is completely missing in DCS. I think once a target is assigned it might be relatively straightforward to code (I could possibly see it being done in a lua script and used through the F10 menu in any mission, even), but when you have to figure out which target to assign to who and pick the offset point to avoid other boogies it gets really complex.

-

The problem is that the indications you would get in the real world aren't directly towards the boogie because that's dumb, but it's towards a point where you can turn on the boogie and start your attack.

 

 

The video I linked shows this pretty well, and this functionality is completely missing in DCS. I think once a target is assigned it might be relatively straightforward to code (I could possibly see it being done in a lua script and used through the F10 menu in any mission, even), but when you have to figure out which target to assign to who and pick the offset point to avoid other boogies it gets really complex.

I still think that having it at a very basic level is better than not at all. You are making it too complicated, it doesn't need to have that level of logic. It can just use a basic threat rating based on range and closure speed, then give you the intercept point for that guy until something changes.

The best way would actually be if RAZBAM did a plugin for Combined Arms, so JTAC can enter the information for individual aircraft.

The GCI will direct the MiG to a fixed point and an altitude of interception been this altitude below the enemy target. When GCI operator see you get into about 10km range, also 15km work. So at this point GCI operator tell you the Radar elevation To set. 2 or 3 will be 2000m or 3000m up for radar elevation for detection. After this point the Pilot confirm the detection and lock and the Pilot do the rest.

A simple implementation that made the HUD pointer say "fly here for nearest bad guy" based on existing EWR and AWACS data would be plenty, still a world of difference to spamming "bogey dope".

 

That's basically all Russian plane (plus Mirage) tactics at the moment though, with varying results. You could also say the 23 would be a slightly less capable 29A but at least full fidelity so more immersive and fun to fly (that cockpit looks amazing).

Well, the 23MLA should have a much better supersonic roll rate than the 29 and better acceleration in certain regimes. And yeah full fidelity goes a long way.

The problem is that the indications you would get in the real world aren't directly towards the boogie because that's dumb, but it's towards a point where you can turn on the boogie and start your attack.

 

 

The video I linked shows this pretty well, and this functionality is completely missing in DCS. I think once a target is assigned it might be relatively straightforward to code (I could possibly see it being done in a lua script and used through the F10 menu in any mission, even), but when you have to figure out which target to assign to who and pick the offset point to avoid other boogies it gets really complex.

Yeah, there is a parallel thread to this in the wishlist section on ways to improve AWACS/GCI in game.

But yeah, Lazur should point you on some intercept course, at the simplest level its just a pure lead intercept. I think in use a real ground controller would use it also as waypoints to move you to a good position before the final intercept.

A simple intercept course would easy to code of course. with maybe some sort of radio menu functionality to "select a target 1-5". Anything more than that I think would get increasingly hard to do.

The Lazur display looks like this: http://www.avatarum.de/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=projekte:basteln:migpanel:mig21panel_36.jpg

The purpose was to intercept a target without the use of voice radio. The flight data (altitude, speed, heading, distance to the target etc.) was calculated at the ground, sent to the interceptor and displayed on the Lazur display, the altimeter (by the use of little white triangles) and the airspeed indicator (also with little white triangles). If the pilot did "what the display said", he was lead to a point where he could identify the target.

Lazur was also connected to the SAU autopilot, which could automatically intercept the target in the "fight regime" operating mode.

AFAIK there was no Lazur information displayed on the HUD.

I think there were different versions of it, and in the 23 it was hud based.

Display was:

The information is displayed at HUD - circle and two numeric values. Also there is single guidance commands at left side. ~50 of them IIRC, I can't find the site now.

(1) Lazur-SM used on the Tu-128 and Su-15 with the Vozdukh-1M ground transmitting station (1960s);

(2) Lazur-1/M used on the MiG-21 (1960s);

(3) Lazur-SMA used on the MiG-23 (1970s);

(5) Lazur E502-20 Biryuza (Turquoise) and E502-20/04 Turquoise used on the MiG-29 (1980s);

stolen from another post from like 15 years ago. Emphasis mine.

"Transmitted data to the pilot included target altitude, speed and heading (both on the HUD and as separate small needles on the analog instruments). Also, the system allowed the GCI operator to remotely set radar elevation, azimuth and mode, input the distance to the target via the trarget designator box, and to switch on the radar illumination remotely, when the target was at the proper distance. Also, when coordinated with the GCI via the LAZUR system, the radar used a 6-bar scan mode, instead of the normal 4-bar mode. It was quite a useful system, when used by a skilled pilot and a good GCI operator.

Also, some commands were given to the pilot, as symbols illuminating on the HUD - the ones I remember now were "Afterburner" - an F was illuminating on the left center side of the HUD, and steep climb (I don't remember the term exctly right now) - a G appeared below the F, on the HUD"

And really much like IADS we basically don't have anything like an AI GCI in DCS.

Yes that true. GCI have been ignored by developers. Not only MiG-23 need it, also MiG-29S was made to be guided with GCI. The only fighters in Soviet Union were really capable to operate independent was Su-27 and MiG-31 when they are in patrol.

So probably we will get a VVS MiG-23 and that’s why they don’t care much bout GCI.

Wait thats contradicting, if its a VVS plane it SHOULD depend on CGI right?

But then what about exports...

I'm dure none of the inporting vountries had CGI systems set up as fully developed as the USSR.

Wait thats contradicting, if its a VVS plane it SHOULD depend on CGI right?

 

But then what about exports...

 

I'm dure none of the inporting vountries had CGI systems set up as fully developed as the USSR.

I think he is referring to VVS as opposed to PVO. PVO aircraft would have datalink as their only job was homeland defense and the fighters were directly integrated with the EWRs and SAM networks. VVS aircraft would be operating offensively, over enemy territory and likley out of friendly EWR range, so cost could by cut by not giving them datalink.

I think he is referring to VVS as opposed to PVO. PVO aircraft would have datalink as their only job was homeland defense and the fighters were directly integrated with the EWRs and SAM networks. VVS aircraft would be operating offensively, over enemy territory and likley out of friendly EWR range, so cost could by cut by not giving them datalink.

I think is the contrary. Datalink is for VVS. While PVO depends on GCI.

We strongly need a Razbam member team to clarify this. MiG-23 is not designed to keep radar search in battlefield (the same for MiG-29 but ED owners give nothing about) so how they plan we gonna be working for enemy contact. Asking AWACS like a FC3 aircraft...?

Nothing is preventing you from using radar in search mode with MiG-23 or 29. That`s like saying F16 is intended to be guided by AWACS and not use its radar for searching.

I think is the contrary. Datalink is for VVS. While PVO depends on GCI.

 

We strongly need a Razbam member team to clarify this. MiG-23 is not designed to keep radar search in battlefield (the same for MiG-29 but ED owners give nothing about) so how they plan we gonna be working for enemy contact. Asking AWACS like a FC3 aircraft...?

The lazur datalink is not something like a western one, its a way for GCI to "talk to" or control the aircraft. There is no display with with "situation", rather "cues" on the hud from GCI to go engage this guy here.

I'm dure none of the inporting vountries had CGI systems set up as fully developed as the USSR.

So at least some of the Warpac nations used Lazur. And surprisingly enough Cuba apparently had the system as well for a while. However other countries like Iraq did not have it.

The lazur datalink is not something like a western one, its a way for GCI to "talk to" or control the aircraft. There is no display with with "situation", rather "cues" on the hud from GCI to go engage this guy here.

Except SAGE did the same exact thing as Lazur except it entered service before it...

MiG-23/23M/23ML/23MLD radar performance against bomber-sized targets

High alt, no ground influence

Low alt, with ground influence

Our MLA must be the lower-right one if we get upgraded to MLD standarts version (MiG-23MLA 1977)

Our mig is either on the top right or bottom right, you can tell from the shape of the vertical stab. The ones on the left are the earlier variants.

Our mig is either on the top right or bottom right, you can tell from the shape of the vertical stab. The ones on the left are the earlier variants.

Those MiG-23 pictures aren't there to represent specific modifications

Except SAGE did the same exact thing as Lazur except it entered service before it...

There are a few guidance systems that predate Lazur as well in the Soviet Union, like the Gorizont system. It started to be used in the 50ies about the same time as SAGE was used on F-102/106s. Lazur is much more advanced than SAGE in a lot of parameters and features.

There are a few guidance systems that predate Lazur as well in the Soviet Union, like the Gorizont system. It started to be used in the 50ies about the same time as SAGE was used on F-102/106s. Lazur is much more advanced than SAGE in a lot of parameters and features.

True. I just meant that the whole "soviets used GCI, Western aircraft use only onboard sensors" is severely oversimplified.

Except SAGE did the same exact thing as Lazur except it entered service before it...

So what, I'm not measuring sausage sizes. I merely pointed out that it isnt what the average DCS'er thinks when they think of "datalink" like link4 or 16.

hi guys

i see much people discussing the systems of the plane and features in this aspect..and all of this is ok... its important.. veri important... but i think more important is the acurate fligth model...

first: i am a fan of the mig-23 (in my opinion one of the most refined and powerfull third gen aircraft... and one of the most beautifull) and a fan of the mig-29, and in both cases dcs let us "half plane"

im really thankful to razbam they are working in the mig-23mla (almost the best mig-23) and as PROWLER 111 say "The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to, the real plane" and thaths very good (im really anxious wating the anouncement of the pre-sale of that lady).

having say that... the real deal is the MLD, not only because it have the spo-15 and not the spo-10 and got chaff and flares, but most important is the diferences in aerodinamics is so abismal that is another plane (some features... litle wings in the pitot tube like in the mig-29 and two extra fangs in the wing boxes that generates vortex alowing you greater angles of attack, betther handling at lower speeds, other change is the wing... wider... in other position... an aliwing angles of 33° or 36° (depending the source) not in 45°.. the posbility of use the r-73... and other things)

that let us a bird that cant deal with a tomcat in close combat (the mld can... and they do in a couple of times... Cam Ram bay... Libya) and in better position to figth an f-16 (as they do in siria fron the 83 and beyond,... in the afgan war).... as i say.. half plane

some people say "its a actualization"... no... isnt, they build between 60 an 70 from in MAPO (1982 to 1984)... and actualize ALL the ML... MLA... and P variants, and most of foreign users made the same

Dont misunderstand, im not complaing abaut Razbam... im complaing abaut ED, i bougth the flaming cliff 3 a couple of years ago, and the mig-29 to this day havent a complete navigation system... have not the lazoor system (some people say mig-29 dont have datalink with awacs, its true but have datalink with the ground control) the gardenia jammer dont work... and missiles... bether dont speack abaut the missiles .

the su-27 and su-33 are in a bether shape... but are not in "much" bether shape

i think ED dont mather wath happen to the red wings

Well. We will get the MLA. With an optional spo15, and a lazur DL. MLD would be cool, but razbam doesnt have one sitting in their hangar like the mla.