Jump to content

DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM


MrDieing

Recommended Posts

It looks like we're going to have a pretty equal opponent to F-4E in terms of air combat. Pure 70th, rudimentary LD/SD, shitty semiactive missiles, flat spin on high AOA and tons of fun...


Edited by DronneR

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For MiG-23MLA exist only one option: S-23MLA

Not every N-003 is alike, as there were several subvariants within the N-003 nomenclature. Problems with the fine-tuning of the AVM-23 taken from the earlier 323D-III caused considerable headaches, with a smaller framework for both the N-003 and N-003E radar as a consequence. Later N-003's didn't have this problem.

 

 

There are even "internet people" that claim that there were differences between export variants, although serial numbers throughout the former Warsaw Pact airforces suggest that they were all the same batch.

 

 

My sources apart from the AVM-23 are all secondary though, so correct me if i'm wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far i know existed two main variants: domestic ( for Soviet AF) N003 and export N003E. Both variants had subvariations, its absolutely normal, changes made on service experience basis ( some problematic stuff changed for new more realiable, added new features: mainly missiles , rockets capability ). Tuning problems are very common even today: two identical radars don't exist, this is very complicated electronics and parameters are never identical but only within some envelopes. One of Polish AF MiG-23MF had radar with typical search range 70 km, which was teoretically impossible for RP-23D-III...... .

Export N003E is a different story, because radar/weapon system capabilities depends from export policy, which was different almost for every country. Even WP countries had individual contract conditions every time when they were buying something in Soviet Union. Great example is MiG-21MF for Polish AF, we bought three batches and every time was a lot of differencies in equipment, weaponry, electronics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the accounts about the ms makes me want to try flying that instead of the mla. those dangerous problems all sound very exciting to deal with inside the safety of a computer sim.

why do you want "bug-free" versions like the mld when you can fly fundamentally bugfree planes like the 29, 27, or eventually the 17?

for all you mld evangelists, do you really think that the aerodynamic improvements will really bring it on par with any of the 4thgens? (rhetorical question; it won't)

 

no let's lay it all bare: you mld lobbyists actually dont care about even the mld. you dont care about the mig-23 either. you just want to take advantage of this development to get another 4th generation module. you want 4th generation weapons, avionics, and aerodynamics -- to transform a 3rd generation aircraft into a 4th generation aircraft in all but name, because you're all deathly afraid of having to learn some other ways of flying than the open air jousts that fc3 allows.

 

im angry because this pursuit of easier, cheaper wins undermines those of us who want to experience difficult, undesirable aircraft characteristics, the ones that shed new insight and allow us to learn something new and different.

 

why own a different module if you can't experience something different?????

Yes yes ...finally someone tells it right +100000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes yes ...finally someone tells it right +100000

 

My think is about why I vote for MLD is, because like Soviets have different Aircraft Philosophies, they try to do cheap mass Produced Aircraft for mass Attacks.

After in DCS we don't fly mass attacks, and like sad before MLD is not a 4Gen Fighter or can compare to F-14 or F-15,

but simple things like a dogfight modus or Prober working RWR Suit with SPO-15 and a Radar Range of 70 Km where US Radars was twice as good, was on a F-4E Phantom 10 Years earlier a standard Equipment.

How can the MLD to good for anything that we have or right now or get in the Future?


Edited by MAD-MM

Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

9./JG27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read your post, because you think you can maybe get 50% of the information needed (and that's generous) for the MLD variant doesn't mean Razbam should do that.

 

 

No not 50%, except few changes in radar ( I wrote about this in one of previous posts ), only RWR, CW dispensers and new wing position 33 deg instead 45 deg. all rest it's identical. If you don't believe me, you can prepare your self equipment list ( there is a lot literature about Floggers, I'm talking about russian literature ) and compare. No black magic here, just a bit of reading, i'm talking of course about domestic models, not export ones. So, if guys planning anyway SPO i some CW, only few small things left and we have MLD. We will get most powerfull F-4 variant, why not most powerfull Flogger?, especially if differences are not big. One more important thing, MLD is much more realistic, few hundred of them flew around, modernized MLA's only several in Iraq and some simillar in Syria. In my opinion they have 85-90 % of needed documentation, just we have to find rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am extremely happy about the Flogger, it will be a day 1 pre-purchase for me, whenever available!

 

I don't think there is a reason to argue here about different versions, since it is clear, that the developer has made a very clever choice by modelling a capable sub-version.

 

SPO-15 and CM are great news!

(Of course, not everybody needs it, a real soviet jedi pilot feels the radar emissions and defeats any opponent through pure geometry :lol: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't care which version we get, the Flogger is just so sexy that it's beyond these puny details. I fly planes based on coolness. The Flogger is cool. I fly flogger. I flog.

 

that's it, that´s cool, man!


Edited by -LEO-

Intel i5-11400 CPU @ 4.30GHz / ASUS Prime B560-Plus / 32GB DDR3 RAM 3000 Mhz Dual / MSI Nvidia GTX  1060 6GB /  SSD Samsung 120/250/500GB  / IIyama  27" 1920x1080 @ 144 Hz / Track IR 4+Track Clip Pro / Sennheiser PC 360 / Thrustmaster Warthog Throttel , VPC-Warbrd D+Warthog Stick, TFRP Rudder / WIN 10

Ever tried. Sometimes failed. No matter. Try again.Fail again. Fail better.

Samuel Beckett (?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am extremely happy about the Flogger, it will be a day 1 pre-purchase for me, whenever available!

 

I don't think there is a reason to argue here about different versions, since it is clear, that the developer has made a very clever choice by modelling a capable sub-version.

 

SPO-15 and CM are great news!

(Of course, not everybody needs it, a real soviet jedi pilot feels the radar emissions and defeats any opponent through pure geometry :lol: )

 

USE THE ANGLE IVAN!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will get most powerfull F-4 variant, why not most powerfull Flogger?

 

Actualy, third most powerful. The most powerful were british F-4M, after them - F-4K/F-4J/F-4S. So the second most powerful MiG-23 against the third most powerful Phantom, with similar avionics and fligt dynamics linitations... seems legit.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Countermeasures are a must apprently in DCS because they are effective, fact is, chaffs alone are very much useless against any type of doppler radar with counter-countermeasures (basicly since the 70s), Fox 2s since the 80s have very powerfull CCMs and render flares almost useless aswell. You want countermeasures because DCS models them in a very basic and poor way, but as probad said, geometry is what saves you.

 

Things aren’t that black & white.

I think you’re underestimating chaff and flares. If it was useless, it wouldn’t have been fitted to latest fighters.

Plus who said you have tu use chaff alone ?

Of course the defensive tactics combine manoeuvres, ECM, chaff and flare when needed.

 

And pilots don’t talk that much about chaff & flares because they don’t get shot at that often, and there are a lot of restrictions to use them in training.


Edited by jojo

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for opening the thread

The team behind is the same team behind the MiG-19, as so, Overstratos is the guy 3d developing this beast, this is his "sweet girl", he is absolutely devoted to it.

The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to, the real plane, in all it's glory so accuracy wont be a problem.

As for release date, none whatsoever right now, there are some other projects STILL in 3d art department that need to be finished 1st, being one of these, the MiG-19.

As usual, regular work in progress pics will be posted, either here or in FB.

 

Question will it truly be an MLA variant or MLD since thats what there were upgraded to starting as a MLA.?

Rift CV1: i-7 8700 RTX 2070 16GB 3200mhz win10. M.2 128gb GB Z390 Aurous Master. warthog stick on Gunfighter Base

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice that being said too bad you couldn't offer the Sub variant MiG-23- 98-2 for Buyers as well like small upgrade package MiG offered that only upgraded the radar Sapfir-23 to the Moskit-23 i believe or the other way around, and HMS and allowing it to fire the R-27 and R-77 making it truly a threat to the Hornet and Tomcat.


Edited by Bad_Karma-701

Rift CV1: i-7 8700 RTX 2070 16GB 3200mhz win10. M.2 128gb GB Z390 Aurous Master. warthog stick on Gunfighter Base

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actualy, third most powerful. The most powerful were british F-4M, after them - F-4K/F-4J/F-4S. So the second most powerful MiG-23 against the third most powerful Phantom, with similar avionics and fligt dynamics linitations... seems legit.

 

Actualy MLA was fifth most powerfull Flogger, after domestic MLD and P, and after export MLD clones MLAE and MLAE2. Writing about F-4 I mean general capabilities not only radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such great news, way to go again Razbam!

 

 

Anyone else read the book "Red Eagles" about the (sort of) secret USAF unit flying Russian/Soviet aircraft? The chapters in that book about their Mig23s they flew gave me an entirely new respect for this fighter, the USAF pilots sure described it as an incredible machine, which tbh surprised me.

 

 

I can't wait for this one, boy oh boy oh boy.

Systems

 

 

Virpil T50x2,T50CM2x2,Warbrd x2, VFX/Delta/CM2/Alpha/Tm Hornet sticks, VKB GF3, Tm Warthog(many), Modded Cougar, VKB Pedals/MFG Pedals/Slaw Viper RX+109Cam Pedals/Virpil T50+T50CM Throttle/CH Fightersticks/CH Throttles/CH peds, Index x1, Reverb x1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things aren’t that black & white.

I think you’re underestimating chaff and flares. If it was useless, it wouldn’t have been fitted to latest fighters.

Plus who said you have tu use chaff alone ?

Of course the defensive tactics combine manoeuvres, ECM, chaff and flare when needed.

 

And pilots don’t talk that much about chaff & flares because they don’t get shot at that often, and there are a lot of restrictions to use them in training.

 

Well in DCS, chaffs will affect the missile, which is not exactly realistic. A doppler radar with basic CCM will filter chaffs without any issues, rendering them useless if they are used alone (by that i meant without the use of ECM, which when in use with chaffs can, by sending energy on the chaffs instead of the aircraft, possibly create a new contact that could confuse the ennemy's radar, in DCS this is not simulated yet). Chaffs can be usefull used that way, and are most likely used like that today.

 

Flares in DCS get you out of any IR missile, just fire a couple of them if the missile is more then a half a mile away it will go for them. the AIM-9M is particularly bad in DCS because of that, all the AI's i've encountered in the Harrier, flare once and my missile is trashed.

They don't have supercomputers on board but they can analyse the signal, they can compare the size of the target to the one of the flares (or other heat sources) it picks up,... Missiles aren't dumb, it feels like they are in DCS.

Of course flares are designed to mimic the aircraft (i'm not sure but they could be developped for each aircraft). Flares used in massive quantities, with appropriate maneuvers, will make a "wall" and potentially save you, maybe when you are far enough the missile will switch targets, but when the missile is in close (half a mile seems too close), I seriously doubt you can avoid it with flares.

 

Countermeasures aren't useless when used properly, but right now in DCS, more with flares then chaffs, it really seems whatever you do, you can get away with countermeasures.

 

I'm sure with the new FLIR coming for DCS and other ECM/Radar improvements, I'm no expert but i'm sure we will see a big change.

 

EDIT : Lets get back on topic :), I'd be happy to continue the conversation though.


Edited by Rex854Warrior

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That surprises me too, since the Tomcats handles them with relative ease at Sidra. Or maybe the Navy really does have better fighter pilots than the USAF????

 

Well you have to consider that the Mig-23 flown by the Libyans at the Sidra encounter was the Mig-23MS which was a very much downgraded model.

For example it had the RP-22 radar from the Mig-21 and if i remember correctly it was only able to carry the R-3/R-13 series of missiles

so not only was it unable to carry the R-23/R-24 BVR missiles it was also unable to carry the R-60 for close range encounters.

 

 

And it also lacked the IRST.

This overall made the Mig-23MS probably inferior to the Mig-21Bis in terms of combat capability as it had the same radar but inferior weapons while also being less agile.

 

 

The Mig-23MLA is on a whole different level from the Mig-23MS as it weighs less has a more powerfull engine and a Radar / weapon system that is miles ahead of the Mig-23MS (as it had a capable Radar with look down capability + the ability to carry the R-23 and R-24 BVR missiles in both Radar and IR guided forms).

 

So the Mig-23MLA outclasses the Mig-23MS in every way and is much more lethal.

 

While the F-14 still has the advantage over the MLA they might be in for a shock if they come in expecting an easy win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you have to consider that the Mig-23 flown by the Libyans at the Sidra encounter was the Mig-23MS which was a very much downgraded model.

For example it had the RP-22 radar from the Mig-21 and if i remember correctly it was only able to carry the R-3/R-13 series of missiles

so not only was it unable to carry the R-23/R-24 BVR missiles it was also unable to carry the R-60 for close range encounters.

 

 

And it also lacked the IRST.

This overall made the Mig-23MS probably inferior to the Mig-21Bis in terms of combat capability as it had the same radar but inferior weapons while also being less agile.

 

 

The Mig-23MLA is on a whole different level from the Mig-23MS as it weighs less has a more powerfull engine and a Radar / weapon system that is miles ahead of the Mig-23MS (as it had a capable Radar with look down capability + the ability to carry the R-23 and R-24 BVR missiles in both Radar and IR guided forms).

 

So the Mig-23MLA outclasses the Mig-23MS in every way and is much more lethal.

 

While the F-14 still has the advantage over the MLA they might be in for a shock if they come in expecting an easy win.

 

 

And last but not the least, the training level of the Lybian pilots was probably below that of the US Navy.

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

"The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...