Sukhoi Su-17

Thanks for the videos Antoha :thumbup:.

What is that sexy cross-hair resize movement of the reticle around minute 4:45 O_O.?

Dreaming about that kind of level of detail being modeled some day for the Su-25.

Although from mentioned latest ED podcast, looks like we are not gonna have more than F-18 and F-16 updates for the next 2 years, do own Hornet... although meehhhh -_-. And for Mi-24P... looks that we are going to be waiting for a long time....

More Russian quality birds please !

Just watching that "inside Su-22 cockpit" video, and again spotted the same thing as Su-25 and Su-27 etc. Why did soviets place a RWR warning (SPO-15) to bottom right corner? Like the furthest place they can find?

Was it because in the high G maneuvers your eyes stay better at low, or that it is in shade as it would be hard to read otherwise or what? It can't be a accident that there is no space to place it anywhere else than to bottom right corner? Was the SPO-15 so "ugly child" position that it was wanted to be place furthest possible corner?

SPO-10 on left side of the HUD, but then SPO-15 at bottom right corner?

I just don't get that SPO-15 positioning in any of those aircrafts...

as per latet Wag's interview all russian modules are proihibited for them.

Interview where?

Thanks for the videos Antoha :thumbup:.

What is that sexy cross-hair resize movement of the reticle around minute 4:45 O_O.?

Dreaming about that kind of level of detail being modeled some day for the Su-25.

In what video you see that? I tried to check all over 4 min long videos in this thread but couldn't see anything...

Interview where?

https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

Skip to 11:44, it seems it's a no go for ED currently, but still a possibility for 3rd parties.

Wao!!! Let’s say RAZBAM thank you to exist!

Although from mentioned latest ED podcast, looks like we are not gonna have more than F-18 and F-16 updates for the next 2 years, do own Hornet... although meehhhh -_-. And for Mi-24P... looks that we are going to be waiting for a long time....

 

More Russian quality birds please !

When and where was that?

I think I've puked a little inside... :/ well, not a little TBH

In what video you see that? I tried to check all over 4 min long videos in this thread but couldn't see anything...

Right here, in video postet by Antoha:

Podcast interview to one of ED's "BigFishes":

https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/

Ok, TBH he is speaking mostly about modern Russian aircraft, and also says that it may still be open for 3rd parties. So didn't seem as doom & gloom.

As for the Mi-24, yeah it looks to be kinda distant, but that isn't exactly news at this point.

as per latet Wag's interview all russian modules are proihibited for them.

I'm not sure he said they were prohibited explicitly. It sounded more like neither mikyoan or sukoi would work with them on those modules, which is probably what kills it. Otherwise, how do you reconcile the fact he said 3rd parties could do red air modules. If the Russian govt said, no red air in DCS that would basically mean no red air period, 3rd party or not. So I took this as meaning as the plane makers weren't too enthused with doing it. If a 3rd party can get enough info to do a mig29 from western sources (and I think that should be possible) then I think we might be able to see one. Though I think it would be difficult to get the required data on the systems in detail. I think there is probably enough aerodynamic data out there in the west (I think NASA might have done some even), and certainly enough on basic systems function. The main problem would be weapons/sensors IMO, but we already at least have symbology from the FC3 planes... Switchology could suck though. The other interesting comment was "while the company was in russia" implying that maybe they might move at some point, but I imagine that would be an insane undertaking.

Anyhow my .02c take on the interview.

Anyhow my .02c take on the interview.

He "literally" said its a "NO GO" for them. Not unless they open up major offices outside of Russia. He also stated that this restriction doesn't carry over to 3rd party developers, who DO have offices outside of Russia and who HAVE access to materials and didn't have to ask for permission to develop said modules.

How this all works out legally, I have no idea, but the main takeaway from this is that Eagle Dynamics will not be producing Redfor aircraft in the forseeable future.

He "literally" said its a "NO GO" for them. Not unless they open up major offices outside of Russia. He also stated that this restriction doesn't carry over to 3rd party developers, who DO have offices outside of Russia and who HAVE access to materials and didn't have to ask for permission to develop said modules.

 

How this all works out legally, I have no idea, but the main takeaway from this is that Eagle Dynamics will not be producing Redfor aircraft in the forseeable future.

Yeah, but the point is why its a no-go. If the actual goverment had a problem with it, then there would no red air period 3rd party or not. I think the real issue is "offical sources" for documents. I doubt mig or Su will work with some 3rd party either. But on the older planes, there is a ton of soviet era documentation out there anyway. Also from western countries that either flew or evaluated the planes. I would think Germany or the Czech republic or Slovakia or Poland would be good places to go looking for documentation I'd add hungary, but no one could read that :megalol: .

At the end of the day I'd love to see HB do a mig29.

Yeah, but the point is why its a no-go. If the actual goverment had a problem with it, then there would no red air period 3rd party or not.

Sorry but that is pure speculation, and it's inferring a lot from Wag's statement, which we can only take at face value.

Sorry but that is pure speculation, and it's inferring a lot from Wag's statement, which we can only take at face value.

Of course. I'm not saying ED is going to do red air when he said they weren't going to. But I find the fact he said a 3rd party dev could do one and they could plunk it into DCS world very interesting. To me that says its not some explicit govt "ban" on those aircraft, but rather there is something else going on in terms of sources/cooperation with 3rd parties thats potentially problematic. So if say HB got western sources and data to do a mig29 (of which plenty exist), maybe they could.

I actually find the whole thing a bit weird, why not just tell us the actual reason?

Right here, in video postet by Antoha:

 

Thanks.

That does look interesting. Like what does it symbol even?

I actually find the whole thing a bit weird, why not just tell us the actual reason?

I expect the complete reason is not for public knowledge. They are a russian company owned by someone who is not Russian. (Stephen Grey)

They also have several former military and intelligence specialists of various nationalities working for them. (Wags himself is a former CIA analyst)

I believe that due to the current political situation in Russia they are just being careful and don't want to go even near that can of worms. NO company in the world wants to undergo close government scrutiny, even if they have nothing to hide this makes operating in a business sense quite difficult.

I also expect publishing a module and developing it itself are quite different under Russian law, which is why they are willing to publish 3rd party software of this kind and not willing to develop it.

I expect the complete reason is not for public knowledge. They are a russian company owned by someone who is not Russian. (Stephen Grey)

They also have several former military and intelligence specialists of various nationalities working for them. (Wags himself is a former CIA analyst)

I believe that due to the current political situation in Russia they are just being careful and don't want to go even near that can of worms. NO company in the world wants to undergo close government scrutiny, even if they have nothing to hide this makes operating in a business sense quite difficult.

I also expect publishing a module and developing it itself are quite different under Russian law, which is why they are willing to publish 3rd party software of this kind and not willing to develop it.

Where did you get this from?

That podcast thing wags did say any 3rd party can make redfor aircraft, Aslong as they are NOT BASED in russia. Who knows the reason. But this is not a bad thing, Pennies to be made in the redfor market.

That podcast thing wags did say any 3rd party can make redfor aircraft, Aslong as they are NOT BASED in russia. Who knows the reason. But this is not a bad thing, Pennies to be made in the redfor market.

I suppose quite enough 3rd party developers are not based in Russia, so we should be good to go.

Interesting

 

I actually find the whole thing a bit weird, why not just tell us the actual reason?

Specifically that they confirmed Mi-24. Why doing a rotor is possible and doing a jet isn't?

I suppose quite enough 3rd party developers are not based in Russia, so we should be good to go.

I want my heatblur SU-27! Or better yet a J-15...

Specifically that they confirmed Mi-24. Why doing a rotor is possible and doing a jet isn't?

Yeah, its weird. I mean we have the KA-50. The mi24E will be less "advanced" so maybe thats why?

Yeah, its weird. I mean we have the KA-50. The mi24E will be less "advanced" so maybe thats why?

It could be some kind of deal or special dispensation. Also, the Mi24 has been on the backburner for a while now. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was quietly shelved to be released at some future "TBA" date and never heard from again.

I think the whole discussion is about getting documentation, a real bird and a couple of pilots who operated that bird. I can't speak for the ka-50, but every other redfor module we have is a warsaw pact/export model. I think it's a huge task for any developer to get their hands on a real bird of a special version which fit into dcs, get all the documentation and probably an ex-pilot who operated the aircraft and is willing to contribute his experience into the module.

I think the whole discussion is about getting documentation, a real bird and a couple of pilots who operated that bird. I can't speak for the ka-50, but every other redfor module we have is a warsaw pact/export model. I think it's a huge task for any developer to get their hands on a real bird of a special version which fit into dcs, get all the documentation and probably an ex-pilot who operated the aircraft and is willing to contribute his experience into the module.

Yeah, I agree there. Documentation and willing pilots are probably hard to come by. Doc wise, I think the mig29 is probably realistic since it was the "tier 2" fighter of the era, and its been tested and evaluated by basically everyone. Same thing pilot wise, lots more people flew the mig than the shukoi.

That being said, I still want the Su-27.