Jump to content

JF-17 Future


Chiron

Recommended Posts

there was a video in GR channel ( i dont wanna say my opinion about this video ) an interview

with one of ED employee ( Simon ) and he said something not cool and made me worry a bit

 

If anyone complained about JF is ( OP Fighter ) i will just ignore him cuz his opinion will not matter to me at all as we all relay on Devs in this matter

 

but now ED is talking about it and ( Simon ) said ( JF-17 being reviewed due to OP concern in the community )

 

That is not cool from the first day Deka said have trust and before this product release ED reviewed this product .. i dont understand ED in this matter . first SD-10 now the Fighter itself ..

i know that u guys work in silent way far enough but this is not cool statue

 

i love JF-17 and DEKA did a great job i hope this misunderstanding end soon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying the JF-17 is over powered is Caps hobby, I have written volumes about this before:megalol:

 

After listening, it’s Cap that brings up the question, (roughly paraphrasing) “How do you go about public information when there isn’t a lot, for example China is a lot like Russia in being closed of and a lot of people have been raising questions about the LD-10 the Chinese AMRAAM, no wait oh wait that’s the Chinese HARM, has drawn a lot of criticism for being too good, how do you model it?”

 

And then Simon says “they have their own sources to start with, we look at all public information available and we review everything like Janes, if there’s a plane that performs like the Enterprise it won’t sell becuase it’s not realistic and that’s our bottom line”

 

Cap: “yeah like me as a layman I can tell wow this thing doesn’t have a notch filter somethings not right it’s not a super radar..”

 

(Simons speech overlaps with Cap a bit at the end there but what Simon says is-)

“Umm yeah well There are some thing that are legacy, and it’s not just third party, for example the way the gunners behave on the WW2 bombers they’re like aliens with lasers. Alright well this clearly needs sorting so I asked about and it’s actually one of oldest pieces of code, chiseled on stone in like 2003. So we’re getting around to it now that it really matters, changing and reviewing it.”

(Cap moves on)

 

I don’t think you have anything to worry about Chiron. Cap loves to pick on the Jeff buy as Simon clearly says when he sidesteps the question with the comment about WW2 gunners, all modules have issues like this.

 

The Tomcat since release has had active radar missiles with magic INS that allow people to fire and forget at 60nm. But it’s not Heatblurs fault, as Simon tried to explain to Cap, there are some inherent limitations that are not realistic but a lot of them are being worked on.

 

But hey Cap wants to single out JF-17 whatever, it’s notch got added, it’s aerodynamic coefficients and engine efficient was changed, the SD-10 was changed multiple times including with suggestions by ED based off CFD they themselves ran.

 

If Cap was aware of all this I would hope that he would feel better and pretty well about the module process, and hopefully if he did learn how much it has progressed towards realism and how committed Deka is I would hope he atleast mentions it to make up for all the times he’s singled it out at being overpowered it.

 

I mean the F-16 was released without a damage model! F-16, 18, 14, JF-17, they are all early access still and every one of them debuted with a different level of completion. Deka chose other systems before finalizing the radar, which probably wasn’t a bad strategy considering how much more realistic the radar API gets as F-18/16 are developed, and since the FC3 planes have instant scanning instant lock radars it’s not like not having a notch is most egregious modeling discrepancy in the air. Not to mention that time that the radar engineer couldn’t get to his work computer and had to work on the radar with his home computer, but no Cap won’t cut them any slack.

 

I’m sure I sound a little crazy and like a nerve got touched, but over and over again Cap picks on the Jeff as overpowered and Arcady not realistic while coddling his unfinished F-16. I would forgive him once or twice but it happens so much it really feels like he has something against it, or against the fact it’s Chinese, or something. When it first came or I think it was RC even said “I think you’re being too hard on the JF-17”

 

TLDR: I think Cap really likes to pick on JF-17, and Simon was pretty adamant that there are issues across the board and everyone is working to get everything as real as possible. I swear sometimes it sounds like Cap thinks Deka deliberately over powered it


Edited by AeriaGloria

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying the JF-17 is over powered is Caps hobby, I have written volumes about this before:megalol:

 

After listening, it’s Cap that brings up the question, (roughly paraphrasing) “How do you go about public information when there isn’t a lot, for example China is a lot like Russia in being closed of and a lot of people have been raising questions about the LD-10 the Chinese AMRAAM, no wait oh wait that’s the Chinese HARM, has drawn a lot of criticism for being too good, how do you model it?”

 

And then Simon says “they have their own sources to start with, we look at all public information available and we review everything like Janes, if there’s a plane that performs like the Enterprise it won’t sell becuase it’s not realistic and that’s our bottom line”

 

Cap: “yeah like me as a layman I can tell wow this thing doesn’t have a notch filter somethings not right it’s not a super radar..”

 

(Simons speech overlaps with Cap a bit at the end there but what Simon says is-)

“Umm yeah well There are some thing that are legacy, and it’s not just third party, for example the way the gunners behave on the WW2 bombers they’re like aliens with lasers. Alright well this clearly needs sorting so I asked about and it’s actually one of oldest pieces of code, chiseled on stone in like 2003. So we’re getting around to it now that it really matters, changing and reviewing it.”

(Cap moves on)

 

I don’t think you have anything to worry about Chiron. Cap loves to pick on the Jeff buy as Simon clearly says when he sidesteps the question with the comment about WW2 gunners, all modules have issues like this.

 

The Tomcat since release has had active radar missiles with magic INS that allow people to fire and forget at 60nm. But it’s not Heatblurs fault, as Simon tried to explain to Cap, there are some inherent limitations that are not realistic but a lot of them are being worked on.

 

But hey Cap wants to single out JF-17 whatever, it’s notch got added, it’s aerodynamic coefficients and engine efficient was changed, the SD-10 was changed multiple times including with suggestions by ED based off CFD they themselves ran.

 

If Cap was aware of all this I would hope that he would feel better and pretty well about the module process, and hopefully if he did learn how much it has progressed towards realism and how committed Deka is I would hope he atleast mentions it to make up for all the times he’s singled it out at being overpowered it.

 

I mean the F-16 was released without a damage model! F-16, 18, 14, JF-17, they are all early access still and every one of them debuted with a different level of completion. Deka chose other systems before finalizing the radar, which probably wasn’t a bad strategy considering how much more realistic the radar API gets as F-18/16 are developed, and since the FC3 planes have instant scanning instant lock radars it’s not like not having a notch is most egregious modeling discrepancy in the air. Not to mention that time that the radar engineer couldn’t get to his work computer and had to work on the radar with his home computer, but no Cap won’t cut them any slack.

 

I’m sure I sound a little crazy and like a nerve got touched, but over and over again Cap picks on the Jeff as overpowered and Arcady not realistic while coddling his unfinished F-16. I would forgive him once or twice but it happens so much it really feels like he has something against it, or against the fact it’s Chinese, or something. When it first came or I think it was RC even said “I think you’re being too hard on the JF-17”

 

TLDR: I think Cap really likes to pick on JF-17, and Simon was pretty adamant that there are issues across the board and everyone is working to get everything as real as possible. I swear sometimes it sounds like Cap thinks Deka deliberately over powered it

 

u cleared my thoughts about this thread cuz when i heard him talking i was :mad: and most of his videos about JF-17 even its contain a wrong information or misguided information like MAWS bug video without knowing the difference between RWR and MAWS.....etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

u cleared my thoughts about this thread cuz when i heard him talking i was :mad: and most of his videos about JF-17 even its contain a wrong information or misguided information like MAWS bug video without knowing the difference between RWR and MAWS.....etc

 

I wished he had done what the viewer asked and tested A-10C at the same time, so despite mixing up RWR and MAWS, it would be easier to tell if it is a JF-17 thing, or a DCS wide limitation

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its videos from GR like these that just handled so poorly and unprofessionally that makes me so sad. It was the same with the True Grit Technologies video, Cap complained about if the dev team were worried about it being overpowered and the like. Like common, I know its a game but at the same time its a sim. If you want balanced PVP then make join a server where the balance is closely monitored, otherwise stop trying to ruin whatever enjoyment people get from the module with your own biases. It frustrates me watching arguably one of the biggest channels in DCS reflect so poorly the game, themselves, and the community. I hope going forward ED and other dev teams just give them the cold shoulder, because obviously the channel doesnt even have the self respect to have a decent interview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Cap: “yeah like me as a layman I can tell wow this thing doesn’t have a notch filter somethings not right it’s not a super radar..”

 

 

About the notching... Honestly... In 2008-2015 (Block1 and Block2) the notching is no longer a problem. If a plane notchs you, the radar will change to submodes to stay tracking it, and if it really loses it, the radar will change to memory mode, none of this things happens, for some reason the radar literally goes blind and loses its target... Like, for real Cap? That's not a freaking "Super Radar" it's a freaking radar from 2008!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cap is a biased idiot.

 

Some things were changed on the JF and they were changed for the better. Fuel flow got fixed and now the engine consumes fuel as it should, drag on the SD-10 was adjusted, not it behaves like expected, almost matching Nighthawk's CFD perfectly. The range is still very good. So far there is no reason to be worried about "nerfs" for the sake of balance.

 

A ton of people pick on the JF-17 because it is good without being a NATO aircraft. A ton of people are just biased, Cap is one of them. But with the current history of patches for the JF-17, I see no reason to be worried about anything. It is a good and very capable plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its videos from GR like these that just handled so poorly and unprofessionally that makes me so sad. It was the same with the True Grit Technologies video, Cap complained about if the dev team were worried about it being overpowered and the like. Like common, I know its a game but at the same time its a sim. If you want balanced PVP then make join a server where the balance is closely monitored, otherwise stop trying to ruin whatever enjoyment people get from the module with your own biases. It frustrates me watching arguably one of the biggest channels in DCS reflect so poorly the game, themselves, and the community. I hope going forward ED and other dev teams just give them the cold shoulder, because obviously the channel doesnt even have the self respect to have a decent interview.

 

 

Yep, honestly GR's interviews are not easy to watch between Cap not knowing what he's talking about, talking over the people he's interviewing, and putting words in their mouths.

 

 

 

About the notching... Honestly... In 2008-2015 (Block1 and Block2) the notching is no longer a problem. If a plane notchs you, the radar will change to submodes to stay tracking it, and if it really loses it, the radar will change to memory mode, none of this things happens, for some reason the radar literally goes blind and loses its target... Like, for real Cap? That's not a freaking "Super Radar" it's a freaking radar from 2008!

 

 

This is only true to an extent though, because ultimately you can't change the laws of physics. Plus, radar in the JF-17 was patched to be easier to notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cap is an idiot, like who listens to this muppet anyway?

i7 - 9700K | 32 GB DDR4 3200 | RTX 2080 | VKB Gunfighter Mk II /w MCG Pro | Virpil T-50CM2 Throttle | TrackIR 5 | VKB Mk. IV

 

AJS-37 | A/V-8B | A-10C | F-14A/B | F-16C | F-18C | F-86F | FC3 | JF-17 | Ka-50 | L-39 | Mi-8 | MiG-15bis | MiG-19 | MiG-21bis | M2000-C | P-51D | Spitfire LF Mk. IX | UH-1H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering anti-china is so popular these days, it should not be a surprise Deka getiing A LOT pressure of giving REAL manuals and name our SMEs, from inside and outside of dev community, which means Deka should suicide.

someone want intellegence from Deka, and someone want anti-china drama get hotter.

 

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

 

On the contrary, a guy at paf-def site, precisely tell the manual version we use, claim dcs JF17 is uderpowered.

yes, he is right.


Edited by L0op8ack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering anti-china is so popular these days, it should not be a surprise Deka getiing A LOT pressure of giving REAL manuals and name our SMEs, from inside and outside of dev community, which means Deka should suicide.

someone want intellegence from Deka, and someone want anti-china drama get hotter.

 

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

 

On the contrary, a guy at paf-def site, precisely tell the manual version we use, claim dcs JF17 is uderpowered.

yes, he is right.

 

that is what i found also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it difficult to take seriously a guy talking about FM with zero hours in his log book. Not said to cause offence and non intended its just the reality of the situation and an observational fact. He has nothing to base it on when he say's it "feels" right or doesn't and in my opinion shouldn't include these comments in his videos as being UK based he really need's to have the pedigree of say tutor, tucano to discuss say the warbirds and then Hawk to discuss some of the Jet aircraft like the L39 / C101. I think he should just not include FM analysis in his video's if i had any criticism.

 

Whilst alot of people are critical of Cap he's just a guy at the end of the day into his flight sims like most customers so lets not get to heavy on him, i think he does alot of good for the community especially for lets say newer, less experienced players. Yes his videos have alot of faults but its better than nothing for those that can't be bothered to read manuals and more than anything raises awareness of DCS which is good for all of us.

 

Ok back to the OP point - Some aspects of Deka's work is definitely incorrect. So for example the kill boxes on the HQ7 and Chinese Bmp ZBD04 are located in a very small area around the base of the turret not the vehicle itself. You can put AP rounds through the body and they don't die - so yes some of Deka's work needs further development.

 

However that said as a game, which this is, Deka's release of the JF17 IMO left ED very embarrassed given the state of the Viper on early access. What cannot also be faulted is Deka's work rate, just look at the change logs since release. I think they are a welcome addition to the community and look forward to more of their modules.

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

 DCS & BMS

F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 |  L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai 

 Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering anti-china is so popular these days, it should not be a surprise Deka getiing A LOT pressure of giving REAL manuals and name our SMEs, from inside and outside of dev community, which means Deka should suicide.

someone want intellegence from Deka, and someone want anti-china drama get hotter.

 

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

 

On the contrary, a guy at paf-def site, precisely tell the manual version we use, claim dcs JF17 is uderpowered.

yes, he is right.

 

While i am the furthest from anti-china in any sort of way, i think that deflecting criticism by using that kind of argument is extremely poor and unprofessional.

 

You have clearly shown that your priority is not the simulation of a specific aircraft block and its weaknesses, but to inflate the performance of your systems and weapons as much as you can get away with. There are many examples of this, like you adding features from block 2 and 3 however you like to increase the block 1 JF-17s performance. Or only decreasing drag after ED tells you to INCREASE your missiles drag at high speed AND DECREASE at low speed. Or you leaving out important features many months after launch like the radar notch.

 

Of course, your politically flavored forum posts also have not done a good job at hiding it. Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers, at least from the ones that are developing planes for DCS. If you want to change that is up to you, but the idea of mixing capabilities between 3 different blocks in my opinion is not a good fundament for a positive change in that regard.

 

I would like to add that i love non-NATO aircraft, but i cannot purchase the JF-17 in this current state.


Edited by Max1mus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i am the furthest from anti-china in any sort of way, i think that deflecting criticism by using that kind of argument is extremely poor and unprofessional.

 

You have clearly shown that your priority is not the simulation of a specific aircraft block and its weaknesses, but to inflate the performance of your systems and weapons as much as you can get away with. There are many examples of this, like you adding features from block 2 and 3 however you like to increase the block 1 JF-17s performance. Or only decreasing drag after ED tells you to INCREASE your missiles drag at high speed AND DECREASE at low speed. Or you leaving out important features many months after launch like the radar notch.

 

Of course, your politically flavored forum posts also have not done a good job at hiding it. Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers, at least from the ones that are developing planes for DCS. If you want to change that is up to you, but the idea of mixing capabilities between 3 different blocks in my opinion is not a good fundament for a positive change in that regard.

 

I would like to add that i love non-NATO aircraft, but i cannot purchase the JF-17 in this current state.

 

I mean, people get upset about this idea of frankenstein aircraft. But irl there are plenty of aircraft that do not adhere to a specific tape and block series. I think its fine if the jeff improves over time, since it means you can do more stuff with plane that is fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i am the furthest from anti-china in any sort of way, i think that deflecting criticism by using that kind of argument is extremely poor and unprofessional.

 

You have clearly shown that your priority is not the simulation of a specific aircraft block and its weaknesses, but to inflate the performance of your systems and weapons as much as you can get away with. There are many examples of this, like you adding features from block 2 and 3 however you like to increase the block 1 JF-17s performance. Or only decreasing drag after ED tells you to INCREASE your missiles drag at high speed AND DECREASE at low speed. Or you leaving out important features many months after launch like the radar notch.

 

Of course, your politically flavored forum posts also have not done a good job at hiding it. Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers, at least from the ones that are developing planes for DCS. If you want to change that is up to you, but the idea of mixing capabilities between 3 different blocks in my opinion is not a good fundament for a positive change in that regard.

 

I would like to add that i love non-NATO aircraft, but i cannot purchase the JF-17 in this current state.

 

 

 

 

So...you dont have the module? and yet you know without using it yourself, its is overpowered.

 

 

I can understand that most of west has clear Anti China sentiment. Hope we don't alienate our developers coz of this politics over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i am the furthest from anti-china in any sort of way, i think that deflecting criticism by using that kind of argument is extremely poor and unprofessional.

 

You have clearly shown that your priority is not the simulation of a specific aircraft block and its weaknesses, but to inflate the performance of your systems and weapons as much as you can get away with. There are many examples of this, like you adding features from block 2 and 3 however you like to increase the block 1 JF-17s performance. Or only decreasing drag after ED tells you to INCREASE your missiles drag at high speed AND DECREASE at low speed. Or you leaving out important features many months after launch like the radar notch.

 

Of course, your politically flavored forum posts also have not done a good job at hiding it. Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers, at least from the ones that are developing planes for DCS. If you want to change that is up to you, but the idea of mixing capabilities between 3 different blocks in my opinion is not a good fundament for a positive change in that regard.

 

I would like to add that i love non-NATO aircraft, but i cannot purchase the JF-17 in this current state.

 

hey long time not seeing u lets start shall we ?

 

1- what features that add in DCS JF from Block III

2- who said that JF radar can't be notched ( if u are referring to CAP than u are like him )

3- ED after they reduce SD-10 drag they gave DEKA Tips to increase it a bit ( your small mind dont know that )

4- from the start they said that JF-17 is between Block I and Block II and BTW that is not something Odd and long term it will be block II cuz they are not like some ( ...... ) that said u have block II but its a block I with also with missing features

 

to add our JF-17 is nearly fully Block II not Block I


Edited by Chiron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i am the furthest from anti-china in any sort of way, i think that deflecting criticism by using that kind of argument is extremely poor and unprofessional.

 

You have clearly shown that your priority is not the simulation of a specific aircraft block and its weaknesses, but to inflate the performance of your systems and weapons as much as you can get away with. There are many examples of this, like you adding features from block 2 and 3 however you like to increase the block 1 JF-17s performance. Or only decreasing drag after ED tells you to INCREASE your missiles drag at high speed AND DECREASE at low speed. Or you leaving out important features many months after launch like the radar notch.

 

Of course, your politically flavored forum posts also have not done a good job at hiding it. Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers, at least from the ones that are developing planes for DCS. If you want to change that is up to you, but the idea of mixing capabilities between 3 different blocks in my opinion is not a good fundament for a positive change in that regard.

 

I would like to add that i love non-NATO aircraft, but i cannot purchase the JF-17 in this current state.

 

Completely agree , but their fanboys are gonna be fanboys. Not many people look at all the modules and highlight the rights and wrongs cause they don't want to. What they want is to favour their modules and want them to perform the best and throw any real performance out of the window.

 

Deka are just gonna become Razbam 2.0 but with Chinese Aircraft .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for what its worth, Deka. i think the module is one of the best in the game and I happily defer to the SME's on any aircraft in this game.

 

I am not a pilot (of anything wirh more than 120 horsepower, anyway), most people here are not. and their winging about things they are wholly unqualified to make judgements on is uncalled for.

 

As an American I am happy to have you guys in the field here. for the love of flight above all else.

 

I am genuinely sorry that the community often berates products and development based on the preconception that everything china makes is "cheap chinese crap" if that were the case ditch your 1200 dollar monitor, your 500 dollar joystick and your thousand dollar iphone. its crap, right?


Edited by Exile5121
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its better than nothing for those that can't be bothered to read manuals and more than anything raises awareness of DCS which is good for all of us.
i dont think so. bad information is worse than no information

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

but this is political passive aggression just as bad as cap's

focus on pursuit of the truth and the rest takes care of itself. if the numbers are real, they're real and it doesn't matter what anyone wants to think about it.


Edited by probad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh man, I thought the Hoggit reddit was bad but now i see it showing up here also...

 

 

Deka, love your module and the work you put into it. Build your passion, ignore the haters. Leave politics out of it. At the end of the day it's a simulated game for gamers to enjoy. Keep things real (as good as the simulator allows) and your customers will be happy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering anti-china is so popular these days, it should not be a surprise Deka getiing A LOT pressure of giving REAL manuals and name our SMEs, from inside and outside of dev community, which means Deka should suicide.

someone want intellegence from Deka, and someone want anti-china drama get hotter.

 

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

 

On the contrary, a guy at paf-def site, precisely tell the manual version we use, claim dcs JF17 is uderpowered.

yes, he is right.

 

Yet everyone bought your module and gave you a LOT of praise for it? (I certainly did, think it's a tremendous module, demonstrating how modules *should* be released, but don't fly it as often since it isn't my type of aircraft). Criticism is criticism, if something flies like an UFO, has insane fuel economy and has negative drag (initial SD-10) then there sure is a reason for concern. It's not about being OP or yelling "chinese bias" but more about a healthy scientific discussion. People bring up concerns about certain aspects, provide crude test data and values and want a statement from the dev. where they got their sources from or what data they base said figures on. The radar being basically an AESA and unnotchable and unjammadble is another of those things. There still is some work and tweaking to do for the JF-17 in various areas.

 

Someone too could develop a J-20 or J-10 and claim they are correct since they have all the secret documents and some guy on some forum has confirmed it...

 

Regardless, the way the SD-10 got "downgraded" doesn't seem right either, which is a problem on the complete oposite end of the spectrum and should too be corrected. The same way people would cry out if the JF-17 had the fuel economy of a Mig-21. People raise the same concerns with ED, Heabtlur or other 3rd parties when it comes to engine performance, flight model and systems (the really OBVIOUS stuff in a flightsim), yet some handle this better than others.


Edited by Airhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Deka might just need to grow some thicker skin and counter criticism with module improvements. The internet is the internet and everyone's a critic some harsher than others.

 

 

 

I for certain would hate to see Deka go as Chinese asset/plane development is pretty important to any combat flight sims rendition of redfor... its not all WARPACT...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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