Jump to content

Mig-29 Study Sim?


GrislyAccord

Recommended Posts

Not a chance ..

 

currently RazBam has the MiG-23 in development and that will be the most modern Russian fighter available on DCS.

 

The JF-17 has chinese origin and uses the engine of the MiG-29, but most of its avionics are western, so it isnt really similar to a MiG-29.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a chance ..

 

currently RazBam has the MiG-23 in development and that will be the most modern Russian fighter available on DCS.

 

The JF-17 has chinese origin and uses the engine of the MiG-29, but most of its avionics are western, so it isnt really similar to a MiG-29.

 

Oh, lame. I was hoping there were some rumors way down in the mill...

 

Would be nice to get into some Cold War style engagements against the Tomcat, only in a study-plane environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

This may be my optimism at play, but I wouldn't say "Not a chance". Their statement about newer Russian aircraft only applied to themselves, ED. They've stated before that if a third party developer operating outside of Russia wishes to tackle one, then they weren't going to stop them.

 

 

 

That said it's suspicious that we still haven't seen one yet from the third party devs aside from the fact that NATO aircraft seem to sell better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be my optimism at play, but I wouldn't say "Not a chance". Their statement about newer Russian aircraft only applied to themselves, ED. They've stated before that if a third party developer operating outside of Russia wishes to tackle one, then they weren't going to stop them.

 

 

 

That said it's suspicious that we still haven't seen one yet from the third party devs aside from the fact that NATO aircraft seem to sell better.

 

Chizh wrote on the Russian forum a while back that they (ED) could indeed do a non modernised MiG-29 but were doing the F-16 and other (western) aircraft as they would sell better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well why not add older F-16 and F-18 to match a MiG-29 then?

 

I think there is a chance. IIRC Matt Wagner said it's possible they would make some older F-16 like block 30 from mid 1980s when current block 50 will be finished.

Block 30 was even better than block 50 when it comes to acceleration, climb, turn rate having similar GE engine and being half ton lighter but it didn't have many modern gizmos like datalink, GPS guided munitions etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough, a Mig-29A is not a proper opponent against modern F-XXs

 

 

That's not particularly true at all. I reject the very concept that we need to start introducing aircraft to 'balance' sides or to find 'proper matches' for them.

 

Even if it isn't a proper opponent, it's still a fourth gen aircraft and it still is a very realistic opponent for NATO fourth gen aircraft. There is no reason to 'match' aircraft in our study sim.

The "It sells better" argument seems to be the only real barrier to its inclusion, which is a fair concern but I think undersells how big the Redfor side of DCS is and how many of them would love to have another study sim level Mig.


Edited by Auditor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I mainly thing the "problem" with modern red air is the licensing issues and the fact ED/Chiz doesn't think it will sell. Most of this mumbo jumbo about state sekrits is mostly bunk, literally everyone and their extensive family of brothers has "been inside" a mig29. There are no sekrits at least from a practical military POV, especially true for the older migs, literally every serious military on earth has tested and evaluated them in detail, the mig29 is the pass-around girl of the aviation world. The Su-27 is I think a bit "harder" in that regard as they haven't exported as much, but again, the USAF/NATO has had their hands all over them for decades too. Now "public" documentation OTOH is a different kettle of fish, and thats the other "problem" ED or 3rd parties have to worry about.

 

The other problem is "core engine" issues. Mig's were doctrinally designed to be used with various GCI/datalink systems that don't exist in DCS at the moment. So its not only adding a plane, its adding a decent IADS simulation into the game. And then the further complexity is to then add different kinds of IADS/GCI networks to the game. Frontal Aviation and VVS were different, as were NATO GCI nets depending on which decade you are talking about.

 

That being said though, we do have older migs in game, and aside from the F5, no opfor for them. I'd be just as happy to see an F4 or some other older bluefor planes.


Edited by Harlikwin

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I mainly thing the "problem" with modern red air is the licensing issues
Licensing issues is an interesting viewpoint to have on it. Would it be a requirement to get licensed with UAC before simulating any of their planes? I would think the 9-12 era Mig-29 would be too old for them to care, but maybe it doesn't work that way.

 

That being said though, we do have older migs in game, and aside from the F5, no opfor for them. I'd be just as happy to see an F4 or some other older bluefor planes.
Oh man, I too would love an F-4, maybe an F-4E.

 

 

I'm not bitter. :noexpression:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I too would welcome a study level MiG-29. That being said I don't think we will be seeing one in a while. Current focus is on US aircraft and I think it will stay that way until ED runs out of iconic US aircraft to make. We woll peobablybe seein at least an F4 from them before we even get any hints about a remot possibility of making a full fidelity red aircraft.

 

After that, hower I do think we will be seeing something from redfor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The information may be freely available but I don’t think ED will approach anything without written confirmation from the relevant authorities. (The F16 incident...) Getting that written authorisation from Russia will be difficult, officially almost everything is regarded as classified now and bureaucracy is supposed to be incredible.

 

However, ED are working their way through the 90s F planes, maybe that will prompt them to start looking East. There is the big announcement later in the year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The information may be freely available but I don’t think ED will approach anything without written confirmation from the relevant authorities. (The F16 incident...) Getting that written authorisation from Russia will be difficult, officially almost everything is regarded as classified now and bureaucracy is supposed to be incredible.

 

However, ED are working their way through the 90s F planes, maybe that will prompt them to start looking East. There is the big announcement later in the year...

Nah, forget about the classified issue. The Fulcrum (9.12 & 9.13/S) is not in service with VKS. It is just there is more money in US fighters than in russian fighters.:pilotfly:

:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chizh wrote on the Russian forum a while back that they (ED) could indeed do a non modernised MiG-29 but were doing the F-16 and other (western) aircraft as they would sell better.
I agree with "sell better" argument. They do have real data at their hand and we could only guess. I'm aware its probably not even near the number but in MP not very much people fly the Jeff compared to Viper despite the Jeff being more complete in functionality so it could reflect the sale of the Jeff. I can see the sentiment.

Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chizh runs a circular argument though...

 

There are Red aircraft that are famous in the west, but most of them are not.

 

I doubt there's a male in any Western country who doesn't know what an Su-27 or MiG-29 are, but I bet the % that know what a Yak-52 or L-39 are is in the low single digits.

(probably similar for Huey & Ka-50 - probably even Mi-8. Huey is every westerner's mental image of a helicopter - most would never have heard of a Ka-50, and might know the Mi-8 is a Russian helicopter, but that's about it.)

 

If Western audiences are offered a choice between iconic Western aircraft and obscure Russian aircraft, then of course the Western aircraft are going to sell better, but this says nothing about how well one of the 'iconic' Russian aircraft would sell.

 

From a few posts that I've translated it seems to me that Chizh is more of a fan of Western aircraft than Russian, so perhaps his personal preferences come into play too (as in why will the Ka-50BS-III have extra pylons, Igla & MLWS ? "because we want it to").

(If you feel I'm putting words in your mouth Chizh please feel free to correct me)

 

I've said this before too - it could be that they don't want the customer agro.

 

I suspect that because the aircraft is so iconic in the West, if they did a DCS level Su-27 and modelled the avionics as they were in the early versions of the production aircraft (which presumably is what they could get away with), without a decent GCI system people might be disappointed with the capabilities of the aircraft, and certain people might throw their toys and complain about E.D. nobbling the aircraft....

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
That's not particularly true at all. I reject the very concept that we need to start introducing aircraft to 'balance' sides or to find 'proper matches' for them.

 

Even if it isn't a proper opponent, it's still a fourth gen aircraft and it still is a very realistic opponent for NATO fourth gen aircraft. There is no reason to 'match' aircraft in our study sim.

The "It sells better" argument seems to be the only real barrier to its inclusion, which is a fair concern but I think undersells how big the Redfor side of DCS is and how many of them would love to have another study sim level Mig.

Modern REDFOR planes should come even as AI only aircraft purely because this is a Sim, and people would like to Sim NATO forces fighting Peer states like Russia and China, or client states of these listed which have undergone force modernisations in the 2000s.

 

 

One can't deny the proliferation of types like the Su-30MKX & MiG-29SMT makes them a more likely foes for a late noughties F/A-18C or F-16C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chizh runs a circular argument though...

 

There are Red aircraft that are famous in the west, but most of them are not.

 

I doubt there's a male in any Western country who doesn't know what an Su-27 or MiG-29 are, but I bet the % that know what a Yak-52 or L-39 are is in the low single digits.

(probably similar for Huey & Ka-50 - probably even Mi-8. Huey is every westerner's mental image of a helicopter - most would never have heard of a Ka-50, and might know the Mi-8 is a Russian helicopter, but that's about it.)

 

If Western audiences are offered a choice between iconic Western aircraft and obscure Russian aircraft, then of course the Western aircraft are going to sell better, but this says nothing about how well one of the 'iconic' Russian aircraft would sell.

 

From a few posts that I've translated it seems to me that Chizh is more of a fan of Western aircraft than Russian, so perhaps his personal preferences come into play too (as in why will the Ka-50BS-III have extra pylons, Igla & MLWS ? "because we want it to").

(If you feel I'm putting words in your mouth Chizh please feel free to correct me)

 

I've said this before too - it could be that they don't want the customer agro.

 

I suspect that because the aircraft is so iconic in the West, if they did a DCS level Su-27 and modelled the avionics as they were in the early versions of the production aircraft (which presumably is what they could get away with), without a decent GCI system people might be disappointed with the capabilities of the aircraft, and certain people might throw their toys and complain about E.D. nobbling the aircraft....

 

 

I honestly feel it might really be some of his biases and views while they might be received as tame and milquetoast here in the west might be seen as unsavory and radical by certain folks in russia.

 

 

 

Maybe he's just not trying to get locked up or give them too much a reason to hound him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1, any version will do!

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 And I wouldn't even care if it was the first production variant.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chizh runs a circular argument though...

 

There are Red aircraft that are famous in the west, but most of them are not.

 

I doubt there's a male in any Western country who doesn't know what an Su-27 or MiG-29 are, but I bet the % that know what a Yak-52 or L-39 are is in the low single digits.

(probably similar for Huey & Ka-50 - probably even Mi-8. Huey is every westerner's mental image of a helicopter - most would never have heard of a Ka-50, and might know the Mi-8 is a Russian helicopter, but that's about it.)

It should be pointed out that the high-fidelity Eastern aircraft in ED's lineup were made under license. The Yak-52 and Ka-50 were made as contracted projects, as in they were paid to make a licensed study simulator off of these aircraft, and the existing work was made available in DCS. The L-39 and the Mi-8 were early Belsimtek offerings before the two studios merged.

 

When looking at it that way, there really hasn't been an eastern offering from ED that they made with the intent to sell in DCS for-profit. Black Shark, as in the precursor to DCS, is the closest one could come to making that argument, but even that is based on work previously done under license.

 

Again, I don't think there's any personal reason for it, I just think it's clear the NATO modules sell much better. They're ultimately a company and they have to put the justification in for selling higher-priced modules. Especially when the Fulcrum variants discussed aren't exactly systems-heavy machines.

 

 

Definitely +1 from me on early production variant Fulcrums, as well. 9.13(S) would be a dream.


Edited by Auditor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with "sell better" argument. They do have real data at their hand and we could only guess. I'm aware its probably not even near the number but in MP not very much people fly the Jeff compared to Viper despite the Jeff being more complete in functionality so it could reflect the sale of the Jeff. I can see the sentiment.

 

Yeah, but the Jeff is hardly "iconic" I mean its a 2nd tier budget plane that basically no one other than Pakistan uses.

 

I think its one of the best planes in DCS, but a western newbie coming to DCS is gonna probably buy a 4th gen blue, then maybe a 4th gen red, and finally might consider the Jeff since they've never heard of it. I mean if warthunder doesn't have a jeff how good could it be?

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chizh runs a circular argument though...

 

There are Red aircraft that are famous in the west, but most of them are not.

 

I doubt there's a male in any Western country who doesn't know what an Su-27 or MiG-29 are, but I bet the % that know what a Yak-52 or L-39 are is in the low single digits.

(probably similar for Huey & Ka-50 - probably even Mi-8. Huey is every westerner's mental image of a helicopter - most would never have heard of a Ka-50, and might know the Mi-8 is a Russian helicopter, but that's about it.)

 

If Western audiences are offered a choice between iconic Western aircraft and obscure Russian aircraft, then of course the Western aircraft are going to sell better, but this says nothing about how well one of the 'iconic' Russian aircraft would sell.

 

From a few posts that I've translated it seems to me that Chizh is more of a fan of Western aircraft than Russian, so perhaps his personal preferences come into play too (as in why will the Ka-50BS-III have extra pylons, Igla & MLWS ? "because we want it to").

(If you feel I'm putting words in your mouth Chizh please feel free to correct me)

 

I've said this before too - it could be that they don't want the customer agro.

 

I suspect that because the aircraft is so iconic in the West, if they did a DCS level Su-27 and modelled the avionics as they were in the early versions of the production aircraft (which presumably is what they could get away with), without a decent GCI system people might be disappointed with the capabilities of the aircraft, and certain people might throw their toys and complain about E.D. nobbling the aircraft....

 

Largely right IMO.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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