Mig-19 hype?

Actually ther was mention in a post or newsletter from ED that all major conflict of the 20th century will be represented in DCS. So Vietnam will come. The F-105 is in Dev with Razbam. Its a start.

Of course all major conflicts and all major aircraft will be represented in DCS. Maybe. Eventually. What will happen in 10+ years, only time will tell. I remember the bold plans outlined by ED 10 years ago, much of that has not materialized.

Neither MiG-21, MiG-19, F-5 or F-4 that is in development by Belsimtek is from the Vietnam theatre. Which says that there's no coordinated development to bring a proper quality Vietnam scenario to DCS.

BTW, the F-105 by Razbam was just a teaser along several other aircraft they posted. They can have plans, but so far it's not even on their public roadmap that already contains several still unreleased aircraft.

"our f-86 would actually make for a more accurate mig-17 stand-in."

Or the MiG-15 lol, since it's just about the same airframe......I mean, who can tell between 2 or 3 wing fences in a furball of over 400mph?

I toss out that far more people would be happy to have a dogfight between some variant of the F4 and some variant of the MIG-21, then there are people who would be bothered by the fact they aren't variants that faced each other in reality.

-Jenrick

What we really need now is the F-8 Crusader, then I'd be so happy.

Or the MiG-15 lol, since it's just about the same airframe......I mean, who can tell between 2 or 3 wing fences in a furball of over 400mph?

unlike the mig-15 the mig-17 has better transonic controllability, it has a radar ranged gunsight (derived from the sabre's no less), and it can carry aams. these are all significant features that materially give the sabre and mig-17 common capabilities not available to the mig-15.

if you think an airplane starts with how its named and ends with how it looks, then you haven't learned a damn thing about airplanes.

That is without counting the MiG-17F, which had an afterburning engine that improves the rate of climb a lot.

Only the MiG-17PM variant could carry AAMs, and only the K-5 missile. :)

A MiG-17F would be great for a Vietnam Scenario but I am so much more hyped for the MiG-19!

It will turn like the 15 and accelerate like the 21, almost the perfect late 1950's fighter.

+1

Does the Farmer have any kind of RWR system, even if its even more rudimentary than the SPO-10? Additionally does it have any kind of countermeasures?

Does the Farmer have any kind of RWR system, even if its even more rudimentary than the SPO-10? Additionally does it have any kind of countermeasures?

Some of the later production ones did indeed get a rudimentary RWR

I don't recall reading anything about any countermeasure integration however

I don't recall reading anything about any countermeasure integration however

How could you forgot the trusty "full throttle and whip the stick around" strategy?:D

But on a serious note that will work fine for evading any missiles shot at them during this time period (or any missiles from the next 15-20 years of the MiG-19 Debut)

Does the Farmer have any kind of RWR system, even if its even more rudimentary than the SPO-10? Additionally does it have any kind of countermeasures?

About the RWR we have taken the desition to leave it to mision creators (as an option) as the MiG-19P do not have them at first, but was later added in service to some aircraft.

 

The RWR is the first simple tail only one (SPO-2), that will give visual (two lamps) and audible warnings whetever another aircraft is locking you from behind.

that said though heaters will be the primary threat so bring your eyeballs.

Ok, at least we've got even a little something.

Now all i want to ask from this module is the ability to catapult launch, as a counter to the viggen's roadside bases :)

MIG-19 was the First supersonic Jet in the Soviet Inventroy, with all moving tail and not suffer from the instability at high Mach Numbers from the MIG-15/17 Designs...

We need a Vietnam Map :D

We need an F105 then !!!

Mizzy

We need an F105 then !!!

 

Mizzy

YES WE DOOOOOOOO +1+1+1+1

Ok, at least we've got even a little something.

 

Now all i want to ask from this module is the ability to catapult launch, as a counter to the viggen's roadside bases :)

 

If I read the following correctly (emphasis mine), the catapult launcher will sadly not be included.

It will not have weapons or capabilites that it never used, and that includes those used in test aircraft, like in-flight refueling, zero leght takeoff, etc.

But I would very much want it, too. It would make the plane more attractive:

The US when testing zero length launch integrated the system onto a road mobile trailer so it could be towed anywhere and used as a point defense fighter anywhere on land (terrain permitting)

All the Soviet zero length launch systems I've seen have been rather more... experimental in nature, a static ramp for testing purposes quickly abandoned.

Am I right about that? If so it seems to be a less attractive tactical proposition if you can't spawn a zero length launch system anywhere on the map like you could potentially do with an F-100 or F-104

The US when testing zero length launch integrated the system onto a road mobile trailer so it could be towed anywhere and used as a point defense fighter anywhere on land (terrain permitting)

 

All the Soviet zero length launch systems I've seen have been rather more... experimental in nature, a static ramp for testing purposes quickly abandoned.

 

Am I right about that? If so it seems to be a less attractive tactical proposition if you can't spawn a zero length launch system anywhere on the map like you could potentially do with an F-100 or F-104

Though neither were actually used in mainstream series and thus are not required to simulate a module.

The US when testing zero length launch integrated the system onto a road mobile trailer so it could be towed anywhere and used as a point defense fighter anywhere on land (terrain permitting)

 

All the Soviet zero length launch systems I've seen have been rather more... experimental in nature, a static ramp for testing purposes quickly abandoned.

 

Am I right about that? If so it seems to be a less attractive tactical proposition if you can't spawn a zero length launch system anywhere on the map like you could potentially do with an F-100 or F-104

Soviet abandoned the concpept quite quickly - for a simple reason, it was turning the plane to a really expensive, one time use human piloted missile.

After all, the plane had to land after being launched from the rail - so it needed an airfield anyway. Second point was an already ongoing development of misile based air defences (S-25, S-75).

Though neither were actually used in mainstream series and thus are not required to simulate a module.

I don't remember suggesting that it was?

With the F5, Phantom F4, Mig21 and Mig19, we can replicate late 60 early 70s quite defently.

 

I love this era.

+100 :thumbup:

I don't remember suggesting that it was?

I don't either, but the point i was trying to make is that it would be strange if these features would be implemented. Since they were only prototypes that were later scratched. Though I guess we have stranger things actually modeled already. For example the Grom, which couldn't be used at all by the Bis variant of the MiG-21.

... Though I guess we have stranger things actually modeled already. For example the Grom, which couldn't be used at all by the Bis variant of the MiG-21.

I wonder how long the community will bash on that point :doh:.

It had been clearly stated by the devs that the Kh-66 should be considered as an extra. Was it added by intention or eventually turned out a misunderstanding of “bis” variant capability doesn't really matter.

It's also not that far from reality as it had been used with MiG-21, just with a different variants.

Really, get over it. The purists - just don't load the Kh-66. Mission designers can remove the missile if striving for ultimate realistic setup. The missile is a novelty anyway, it doesn't make the bis an unstoppable beast. It's not like we've got an AIM-120C for F-5E.

I wonder how long the community will bash on that point :doh:.

It had been clearly stated by the devs that the Kh-66 should be considered as an extra. Was it added by intention or eventually turned out a misunderstanding of “bis” variant capability doesn't really matter.

It's also not that far from reality as it had been used with MiG-21, just with a different variants.

Really, get over it. The purists - just don't load the Kh-66. Mission designers can remove the missile if striving for ultimate realistic setup. The missile is a novelty anyway, it doesn't make the bis an unstoppable beast. It's not like we've got an AIM-120C for F-5E.

Sorry for not wording my intentions with that comparison, I find it alright since it's not a major part of the aircraft. Like your example would've been. I just used it as a comparison, since the majority of aircraft don't have such features in DCS. But as the president for some freedom (though it better be something minor and optional, i.e: the Grom, heater warning system on the Mirage, and hence forth) is already set, it wouldn't bee too much of a stretch.