Jump to content

Realistic or Balance - J-11A Datalink


uboats

Realistic or Balance - J-11A Datalink  

474 members have voted

  1. 1. Realistic or Balance - J-11A Datalink



Recommended Posts

Earlier version of J-11A although has upgrade to shoot R-77, it has no datalink (DL) support (Russian DL has its own support system).

 

Since earlier version of J-11A has almost same avionics as Su-27SK, we directly use Su-27 SSM which brings J-11A DL.

 

Here, I want your feedback: realistic (remove DL) or balance (keep DL)?


Edited by uboats

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't there physically, it should be removed - although it would require to check if Chinese did not implement their own datalink.

 

Chinese developed its own DL for j-11a (late version), but it requires completely different cockpit etc, and DL/RWR is too sensitive and we don't have info (even if we had, do it correctly, trouble; incorrectly, trouble too ;)).

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say keep it realistic.

 

However it is FC3, I guess the better alternative would to be optional, like the MiG-21Bis' ASP reticle

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

  • ED Translators
Chinese developed its own DL for j-11a (late version), but it requires completely different cockpit etc, and DL/RWR is too sensitive and we don't have info (even if we had, do it correctly, trouble; incorrectly, trouble too ;)).

 

It is all simple.

 

Which one you represent in DCS?

 

J-11A (late version) with Chinese datalink inside?

 

OR

 

J-11A earlier version? (Earlier version just had this piece of hardware didn't build? They didn't have license for it?)

 

If you represent earlier version in DCS and if real earlier version didn't have such hardware, then it should be removed in DCS there could be no questions here about that :)

 

If you represent late version you would need to implement Chinese datalink with all other details, or just stop calling it later version :)

AKA LazzySeal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realistic! But what's do you mean in Datalink System? Only avionic comms with AWACS or with other J-11A in group too? We have early version of Su-27, why J-11 have to be more modern?

 

Су-27 Flanker | Су-30 Flanker-C | Су-33 Flanker-D | Су-34 Fullback | Су-24 Fencer | МиГ-29 Fulcrum | F-14A/B/D Tomcat | F/A-18C/D Hornet | F/A-18E/F Super Hornet | F-16C Fighting Falcon | F-15C Eagle | Eurofighter Typhoon | Tornado IDS | JAS-39 Gripen | AJ/JA(S)-37 Viggen | Rafale | M-2000 Mirage | Mirage F1

Ka-52 Hokum | Mi-28N Havoc | Mi-35M Hind | Mi-24P Hind | AH-64D Apache | AH-1W SuperCobra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted for keep, The real J11 has data link so it isn't like we're adding capability, I know it isn't strictly correct but other compromises exist in dcs world, especially in FC3 aircraft with various systems being automated or omitted. Removing the data link would have the aircraft stray further from the real J11 than keeping the data link on board, if the data were available I'm sure the correct data link would have been modeled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is all simple.

 

Which one you represent in DCS?

 

J-11A (late version) with Chinese datalink inside?

 

OR

 

J-11A earlier version? (Earlier version just had this piece of hardware didn't build? They didn't have license for it?)

 

If you represent earlier version in DCS and if real earlier version didn't have such hardware, then it should be removed in DCS there could be no questions here about that :)

 

If you represent late version you would need to implement Chinese datalink with all other details, or just stop calling it later version :)

 

unfortunately, earlier one. it's safe not to touch the rwr/dl developed by China. you know, those are sensitive in all countries.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realistic! But what's do you mean in Datalink System? Only avionic comms with AWACS or with other J-11A in group too? We have early version of Su-27, why J-11 have to be more modern?

 

i mean with wingman in same group or awacs, you can have tactical situation without turning on radar.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My DCS Mods, Skins, Utilities and Scripts

 

| Windows 10 | i7-4790K | GTX 980Ti Hybrid | 32GB RAM | 3TB SSD |

| TM Warthog Stick | CH Pro Throttle + Pro Pedal | TIR5 Pro | TM MFD Cougar | Gun Camera: PrtScn |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i mean with wingman in same group or awacs, you can have tactical situation without turning on radar.

 

Copy... however I still vote for realistic :)

 

Су-27 Flanker | Су-30 Flanker-C | Су-33 Flanker-D | Су-34 Fullback | Су-24 Fencer | МиГ-29 Fulcrum | F-14A/B/D Tomcat | F/A-18C/D Hornet | F/A-18E/F Super Hornet | F-16C Fighting Falcon | F-15C Eagle | Eurofighter Typhoon | Tornado IDS | JAS-39 Gripen | AJ/JA(S)-37 Viggen | Rafale | M-2000 Mirage | Mirage F1

Ka-52 Hokum | Mi-28N Havoc | Mi-35M Hind | Mi-24P Hind | AH-64D Apache | AH-1W SuperCobra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the absence of modern red planes it's a keeper. My reasoning. Nor is it realistic that we do not have access to modern Russian aircraft. In a real war we would see modern Russian / Chinese with this capacity. To me it is still realistic to keep.

Intel I7 4770K, Evga 1080 FE, win10 64Pro, 32GB ram, TracIR 5, Hotas Warthog, MFD Cougar x2, MFG Crosswind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some additional clarifications might be helpful here by the OP before making the vote.

 

IIRC, the Su-27SK manual mentioned the datalink, so I presume the equipment was still there on the J-11A (given that even the labels in Russian were kept)?

 

Is the problem then perhaps that the Chinese Air Force didn't have the required ground stations and/or AWACS aircraft? If so, I'd presume the datalink could still function between the flight members?


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier version of J-11A although has upgrade to shoot R-77, it has no datalink (DL) support (Russian DL has its own support system).

 

Since earlier version of J-11A has almost same avionics as Su-27SK, we directly use Su-27 SSM which brings J-11A DL.

 

Here, I want your feedback: realistic (remove DL) or balance (keep DL)?

 

With the mention of the upgrade to deploy R-77, I first read the above as a question of datalink support(radio correction) for the R-77.

 

But now it seems that you are actually talking about datalink between the J-11A and other aircraft/AWACS.

 

Could you clarify please?

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely remove if the real aircraft counterpart doesn't have the capability.

 

If it's kept for balance reasons we'll have begun a journey towards the death of what DCS prides itself on - accuracy.

Intel i5-8600k | EVGA RTX 3070 | Windows 10 | 32GB RAM @3600 MHz | 500 GB Samsung 850 SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some additional clarifications might be helpful here by the OP before making the vote.

 

IIRC, the Su-27SK manual mentioned the datalink, so I presume the equipment was still there on the J-11A (given that even the labels in Russian were kept)?

 

Is the problem then perhaps that the Chinese Air Force didn't have the required ground stations and/or AWACS aircraft? If so, I'd presume the datalink could still function between the flight members?

 

Thats a good point. Is it a case of the aircraft missing datalink or the Air forces missing infrastructure to support datalink. Also by any chance you still have a link or a copy of the SK manual?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This really has not a deep impact in the game because in MP the datalink between wingmen players is not working either on the Su-27 so even if the J-11A keeps the DL, in MP is not working so....

 

Only useful in SP

" You must think in russian.."

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´

 

Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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