FC3 revisions? - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2020, 12:50 AM   #1
vanir
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 263
Default FC3 revisions?

I know it's not the DCS focus but FC3 is still big among some of us simply for the sheer joy of flying Flankers and Fulcrums in the best form available, even if jumping from an Su33 to the DCS Hornet module gives a slight brain meltdown from key bindings to how do I fly this for reals? But FC3 is still pretty big for some of us too. At least while we wish for Flankers and Fulcrum clickables and were allowed to join the rest of DCS humanity.

Are there current ED plans to do anything to help update FC3 for DCSW mission building purposes, at least? I mean in terms of say, more detailed modelling of Russian weaponry like the R27 to balance the attention NATO and obsolete munitions have undergone for their modules equipment in DCS.

Would there be any chance Su27S version could be updated to Su27SM? Mainly delivering R77 capability as far as FC3 is concerned and afaik completed in VVS by early 2000s. I've even seen recent footage of Su33 carrying live R77, not dummies off Kuznetsov.

Speaking about Su33 and Kuznetsov, especially in light of the new modelling with the SC module and DCS focus on carrier aircraft, how about filling out the Su33 a little with working support vehicles like the Ka27 buddy refueller and don't ask me how that works except the helo guns flat out and the Flankers sit upon stalling and everybody sweats a lot during the refuelling. Sukhoi themselves have been saying the Flanker D has Kh31 option since the 90s, although never seen them on a Flanker before the Su34. They are recently photographed and videoed with R77 however, logically this would follow the Su27 midlife update across the board but I haven't exactly seen newspaper headlines saying Flanker D has R77 or anything like that.
Su25UTG or UBK or whatever the hell it's called, the carrier one. And more functional Ka27 with some combat capability, I mean there's no reason to have torp dropping in the game but you could have recon mission in ME and AFAC and certainly stick a HMG out the door and pretty sure they can carry rockets if you want to bolt them on. The versions aboard Kuznetsov are the 2 elint and fire director ones for the SS-N missiles on Russian cruisers and electronic recon of an enemy force, about 30 of the familiar ASW version with transport secondary role, can have an MG out the window and carries a torp or depth charges, and (six?) of the SAR version with the ASW equipment stripped out and has a dual role as an assault helo or air ambulance, carries rockets, HMG, armed marines or some stretchers and a winch. Kuznetsov uses them more than the Flankers.

MiG29K, there was an FC2 mod (?). Is it adaptable? Could give India an in game fleet with a Kuznetsov class and their MiG29K with the phased array.
Plus they still keep one or two on the Russian Kuznetsov doing trials and development work, word was a while back if the Russians planned keeping a blue water fleet in the future they would replace the Su33 with the phased radar MiG29K they sold to India.
This is wishful thinking, involving some real module level attention put back into FC3 but it'd sure be nice.

Anyway I remember lots of discussions about possible plans for FC3, and abandoned ideas, I was wondering what the current deal is for FC3 and its future from ED?
I still just love flying the Su33 off Kuznetsov and the MiG off coastal bases, even if they are very confusing and a little annoying key binding and dated flight modelling and not the current standard of DCS modules.

I don't suppose whoever made the Chinese destroyers in DCSW wouldn't mind doing a Russian one? Bit more versatile than the frigates and there are at least a couple left after the big post soviet everything must go sale.
vanir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2020, 12:57 AM   #2
Rudel_chw
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Antofagasta, Chile
Posts: 6,712
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanir View Post
... and dated flight modelling and not the current standard of DCS modules.
Dated? The Su-33 had its flight model revamped just a couple of years ago, as were also the FM of the MiG-29, Su-27 and F-15.
__________________
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: 27" Monitor - Ryzen 1500X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Windows 10 Pro - Thrustmaster HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1
Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB
Rudel_chw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2020, 08:51 AM   #3
BlackPixxel
Member
 
BlackPixxel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 355
Default

Where have you seen a Su-33 with R-77? Maybe it was a different aircraft?
__________________
BlackPixxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2020, 11:06 PM   #4
DarkFire
DCS Ground Crew
 
DarkFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackPixxel View Post
Where have you seen a Su-33 with R-77? Maybe it was a different aircraft?
I think the combination has been shown as a static display at a couple of airshows. Probably nothing more than advertising by Sukhoi for advanced export versions of the Su-33, which I can't imagine has much of a potential market.
__________________
CM Storm case | i7 6700k @ 4GHz | MSI GTX1080 | 32GB Kingston Predator PC3000 RAM | SB ZXR sound | TM Warthog stick & throttle | TrackIR 5 | Samsung Evo 850 2TB | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

Personal wish list: DCS: Su-27SM.
DarkFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 01:42 AM   #5
vanir
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 263
Default

I found the R77 photo while looking for pictures of the Su33 actually in service with the extra two wing pylons over the Su27 we have in game. It's a video still off the deck and isn't carrying orange or striped dummies like the airshows and arms conventions, these are live missiles. I wasn't there and can't say that it wasn't a propaganda shot but there's no reason for those lengths when it's perfectly clear any export Su33 need only a software cassette to fire R77, whilst adding the capability to the Russian ones needs only the same. So you can figure out what you think the photo implies. Sukhoi themselves also state it had Kh31 capability since serial production but I don't know if they mean it just needs a software tape like the R77 or if it's already good to go and you just stock the Kuznetsov magazine with them when you want to bolt them on.

Magazine stocks are actually a big expense in Russia, in Chechnya they decided to use up a backlogged stock of WW2 artillery shells and there is no question the variety of modern munitions in Russia far outweighs their actual availability in stocks or limited production lines. For all I know it could very well be an interservice rivalry between VVS and Naval Aviation for the latest, modern weapons stocks, especially since the PVO got folded into the VVS and the blue water navy plans of the soviet era took an immediately lower priority since.
There maybe no plans to stock Kuznetsov magazines with either R77 or Kh31, as the roles of the Su33 before final retirement might find R27 and rocket packs perfectly adequate and the navy might be on a waiting list for some weapons.

I do know the Su27SM upgrade was completed quite some time ago now, pending conversion to Su35ovt, for which the budget is a little tight so will take some years hence the midlife update. We have Su30SM in the game, it's just the same weapons fit for the flyable Su27S to make it the SM.

With the flight models I was really talking about the missiles. NATO ones now implemented have much more detailed ones and it would be awesome if we got that kind of immersive behaviour from Russian missiles. I don't want to restart the versus controversy but let's assume you have two similarly performing missiles and one is a simplified flight model from WXP days and the other an advanced one written on a multithreaded processor it's a bit like VR meets PacMan in performance terms. Forget east vs west arguments, it'd still be cool if they were inferior missiles but just had that same level of coding detail in performance and then maybe there would be times when something that shouldn't have spoofed it but did because of a simple flight model, well at least those things won't happen if they do now.

With the four wing pylons search I mentioned, I found two photo-stills during operations with them added: one had four rocket pods and a pair of R73 and the other had the R77, plus R27R and R73, oddly never saw a single photo of weapons on the wingtips, always either ecm pods or left bare. Most photos just have three wing stations each like the Su27, they still don't put archers on the tips at all but just carry a pair of short burn R27 and a pair of R73, that's the most common load configuration. There's one other, 4x R27ER long burn and a pair of R73, that and the one with the R77 was the most AAMs I saw on an Su33 coming off the deck, four MRM and two SRM basically is the heavy AAM loadout compared to like ten AAMs in a land based Su27 sortie.

Last edited by vanir; 05-03-2020 at 01:56 AM.
vanir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 01:48 AM   #6
AeriaGloria
Senior Member
 
AeriaGloria's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: LA
Posts: 2,855
Default

Chizh has already confirmed a lot that R-27 re work will be after AMRAAM is done.

Can you share this Su-33 picture or its source?
AeriaGloria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 02:02 AM   #7
vanir
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 263
Default

copyright protected and doesn't like being linked but one comes up on the first page of a google image search, underbelly shot in flight, not dummy missiles, has 2 R77 and 2 R27R, recent photo.
I was just using google image search and watch a lot of combat approved Russian documentary and its youtube channel. YouTube and google man, what's this "source" crap? Are we doing a university course and you need references to publish? I'm not making it up mate, so what's wrong with talking about it?
vanir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 02:47 AM   #8
AeriaGloria
Senior Member
 
AeriaGloria's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: LA
Posts: 2,855
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanir View Post
copyright protected and doesn't like being linked but one comes up on the first page of a google image search, underbelly shot in flight, not dummy missiles, has 2 R77 and 2 R27R, recent photo.
I was just using google image search and watch a lot of combat approved Russian documentary and its youtube channel. YouTube and google man, what's this "source" crap? Are we doing a university course and you need references to publish? I'm not making it up mate, so what's wrong with talking about it?
I just mean if you don’t want to share the picture itself you can either link or name the website it comes from.

I have googled Su-33+R-77 as well as Su-33 and R-77 on it’s own and see no pictures of a Su-33 with R-77
AeriaGloria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 11:16 AM   #9
BlackPixxel
Member
 
BlackPixxel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 355
Default

Maybe his underbelly shot is actually from a Su-33 and he thinks it is a Su-33 because of the canards + extra weapon stations. Or Su-37.
__________________
BlackPixxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2020, 01:07 PM   #10
SharkWizard
Junior Member
 
SharkWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 3
Default

I did find a gettyimage photo labelled as a "sukhoi-su-33-fighter-aircraft-on-a-mission-to-carry-out-news-photo" with R-77s. However its most probably an Su-35 in Syria since it doesn't have canards and has a long tail.

Unless its very simple and cheap to configure the Su-33 to carry R-77s (as in just new launch shoes and make the weapons control system treat it like R-27T? maybe?) I don't think the Russian navy is going to modify their Su-33s to do so because they have just gotten a bunch of brand new MiG-29Ks which have them while their Sea-Flankers are a bunch 30 year old airframes.

But thats just my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong.
SharkWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:34 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.