Jump to content

JF-17 Future


Chiron

Recommended Posts

Any sources about OBOGS on Block 2? As far as I've read it's a planned feature for block 3.

 

Yea I should’ve mentioned thats pretty nebulous, I’ve only heard it in passing a few times mentioned along with AAR and maybe I just assumed they had to be related. You could be very much right

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

Block 1+

 

My understanding, and its been a while to be honest, is that the Block 1 didn't even have a second radio, no datalink, no AAR. It was barebones as hell. After the improvements to Block 2 came through a lot of Block 1 airframes were upgraded to Block 2 spec, so we have D/L, second radio, AAR etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Block 1+

 

My understanding, and its been a while to be honest, is that the Block 1 didn't even have a second radio, no datalink, no AAR. It was barebones as hell. After the improvements to Block 2 came through a lot of Block 1 airframes were upgraded to Block 2 spec, so we have D/L, second radio, AAR etc.

 

Damnit I forgot about the radio! It’s a wonder atleast on the English web how it’s even integrated, AFAIK there was only that one or two pictures of the cockpit from early Block 1 days and that’s all we have. Hell getting the clock was an unexpected gift. Makes you wonder how many other parts of the cockpit could have stuff strapped to them

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

Block 1+

 

My understanding, and its been a while to be honest, is that the Block 1 didn't even have a second radio, no datalink, no AAR. It was barebones as hell. After the improvements to Block 2 came through a lot of Block 1 airframes were upgraded to Block 2 spec, so we have D/L, second radio, AAR etc.

 

 

Block I was delivered in a hurry, from my perspective.

Officer of PAF who were in charge of Thunder project, want to see it get into service before his retirement.

 

 

Most of subsystems can be upgraded without many modifications, it's a reasonable dicision.


Edited by L0op8ack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

Just ignore those arrogant people. They are just racist who didn't like the ideal of having a better Chinese jet than west. You didn't hear them complaining about how western jets vastly overpower MiG-21 on the red side.

 

So just ignore them. I say, as long as the data used to create modules are accurate, them let them in DCS. We are here for flight, not to sooth their racist ego.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just ignore those arrogant people. They are just racist who didn't like the ideal of having a better Chinese jet than west. You didn't hear them complaining about how western jets vastly overpower MiG-21 on the red side.

 

So just ignore them. I say, as long as the data used to create modules are accurate, them let them in DCS. We are here for flight, not to sooth their racist ego.

 

agree .. its just sad there are many unrealistic stuff here and all the focus go to JF-17 more specially SD-10 and look at what we have today SD-10 performance in low alt and subsonic and Guidance i had enough talking about this and now launch TWS on F-16 or F/A-18c and its like u are launching a Fox 1 how marvelous this game can be more than that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are just racist who didn't like the ideal of having a better Chinese jet than west.

 

What I don't understand is... the JF-17 is not remotely "better" than the Viper or Hornet... Especially after multiple SD-10 adjustments... What are they complaining about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end people are Always going to be jealous and there are people who can’t handle loosing a Fair fight. But I can’t handle ED supporting or entertaining the communities complaints cause they can’t deal With loosing. ED need to stop passively supporting this biased hate towards the JF-17 and Deka. One comment from ED that supported the JF-17 and Deka’s work would make all this go away, but they choose not to. ED wouldn’t tolerate this for their modules and they have gone on the defence for heatblur before so where are they now?


Edited by Blinky.ben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is... the JF-17 is not remotely "better" than the Viper or Hornet... Especially after multiple SD-10 adjustments... What are they complaining about?

 

As far as I know, growling sidewinder named it the 2nd most lethal fighter in DCS.

 

That's why they enjoyed their time before the introduction of JF-17, when they can bully MiG-21bis. Now that's all changed and with their low IQ they don't have the skill to fight JF-17 honorably. And it hurts them their low self-esteem. So they desperately want to return to that little imaginary world where they can bully red side planes as if they are really men.


Edited by uboats
  • Like 1
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.

 

No.... just no.

 

I have no idea how someone might get the idea, that Deka is intentionally increased the performance of the JF over the real counterpart. At least not someone, who spend more than 5 Minutes looking into the modeling of the module:

 

It is the only module in DCS, that has a targeting pod with limitations. Every single targeting pod in the game enters a perfect track of any target, as soon as the targeting pod starts rendering the scene. The JF is the only targeting pod in this game that has a limitation build in, beyond ~21nm it is unable to measure distance correctly and unable to enter either point or area track.

Did they model realistic limitations of the system to overstate the capabilities of the plane?

 

It is the only modern module that suffers from engine surges due to smoke ingestion or overspeeding.

Did Deka introduce this limitation to make the aircraft better?

 

Deka removed the BRM-1 90 rockets from the inner pylons, due to possible exhaust gas getting into the engine and that could lead to an engine surge.

Did Deka remove weapons because they wanted to make the JF-17 more powerful than it is?

 

Right now the BRM-1 90 uses the Vikhir control scheme, instead of the one from the laser maverick, for example, removing the ability to use it with an external laser source.

 

It is one of the few modules in DCS that have modeled pilot overheating and freezing. Lost the ECS? Better descend below 10k feet or your pilot will start blacking out due to hypothermia. Meanwhile, the F/A-18C can happily cruise at angels 40 without a canopy.

Did Deka model this to overstate the capability of the JF-17?

 

The JF-17 is one of the few modules that is affected by jamming at all in the game. The radar can be jammed and prevent it from IFFing a soft locked target correctly. Sometimes it is necessary to enter STT just to get an IFF response.

But I guess that Deka modeled this to inflate the capabilities.

 

The JF-17 is the only model with at least a rudimentary model of an IFF system, no other module needs to worry about entering IFF codes in this game.

 

The JF-17 is one of the few models that have INS drift modeled at all. Even if the amount of drift is overstated right now. Most other modules have perfect INS without any issues.

 

I have literally no idea how anyone, who spends more than 5 Minutes looking into the quality of the modeling, can get the idea that Deka is trying to "inflate the performance". Is it perfect? Of course not. Some issues still remain, that will hopefully get fixed soon.

 

Of course, you can call me biased too, if you want. The JF-17 is by far my favourite module in the game right now. Why? Because it has great system-modeling combined with realistic limitations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't hear them complaining about how western jets vastly overpower MiG-21 on the red side.

 

 

Whats amusing is since MAG3 updated the FM I'd argue it performs vastly better than its current equivalent, the F5E.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Hi all,

 

We continue to work with our third party partners to bring the best representation of aircraft for DCS World.

 

With that said please keep any discussion civil and polite.

 

Thank you

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was before the SD-10 got "fixed." Now, I don't dare take the JF-17 into PvP because the SD-10s simply don't track the target 50% of the time.

 

we are not talking about SD-10 but out of topic ( shoot SD-10 above angel 30 inside 30nm if u go below shoot inside 10nm i am still kill people with SD-10 ) :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was before the SD-10 got "fixed." Now, I don't dare take the JF-17 into PvP because the SD-10s simply don't track the target 50% of the time.

 

You may want to reinstall a fresh copy of DCS. Because I flight almost everyday and SD-10 tracks just fine.

 

The other day, I used my SD-10 and killed a F-18 from...... Aeria Gloria? How far was that again? 45nm??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what's happening. Maybe your internet connection had a package drop or something. Because I haven't experienced anything you had described.

 

 

Hes correct, though how much of that is a symptom globally or just the SD10 is up for debate as similar behaviour was seem in other Fox3s. But yeah its really simple to defeat, a bit too simple if you ask me. Doesn't really fit the ballpark of in between a Bravo and Charlie AMRAAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hes correct, though how much of that is a symptom globally or just the SD10 is up for debate as similar behaviour was seem in other Fox3s. But yeah its really simple to defeat, a bit too simple if you ask me. Doesn't really fit the ballpark of in between a Bravo and Charlie AMRAAM.

 

Are you sure he wasn't simply being notched?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hes correct, though how much of that is a symptom globally or just the SD10 is up for debate as similar behaviour was seem in other Fox3s. But yeah its really simple to defeat, a bit too simple if you ask me. Doesn't really fit the ballpark of in between a Bravo and Charlie AMRAAM.

Can you post a track/tacview of this "simple defeat"?

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The B has slightly better CM resistance I think the LUA value .06 while SD-10 is .08.

 

The statement about SD-10 being in between B and C AMRAAM is only a general comparison of all missile qualities. There’s been threads that link the interview, I can also share it if I find it easily. It’s been way overblown with people thinking it has to have range performance or something else between the two

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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