DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM

Yer Carlos who made the 3D model for the Farmer and is making the 23 is Cuban :)

Yer Carlos who made the 3D model for the Farmer and is making the 23 is Cuban :)

Does this mean that upon MiG-19P release, the Cuban team will go forward onto our beloved Flogger next? :D

Does this mean that upon MiG-19P release, the Cuban team will go forward onto our beloved Flogger next? :D

wishful thinking :D

Does this mean that upon MiG-19P release, the Cuban team will go forward onto our beloved Flogger next? :D

It means those of you in the USA can't buy it because of sanctions or whatever :smilewink:

I don't know if this link will work, but here is info on MiG-23ML modes: https://sites.google.com/site/sovietaircrafttech/mig-23/n003e/modes

From that it sounds like BS III is a mode originally from the PVO's N006 ie unfiltered long range high altitude search. (A real kick in the teeth to all those who prescribe to the "PVO are strictly GCI until engagement" theory")

Does this mean that upon MiG-19P release, the Cuban team will go forward onto our beloved Flogger next? :D

I hope they release the MLA version including the R-24R/T, Cuba have both missiles in their inventory. as well R-27R/T for the MIG-29A.

Does this mean that upon MiG-19P release, the Cuban team will go forward onto our beloved Flogger next? :D

End of development = free resources is a quite common misconception. Especially with a small teams where it's easy to assume that the same team that did the development during the project will have to provide maintenance.

Actually the result of having the same team to make a support of old project is that it ruins any scheduling as by their nature defects occur and have to be addressed ad-hock. In extreme cases such teams are not able to move forward with the new projects at all.

In other words if the same team that worked on MiG-19 will work on MiG-23, lets hope they did a good job on the project so there are no bugs at all :)

It means those of you in the USA can't buy it because of sanctions or whatever :smilewink:

Don't joke... You might be right... :cry:

End of development = free resources is a quite common misconception. Especially with a small teams where it's easy to assume that the same team that did the development during the project will have to provide maintenance.

Actually the result of having the same team to make a support of old project is that it ruins any scheduling as by their nature defects occur and have to be addressed ad-hock. In extreme cases such teams are not able to move forward with the new projects at all.

more often the case it accounts for the "unresponsive" postlaunch support as the current monetization model favors new product throughput over existing product support.

which is in the grand scheme, a good thing imo

Don't joke... You might be right... :cry:

This would probably come down to if they are a Cuban based team, or just there doing research. If it's the latter, they could probably fudge it. If its the former, not so much.

more often the case it accounts for the "unresponsive" postlaunch support as the current monetization model favors new product throughput over existing product support.

 

which is in the grand scheme, a good thing imo

I guess it all depends on how complete the first product was in the first place.

This would probably come down to if they are a Cuban based team, or just there doing research. If it's the latter, they could probably fudge it. If its the former, not so much.

I dont think the team is Cuban based, they have to be living abroad, maybe they have a friend in Cuba that is the one with the proper connections and do the research.

Anyway, there are former Cuban MIG-23 pilots that live in Miami. Another one, Alberto Ley Rivas, who shot down the South African Mirage F1 in Angola is living in Cuba.

From that it sounds like BS III is a mode originally from the PVO's N006 ie unfiltered long range high altitude search. (A real kick in the teeth to all those who prescribe to the "PVO are strictly GCI until engagement" theory")

That in fact is not a theory. It's just misrepresented.

GCI is the prefered method, as it allows the MiG's to sneak in on the enemy and perform a sudden ambush; not because the migs would be blind otherwise.

It's also not PVO-thing only; the front-line aviation would also use GCI preferably until merge.

One thing to keep in mind with that is that real GCI doesn't only work in the Target-BRA mode, as in DCS, but also, let's call it, Intercept-BRA, where the GCI guides you to a position best suited for attack, while keeping you hidden from the enemy radars - because notching exists. And then once in range you turn on the radar, lock, launch, evac. Or even better, you use the IRST. :thumbup:

It does however bust the myth that Soviets would be blind without it.

On a different note...

...would be neat to also get the original M for some early 1970s shenanigans; would go along nicely with the MiG-21bis

It isn’t that CCRP would have be blind without GCI, but if I compare Mirage 2000C Vs MiG 29A, I can clearly see that is ore designed around GCI use than Mirage 2000C which is more centred around the pilot.

And then you have training and doctrine. What amount of time was given to GCI based tactics Vs the air fighter own tactic ?

Yet France also did use GCI for homeland defence, and AWACS which is kind of the same.

And you’re right, good GCI places you in good position for the engagement, not just toward the threat.

With the release of the Mig-19 being imminent, I hope we'll be seeing this developing soon.

@Developers, is there anyway we can convince you to add an MLD or Mig-27K too?

MiG-27K would cost a good separate 60 bucks, no less. Will eagerly throw them into the screen. Damn, it even has brrrrrt

With the release of the Mig-19 being imminent, I hope we'll be seeing this developing soon.

@Developers, is there anyway we can convince you to add an MLD or Mig-27K too?

"The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to..."

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213395

"The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to..."

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213395

Not what I asked buddy, But yes I'm very excited for the MLA

Not what I asked buddy, But yes I'm very excited for the MLA

But, that's exactly the answer to your question. If they had the docs for the MLD, they'd probably do that instead of the MLA.

I would presume that the only reason they have the manuals for the MLA was that it was exported to some current NATO countries (but, it's just a guess as I don't know what the source is for those manuals). Some MLD's were exported, though, but those were not the same as the Soviet ones as they lacked the exterior changes to improve the maneuverability.

Since the MiG-27K was not exported IIRC, I doubt those docs could be found. The MiG-27M was license made in India, but they still use it (albeit further modernized), so I doubt they're willing to share the manuals.

"The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to..."

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213395

So, would it be a safe bet to assume you have access to a MiG-23BN as well?

So, would it be a safe bet to assume you have access to a MiG-23BN as well?

Yes the manual is online in Russian and original, the ones of the models BN/ML/MF, and UB too

So, would it be a safe bet to assume you have access to a MiG-23BN as well?

Not what I asked buddy, But yes I'm very excited for the MLA

"...because it's the version we have access to..."

If they could swing the MLD or MiG-27, then it follows that they would be building them instead of giving us the MLA. :smilewink:

But, that's exactly the answer to your question. If they had the docs for the MLD, they'd probably do that instead of the MLA.

 

I would presume that the only reason they have the manuals for the MLA was that it was exported to some current NATO countries (but, it's just a guess as I don't know what the source is for those manuals). Some MLD's were exported, though, but those were not the same as the Soviet ones as they lacked the exterior changes to improve the maneuverability.

 

Since the MiG-27K was not exported IIRC, I doubt those docs could be found. The MiG-27M was license made in India, but they still use it (albeit further modernized), so I doubt they're willing to share the manuals.

Yeah pretty much this. AFAIK they have access to a Cuban MLA, so thats what we get. I'd rather get the MLD, for the sole reason it would be the pinnacle of pre 4th gen red air, otherwise the MLA was used by way more countries, so its the better choice in that regard anyway.

MIG-27 is a separate aircraft anyway and would be a logical next step for this team after the MIG-23 assuming they get access to data and they are allowed to even model a 27.