Just for fun. Wishlist for future RAZBAM projects

None of the above on the list

 

RED

Mig31/BM>Mig25>Su17M4>Su24M>Mig23MLD"yeah i know".

 

Blue

F-15E>Mirage2000-5 or -9.

a mirage 2000-5 or -9 aint likely to happen. still classified. theres like almost no public data on those.

Both the Starfighter and the Yak38 were terrible, accident prone planes that put a lot of pilots in the ground. The Su7 on the other hand is a legend.

 

I clicked on the wrong button. :( One of those F104 votes should go to the Su7. I would however recommend there always be a none of the above option included in these polls.

Starfighter claims for being accident prone, are kinda vague, and in some cases exaggerated. Many early supersonic aircrraft werent the ideal handling aircraft. it took getting used to. Mostly Only the nations that used this thing for ground attack complained mostly about problems with accidents

Sorry but no the startfighter is also quite an iconic aircraft, not as legendary as the F4 or the Teen Fighters, but still very notable aircraft ( arguably more so than the su7, which is far overshadowed by the Mig21 anyways) had many notable export users.. Without looking at specific version or sub-versions the F-104 can represent airforces from quite a bit of nations from cold war period.

http://www.i-f-s.nl/f-104-operators/

Please, pretty please can we get the Kiowa attack helicopter inbound!!!! Especially now the Air cav have finished with it. No longer on the secret list!!!!

"Starfighter claims for being accident prone, are kinda vague, and in some cases exaggerated....."

I'll back this one up by also adding that a number of these planes were put to extreme limits in testing and were lost doing things that they weren't designed for. I also want to add, if memory serves, that the German's fledging Luftwaffe redux was transitioning from F-84's to F-104's and that was a steep learning curve for some of the youngsters. I haven't looked it up, but again, if memory serves from Rall's book, Experten Harttman forecast such an issue, and they lost around a quarter of the airframes they received in accidents and mishaps caused by pilot error.

You can hardly say a plane is "accident prone" as in most cases it's improper procedures on the crew resulting in fatalities and airframe losses that give those planes bad names. I'm not saying it's as simple as doing some reading and practicing, I am saying all planes that are deemed difficult to fly have a degree of attention, preparation, and "one step aheadeness" that some pilots simply aren't capable of managing or adjusting to.

~S

"Starfighter claims for being accident prone, are kinda vague, and in some cases exaggerated....."

 

I'll back this one up by also adding that a number of these planes were put to extreme limits in testing and were lost doing things that they weren't designed for. I also want to add, if memory serves, that the German's fledging Luftwaffe redux was transitioning from F-84's to F-104's and that was a steep learning curve for some of the youngsters. I haven't looked it up, but again, if memory serves from Rall's book, Experten Harttman forecast such an issue, and they lost around a quarter of the airframes they received in accidents and mishaps caused by pilot error.

 

You can hardly say a plane is "accident prone" as in most cases it's improper procedures on the crew resulting in fatalities and airframe losses that give those planes bad names. I'm not saying it's as simple as doing some reading and practicing, I am saying all planes that are deemed difficult to fly have a degree of attention, preparation, and "one step aheadeness" that some pilots simply aren't capable of managing or adjusting to.

 

~S

yea part of what i said was the F104 accidents were becasue It was forced into a secodary ground attack role.

frankly F104 was just not an aircraft well suited for many export users needs , but Sold and forced into a role thanks to lockheed bribery, especially during a time when fast pace of technology change. I think they are in part to blame.

Ov-10 bronco.

Su-7! We need more Russian aircraft! >:]

Su-7! We need more Russian aircraft! >:]

meh i really dont see a point in Su7

a su7 module would really just be a radarless Mig21, without spo 10 rwr used for ground pounding.

Doesnt offer anything really

If any russian ground attack that wouldnt be totally primtive at the very least su17/22M4 )a t least that would have Tv guided missiles and offer Spo15 rwr, and Su25A style gunsight and allow for proper ccip for unguided bombs.

how many wish lists can we get in the this area? Lol....

meh i really dont see a point in Su7

 

a su7 module would really just be a radarless Mig21, without spo 10 rwr used for ground pounding.

 

Doesnt offer anything really

 

If any russian ground attack that wouldnt be totally primtive at the very least su17/22M4 )a t least that would have Tv guided missiles and offer Spo15 rwr, and Su25A style gunsight and allow for proper ccip for unguided bombs.

I am hoping for a Su-17/20/22 family aircraft myself, but the Su-7 is the closest thing given in the poll. :)

But I think the perfect aircraft for the Russians to get would be a MiG-23 (I would like an A-A variant :D)... Could also go for the Su-15 for fighters.

The RAZBAM MiG-23 was not given permission for... Hmmm... Does that mean someone else is developing it secretly :O. Time for the tinfoil hat to slide onto my head!

F-104 i really hope for this,because this plane was owned by many nations.

razbam are a happy owner of the Mirage 2000 and is' fantastic.

I suggest you seriously consider the development of the F-104.

you'd have a huge user base.

Sorry BAD english

F-104G, since contributed for years to defense the airspace of many western NATO countries

and for his "multi-role":lol: capalities

F-104S, to make happy italian and turkish guys here :megalol: with a pure interceptor

for historical Mig-21 vs F-104 battle

Phan......tom..........

I pit with the 38L. I'd love to see a REAL twin engine aircraft in DCS.

___________________

To succeed in life, you need three things: a wishbone, a backbone, and a funny bone.

The only one of these that would really make sense IMO is the F-104.

The Yak-38 would be a very complicated aircraft to create, being VTOL, and very few (less than 300) were ever built, AND I don't think they ever saw action. Could be wrong about that last part.

That said, if you look at the current lineup of planes that are announced, in progress, or already released, I think we need more 1970 and later era Russian planes.

I would love to see a Tu-28 or Su-15.

As a matter of fact, i´m interested in a F-104..let´s see if there is enough interest from the community about it...

Of these absolutely the F-104

OBVIOUSLY THE THUNDERCHIEF IS BETTER

but yeah go for starfighter

104, hands down.

I would walk around clicking and howling, and zoom up the stairs, when not flying it :)

I would be VERY interested in a F-104 and would definitely be a customer. Tricky flight dynamics, great looks, and awesome performance - can't say no! :)

I think that simpler fighters like this that were kept in service till the 1980s or early 90s would have a solid place in DCS in light of the inbound F-14A/B, A-7E, and F-4E. Turkey and Italy still had F-104s in service in early 1990s (Desert Storm), so it could fit in to theoretical coalition operations, etc.

Definitely worth considering! :thumbup:

-Nick

I wish Razbam would finish the MIRAGE first.

Yak -38 have my vote.

I have an huge fall for Vtol fixed wing Airplanes

As a matter of fact, i´m interested in a F-104..let´s see if there is enough interest from the community about it...

Prowler, F-105 Thud FTW!!

starfighter? absolutely yes. there are so many contradictory sentiments about this aircraft it would be amazing to have a simulator to put to the test.

As a matter of fact, i´m interested in a F-104..let´s see if there is enough interest from the community about it...

Yes please.