Why are there (part from the KA50) no high fidelity "modern" Russian modules?

Long time DCS pilot here (on and off depending on real life situations) but I rarely post on the forums, more of a lurker so far at least but perhaps it will change.

One thing I need to ask though as I've thought of it many times is how come there are almost no Russian high quality modules for DCS? We have and are getting all these awesome modules for planes that are still even in use on the US side (F18 and F16 for example) but I still don't see anything about any Russian counterparts.

The Mig 21 is of course being used around the world today but it is hopelessly outdated.

Does it have something to do with Russians view of releasing information about their designs?

Just a question out of interest as I said :)

Does it have something to do with Russians view of releasing information about their designs?

Yes, and especially so because ED is a russian company which makes them especially vulnerable in this regard.

MiG-21Bison would be a different enough, but maybe we would need aircrafts like "Su-25 Scorpion", Su-27SM2 and MiG-35. But that only to make some people happy who want latest toys....

A variety of reasons, Russian export law and ED being based in Russia being a main contributor. 3rd parties can do it, though, MiG-23MLA and Mi-24P are both in dev. Ka-50 is from back when Russia was a bit less ''pissed off and getting hammered by international sanctions''.

The story was that after Black Shark came out the Russian Government was unprepared for how detailed it was and changed the law to prevent any more current generation aircraft being simulated.

Thanks guys for the answers, so a little bit as I suspected which is sad, wish we could get some more eastern block stuff.

John, I've always been surprised with the Ka50 module as well since it is a chopper that is very much in service still and yet modeled to such a high degree. Not unlike the F18 now I guess though.

QuiGon also one thought I had in mind as they operate out of Russia, still, it shouldn't be more of a problem than for a company that operates out of the US, unless of course the information of planes was obtained using wrong methods which I don't believe is the case.

Fri13, any eastern block module with a little bit more modernity would be awesome, I know people will always cry for more though :)

As for using the search feature zhukov, I always cringe a little when people reply with such memes or attitudes. It should always be easier for said person to not reply at all rather then to try a show an elitist attitude towards someone. I did not find what I wanted in the search engine though I do appreciate your more real and detailed answer bellow the meme.

Thanks again :)

Take all the answers you get on this with a pinch of salt. Mostly hearsay and speculation.

Official responses from ED have been a consistent "no comment".

Not long ago they expanded that a little to "most of our employees are in Russia which makes things complicated, third parties elsewhere can do so" When pressed on how and why the answer is once again "no comment".

My personal speculation would be that it has less to do with secrecy and more to do with the clampdown on corruption under Russian defense minister Sergey Shoigu.

With potentially ED's employees having relatives and friends working for UAC it's just a potential headache they'd prefer to avoid entirely. Again that is speculation.

Interestingly Chizh did concede on the Russian forum that a Fulcrum would be possible (presumably one of the early models) but wasn't considered as profitable as other aircraft (F-16)

QuiGon also one thought I had in mind as they operate out of Russia, still, it shouldn't be more of a problem than for a company that operates out of the US, unless of course the information of planes was obtained using wrong methods which I don't believe is the case.

One might think so, but I'm afraid it's not that simple. Without going into politics (which isn't allowed to be discussed here), let me just say it's not all black and white. There's also a lot of gray there. ;)

Btw, Wags himself once said in some interview, that 3rd parties could do russian modules, while ED won't.

I believe Wags said no 4th gen or newer Russian aircraft, rather than none at all.

I believe Wags said no 4th gen or newer Russian aircraft, rather than none at all.

Can't recall his exact words, but you're probably right there. But modern russian aircraft is what this thread is about.

i love russian airplane n.1

QuiGon and DeHuman thanks again for very informative and good answers!

No don't worry, I am not at all interested in politics on the forums, those things should always be left out and I understand there are, as always, a lot of gray areas rather then just pure black and white.

I've just been very puzzled at the fact that we're getting modern, still in service, US machines with the modeling and detail that requires cooperation from real sources and "nothing" to compete from the eastern side. I would think that the US, for example, would be at least as comprehensive against releasing that kind of information.

So in ways it must come down to something other than the pure availability of information around the machines.

I'd be very happy with 3:d gen aircraft as that is mostly what we already have from the western side. Older higher modeled versions of the Mig 29 and Su27 would be awesome, or anything slightly more modern than the Mig 21 to be used in scenarios where people want the more advanced feeling of clickable cockpits while flying for the "red" force.

Thanks again :)

/Wilbus

I'd be very happy with 3:d gen aircraft as that is mostly what we already have from the western side. Older higher modeled versions of the Mig 29 and Su27 would be awesome, or anything slightly more modern than the Mig 21 to be used in scenarios where people want the more advanced feeling of clickable cockpits while flying for the "red" force.

Well, RAZBAM is working on the MiG-23, which will be the most modern full fidelity russian fixed wing in DCS so far.

I’m sure the third parties can do what they want, but they still need to take care of the licensing first.

 

Interestingly Chizh did concede on the Russian forum that a Fulcrum would be possible (presumably one of the early models) but wasn't considered as profitable as other aircraft (F-16)

Yeah, I'm thinking the cost vs man hours per module is a decent consideration for them.

The whole, ED can't but 3rd parties can thing is a weird statement, and indicates to me that there isn't much of a "government" problem. The government wouldn't care who did it, just that a hi-fi module existed at all.

The other possibilities are licensing issues for them, which may or may not be a problem, or may be easier for 3rd parties.

QuiGon and DeHuman thanks again for very informative and good answers!

 

No don't worry, I am not at all interested in politics on the forums, those things should always be left out and I understand there are, as always, a lot of gray areas rather then just pure black and white.

 

I've just been very puzzled at the fact that we're getting modern, still in service, US machines with the modeling and detail that requires cooperation from real sources and "nothing" to compete from the eastern side. I would think that the US, for example, would be at least as comprehensive against releasing that kind of information.

 

 

 

So in ways it must come down to something other than the pure availability of information around the machines.

 

 

 

I'd be very happy with 3:d gen aircraft as that is mostly what we already have from the western side. Older higher modeled versions of the Mig 29 and Su27 would be awesome, or anything slightly more modern than the Mig 21 to be used in scenarios where people want the more advanced feeling of clickable cockpits while flying for the "red" force.

 

 

 

Thanks again :)

 

 

/Wilbus

Part of the deal that people don't really get is that neither the F18C or F16C we are getting are all that modern. Modern for the US forces/allies is the F35 and F22 and has been for a decade or more. The Viper and hornet are legacy platforms. And even there we are not getting "full functionality" there absolutely are elements that are not modeled at all (certain western sensor systems), western MAWS, or really badly (Like EW, which is a huge component of modern air warfare). I think ED was very careful to pick western aircraft that were considered old enough to model, and specific models that had less "sensitive" gear/systems on them.

I honestly openly question the decisions to make "the mostest modernest uber fighters" when the actual game engine doesn't simulate the technology that makes them effective (i.e. EW/sensors etc) very well if at all. I mean we are using early 80's fighter tactics with 2007 era planes, because the engine doesn't actually model a modern combat environment very well. And if it does its a permissive bombing environment that existed in Afghanistan or something like that.

I've always though that they should just do the late 70's to early 80's. Planes were simpler in some ways, and you could probably do justice to some of the more "advanced" systems from that era. I mean consider the F16A, superfun day only dogfighter/light bomber, and a great fit for older mig-21's. And WVR combat is something DCS does very well.

i love russian airplane n.1

 

Lol, putin vs thanos...

Pretty sure the Su-57 got canceled recently too.

Interestingly Chizh did concede on the Russian forum that a Fulcrum would be possible (presumably one of the early models) but wasn't considered as profitable as other aircraft (F-16)

Wow, that's interesting. I think the Fulcrum is arguably the more interesting plane compared to the F-16, if you don't consider the popstar-appeal of the 16 and its iconic looks...

With the 18 and 16 available, i honestly hope, that the market is now saturated with modern blufor fixed wing and full-fidelity redfor becomes more viable economicaly.

Lol, putin vs thanos...

 

Pretty sure the Su-57 got canceled recently too.

Russia originally ordered twelve, then after a price reduction increased the order to 76

I also agree a 9.12/9-13S Fulcrum should sell pretty well

I've always though that they should just do the late 70's to early 80's. Planes were simpler in some ways, and you could probably do justice to some of the more "advanced" systems from that era. I mean consider the F16A, superfun day only dogfighter/light bomber, and a great fit for older mig-21's. And WVR combat is something DCS does very well.

Yep - although I'd take it all the way to Gulf War 1, I think. That was the first war PGM really played a big part, but even then most of the ordinance wasn't guided - so it's an interesting crossover point. Still using INS too, and all the other stuff we're used to having well developed was in it's infancy.

Russia originally ordered twelve, then after a price reduction increased the order to 76

 

I also agree a 9.12/9-13S Fulcrum should sell pretty well

I checked again and yeah its alot of conflicting information on it I guess. Most recent sources suggest its not abandoned though. (that info was from last year).

Yep - although I'd take it all the way to Gulf War 1, I think. That was the first war PGM really played a big part, but even then most of the ordinance wasn't guided - so it's an interesting crossover point. Still using INS too, and all the other stuff we're used to having well developed was in it's infancy.

Sure, most of the late 80's stuff was what was used in GW1 or Yugoslavia. Plus the air defenses, EW enviroment and so forth were quite a bit simpler in many ways. Ideally I think if they targeted a 20 year span from say 1975-1995 with a median 1985 age for aircraft variants (plus minus a few years) that would be an interesting era to look at. Plus you have some actual conflicts and alot more hypothetical ones in that time frame you can look at (Bekka valley, falklands, africa), real and hypothetical NATO v Libya stuff, US vs Iran as a hypothetical. And of course the "big show" though I think it would choke the engine to do that. And mostly I think it would be more "fun" since most of that would be up-close and personal, rather than the BVR lobfest and standoff munitions that "modern" stuff is. Though I think they'd have to better address some of the spotting issues for both A/A and A/G.

I actually really like the idea of half-real half hypothetical conflicts. I.e. Falklands if the Argies actually used their carrier would be a pretty interesting one. US invasion of Libya at 2 different points in the 80's instead of just bombing it and so forth. Or US iranian intervention (hey we almost have a plane set for that :) )

I actually really like the idea of half-real half hypothetical conflicts. I.e. Falklands if the Argies actually used their carrier would be a pretty interesting one. US invasion of Libya at 2 different points in the 80's instead of just bombing it and so forth. Or US iranian intervention (hey we almost have a plane set for that :) )

Heh, well, the carrier would have been the second ship sunk by a nuclear sub, but yeah - what-ifs are what we've been dealing with all along; Georgia is a what-if after all. That was an interesting conflict not just because of the naval aspect, but it managed to not be a cold-war proxy fight. A nastier what-if would have been if Yugoslavia broke up a decade earlier, perhaps.

I'm struggling a bit to find a scenario that'd involve early 4th gen Russian aircraft without a full-on cold-war-turned-hot, though.

The story was that after Black Shark came out the Russian Government was unprepared for how detailed it was and changed the law to prevent any more current generation aircraft being simulated.

That's the first notion about that I've read - and it makes sense esp about the realism aspect. Is there some reference link or so where this originated from? Curious....

That's the first notion about that I've read - and it makes sense esp about the realism aspect. Is there some reference link or so where this originated from? Curious....

Yeah, while this sounds plausible to sim community I have a real hard time believing an actual goverment believs it.