Jump to content

DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM


MrDieing

Recommended Posts

I´m afraid this is wrong, most of the regular service types were standard on all services, with the same specifications. They received service updates (factory or field ones) as in any other country. Most of the differences are noticed by the series number, or a letter, like MIG-21Bis A, K, etc. But in any of this series there were hundreds of aircraft with the same parts and they were interchangeable no problem.

 

The MIG-23MLA will have an SPO-15 and the ability to mount ECM dispensers as many have them late in service life. Then, there will be an original one with SPO-10. No R-73 though.

 

Thanks for the correction. :thumbup: If I understood you correctly, you are modeling a version with the SPO-10 and one with SPO-15? If so, will changing between early and late MLA versions be done in the options menu or are they two different models you're making?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the correction. :thumbup: If I understood you correctly, you are modeling a version with the SPO-10 and one with SPO-15? If so, will changing between early and late MLA versions be done in the options menu or are they two different models you're making?

 

 

Have not defined that one yet.

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

"The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I'm concerned, the more quirks the better! Makes it a whole lot more interesting to fly. And giving us the option to choose between early and late variants is awesome! I would prefer the two different planes approach, for obvious MP reasons. However whatever the way you realize it, I'm convinced the end product will be amazing - as it is done by you!

DCS: MiG-23

[sIGPIC]

[/sIGPIC]

Make it happen, and take my money! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has some bizarre aerodynamic “quirks” which proved very dangerous.

 

For example “air intake buzz” was a compressor stall in one engine and not the other which caused a yaw and a secondary roll at speed. This was very difficult to recover from under certain circumstances.

 

Yeah, very quirky. Especially for a single engine plane :megalol:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some really interesting information from Pngflyer. I don’t think we should be worried about material fatigue effects or the engine life time in the sim.

As for the other quirks, well in real life they could have an immediate impact on the pilots’ life time expectancy. In sim they only make the plane more unique, interesting to learn and more engaging to master. I can only see positives of that. Otherwise I guess we would price A-10C for its flight characteristics which, well are obviously not exciting at all.

 

Considering the SPO-15/10 discussion and countermeasures. They really will make a big difference. SPO-10 as we have it in MiG-21 is more or less useless. As for the countermeasures, why every single modern plane has them if they are so not needed and pilot should fight the missile geometry? C'mon... The version of RWR system and availability of countermeasures are a big thing that will define survivability and usability of the plane.

F/A-18, F-16, F-14, M-2000C, A-10C, AV-8B, AJS-37 Viggen, F-5E-3, F-86F, MiG-21bis, MiG-15bis, L-39 Albatros, C-101 Aviojet, P-51D, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Bf 109 4-K, UH-1H, Mi-8, Ka-50, NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf... and not enough time to fully enjoy it all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MIG-23MLA will have an SPO-15 and the ability to mount ECM dispensers as many have them late in service life. Then, there will be an original one with SPO-10. No R-73 though.

 

 

Overstratos if you want make variant with SPO-15 and flare dispenser i think is better to go in MLD direction. Weapon system and other equipment are in 90 % the same for both aircraft, so only small research is needed for rest of this stuff. Luckily for you 23 had simplified SPO-15, so amount of programing with this is not significant, dispensers are simple as well. If you don't like R-73 idea, it's no must because about half of MLD's were flying without them. Only problem I see is aerodynamics with 33 deg wing position and SOS system work, but I think that many people from russian side of this forum will help you. I can made a research in my stash as well.:smilewink::music_whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overstratos if you want make variant with SPO-15 and flare dispenser i think is better to go in MLD direction. Weapon system and other equipment are in 90 % the same for both aircraft, so only small research is needed for rest of this stuff. Luckily for you 23 had simplified SPO-15, so amount of programing with this is not significant, dispensers are simple as well. If you don't like R-73 idea, it's no must because about half of MLD's were flying without them. Only problem I see is aerodynamics with 33 deg wing position and SOS system work, but I think that many people from russian side of this forum will help you. I can made a research in my stash as well.:smilewink::music_whistling:

 

RAZBAM said they were doing an MLA variant, why are you so obsessed ? They do not have documentation on the MLD, they do not have access to one.

It's not like CM and a better RWR (but still kind of crap) are going to make a difference in how the plane will be used and how it will be effective, it's a high altitude, fast fighter/interceptor, your force will be to have 10 when the ennemy has 4 fighters, a GCI will guide you, and if you get shot at, run away at mach 2. Getting in a dogfight will get you killed CM or no CM.

Countermeasures are a must apprently in DCS because they are effective, fact is, chaffs alone are very much useless against any type of doppler radar with counter-countermeasures (basicly since the 70s), Fox 2s since the 80s have very powerfull CCMs and render flares almost useless aswell. You want countermeasures because DCS models them in a very basic and poor way, but as probad said, geometry is what saves you.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed these updates somehow. So glad to have the MiG-23 done in the game after all (the initial rejection by ED was quite a shock). MLA is a pretty good choice, especially if one with the later mods like CM dispensers and SPO-15.

 

MLD would have had some advantages in close-in maneuvering with the vortex generators and the extra wing sweep position, but these planes were not meant to be dogfighters anyway so the difference is probably not that drastic compared to e.g. a MiG-29.

 

Can't wait for it to be done to try to land that thing, thanks Razbam.


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAZBAM said they were doing an MLA variant, why are you so obsessed ? They do not have documentation on the MLD, they do not have access to one.

:thumbup:. There is always a discussion about the versions but in this specific situation, after a clear communication from RAZBAM there is really a little reason to insist on a different version. MLA actually also makes a lot of sense. There are however a flavors, different updates that even a specific versions has went throught where I think there is still a room for discussion.

It's not like CM and a better RWR (but still kind of crap) are going to make a difference in how the plane will be used and how it will be effective

RWR is the main tool that helps to build the situational awarness. Take MiG-21 and F-5E as an example. It's a night and day difference.

... it's a high altitude, fast fighter/interceptor, your force will be to have 10 when the ennemy has 4 fighters, a GCI will guide you, and if you get shot at, run away at mach 2. Getting in a dogfight will get you killed CM or no CM.

Yes, you're right. Conside that MiG-21 is also preliminary a high altitude intenceptor. The way how it's applied in DCS however is totally a different reality. At least in the multiplier missions its almost always low on deck approach ending up in a dog fights. Look on the most popular MiG-21/F-5E MP servers - if you're flying higher than 100-50m meters AGL in MP you're dead.

 

In other words, if you want a samewhot realistic scenario for an interceptor - SP and mission editor are your friends. Still though you're left without a GCI.

Countermeasures are a must apprently in DCS because they are effective, fact is, chaffs alone are very much useless against any type of doppler radar with counter-countermeasures (basicly since the 70s), Fox 2s since the 80s have very powerfull CCMs and render flares almost useless aswell. You want countermeasures because DCS models them in a very basic and poor way, but as probad said, geometry is what saves you.

Geometry saves is you is just a small talk. It's like saying countermeasures are for poor pilots. In reality to use a geometry you need to have a good situational awareness and be in a good position with enough energy. This is maybe just a the the beggining of the fight long before the merge. Once the fight develops and situation gets messy the countermeasures is what saves your life.

F/A-18, F-16, F-14, M-2000C, A-10C, AV-8B, AJS-37 Viggen, F-5E-3, F-86F, MiG-21bis, MiG-15bis, L-39 Albatros, C-101 Aviojet, P-51D, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Bf 109 4-K, UH-1H, Mi-8, Ka-50, NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf... and not enough time to fully enjoy it all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tired listening all this experts telling and explain why MLD is much better , and why Razbam didnt choose to do that as a module . MLA is great ,dont like it , dont buy .Or maybe why ED make F18C and not F18 E , F16 blk 50 and not blk60 or70 etc etc..


Edited by Tarabostes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weapon system and other equipment are in 90 % the same for both aircraft, so only small research is needed for rest of this stuff.

That's like saying climb Everest instead of K2, it's only a bit more.

Luckily for you 23 had simplified SPO-15, so amount of programing with this is not significant, dispensers are simple as well.

That's an assumption you are making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which radar system are you planning to model on the MLA?

 

Sapfir-23MLA variant would be the only option IIRC (unless MLA-II from MLD was installed later on(?), but then they could just call it the export MiG-23MLD).

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the accounts about the ms makes me want to try flying that instead of the mla. those dangerous problems all sound very exciting to deal with inside the safety of a computer sim.

why do you want "bug-free" versions like the mld when you can fly fundamentally bugfree planes like the 29, 27, or eventually the 17?

for all you mld evangelists, do you really think that the aerodynamic improvements will really bring it on par with any of the 4thgens? (rhetorical question; it won't)

 

no let's lay it all bare: you mld lobbyists actually dont care about even the mld. you dont care about the mig-23 either. you just want to take advantage of this development to get another 4th generation module. you want 4th generation weapons, avionics, and aerodynamics -- to transform a 3rd generation aircraft into a 4th generation aircraft in all but name, because you're all deathly afraid of having to learn some other ways of flying than the open air jousts that fc3 allows.

 

im angry because this pursuit of easier, cheaper wins undermines those of us who want to experience difficult, undesirable aircraft characteristics, the ones that shed new insight and allow us to learn something new and different.

 

why own a different module if you can't experience something different?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RWR is the main tool that helps to build the situational awarness. Take MiG-21 and F-5E as an example. It's a night and day difference.

 

Indeed, but the SPO-15 won't make that much of a difference, at least if you use the Mig-23 as it's meant to be used, you have a GCI, and you more or less know where SAMs are with intelligence. The F-5E's RWR in DCS is quite a bit better then the SPO-15.

 

Yes, you're right. Conside that MiG-21 is also preliminary a high altitude intenceptor. The way how it's applied in DCS however is totally a different reality. At least in the multiplier missions its almost always low on deck approach ending up in a dog fights. Look on the most popular MiG-21/F-5E MP servers - if you're flying higher than 100-50m meters AGL in MP you're dead.

 

In other words, if you want a samewhot realistic scenario for an interceptor - SP and mission editor are your friends. Still though you're left without a GCI.

 

The Mig-23 will be used in a different way i think, first because it will be against more modern aircrafts, second because the Sapfir-23, while not being great is alot better then the Mig-21's or the F-5E's radar, which is the main reason people don't fly high because they can't do look down. And thirdly because Mig-23 dogfights won't end well...

 

I am lucky to be in a squadron with a GCI, and soon alot of Mig-23 pilots :D.

 

Geometry saves is you is just a small talk. It's like saying countermeasures are for poor pilots. In reality to use a geometry you need to have a good situational awareness and be in a good position with enough energy. This is maybe just a the the beggining of the fight long before the merge. Once the fight develops and situation gets messy the countermeasures is what saves your life.

 

When you do a crank maneuver after firing a first fox one, that will draw massive amounts of energy from the ennemy's missile, when you pull high G's when evading, the missile maneuvers and looses energy, notching kills the lock, BVR is all about geometry, WVR is all about energy and doing the right maneuver with a type of aircraft to get behind and to stay there, when you listen to pilots they don't mention chaffs or flares, they mention geometry and evading with maneuvers, if he fires a fox two and you don't correctly maneuver, you're dead, even with all the flares you have onboard.

A pilot that prepares his mission at minimum and has a GCI will have enough SA to do those maneuvers. (assuming the pilot is decent)

 

You only answered half of my quote, i don't rely on countermeasures because when DCS will have all this figured out, they will be almost useless.


Edited by Rex854Warrior

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far I read correct if I wrong the MLD Radar also is improved over the MLA and feature as close combat/dogfight Modus, and have one more tooth in the Wing, so soviets try to make it more dogfight cable.

Think its quiet differ from a MLA Version in electronic and Flight characteristic.

Would also hope for a MLD Version, what is far more cable..

Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

9./JG27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sapfir-23MLA variant would be the only option IIRC (unless MLA-II from MLD was installed later on(?), but then they could just call it the export MiG-23MLD).

 

For MiG-23MLA exist only one option: S-23MLA, they didn't get MLA-2 because almost all were modernized to MLD standard. For export existed special variant called N-008E, libyan, bulgarian, syrian aircrafts had them. Generally is no big difference between MLA and MLA-2:

- new "Close Combat" mode simillar for those from Fulcrum,

- new "Gor" mode for searching and tracking low flying targets in mountains

- part of radar's internal devices were digitalized,

- part of already existed modes were organized in a bit different way,

- more symbology on the HUD, commands from Lazur system were moved from separate device.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what about the MLA A/G features, what can we expect about that?

 

Redfor really need a fast attack jet.

 

Enviado de meu Moto G (5) Plus usando o Tapatalk

 

it was already told... pretty much like de Bis, quite limited (still better than none at all)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MIG-23MLA will have an SPO-15 and the ability to mount ECM dispensers as many have them late in service life. Then, there will be an original one with SPO-10. No R-73 though.

 

Thanks for explaining it. Not really interested in the R-73, but better RWR and the CM are pretty welcomed.

 

Specially for the ones like me that will do A-G missions in Afghanistan.


Edited by Stratos

I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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