JF-17 Future

I don’t get people saying SD-10 wasn’t adjusted right. Every single change actually decreased the total range, focusing on over performance at high altitude and speed. If you look at the CFDs ED provided or Nighthawk made, the kinectics are extremely close. Yes the FM and guidance needs to be on the level of new AMRAAM, only once new API is available will it be possible. It now over performs very slightly at high speed and has way too much transonic drag, if there’s a way to fix that with the four CxD values I’m sure Deka is all ears.

And radar is almost on same level as F-18 now, unreliable tracks, notch filter, memory, I don’t see how that’s still a point of contention

I’m all for constructive criticism, push towards realism, identify what needs work, no arguments there. I just always have this nagging feeling Cap(and not the GR themselves) is harsher on it then he is on others, and I just want other fliers of JF-17 or those interested in it to just be aware of that if you listen to him talk about the Jeff. Some of his videos I enjoy, some of them:megalol:

I see this topic has gotten heated, but I honestly think almost all of us are on the same page, we want as much realism as we expect from a DCS title, I guess were just arguing how to best get that done without other interference.

As Simon says, it’s not just a third person party thing but a DCS wise thing. What’s limited becuase of modeling and what’s limited becuase of the software, and changing it for the better.

Will Eurofighter end up having similar discussions about it? I guess we will see

hey long time not seeing u lets start shall we ?

 

2- who said that JF radar can't be notched ( if u are referring to CAP than u are like him )

Patch notes here, released by Deka themselves: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4258844&postcount=8 Before that patch, the radar could basically not be notched.

If we're going to discuss the realism of the module and/or its patch history, let's do so in good faith, shall we?

I don’t get people saying SD-10 wasn’t adjusted right. Every single change actually decreased the total range, focusing on over performance at high altitude and speed. If you look at the CFDs ED provided or Nighthawk made, the kinectics are extremely close. Yes the FM and guidance needs to be on the level of new AMRAAM, only once new API is available will it be possible. It now over performs very slightly at high speed and has way too much transonic drag, if there’s a way to fix that with the four CxD values I’m sure Deka is all ears.

 

And radar is almost on same level as F-18 now, unreliable tracks, notch filter, memory, I don’t see how that’s still a point of contention

 

I’m all for constructive criticism, push towards realism, identify what needs work, no arguments there. I just always have this nagging feeling Cap(and not the GR themselves) is harsher on it then he is on others, and I just want other fliers of JF-17 or those interested in it to just be aware of that if you listen to him talk about the Jeff. Some of his videos I enjoy, some of them

 

I see this topic has gotten heated, but I honestly think almost all of us are on the same page, we want as much realism as we expect from a DCS title, I guess were just arguing how to best get that done without other interference.

I agree, but let's not go the other direction either. The Jf-17 is a great product, but it's still an EA product with some aspects over-performing at release (e.g. SD-10, the aforementioned radar notch). Bringing that up in a constructive (ie, not the way Cap with this 'scientific tests') way should be welcome.

Patch notes here, released by Deka themselves: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4258844&postcount=8 Before that patch, the radar could basically not be notched.

 

If we're going to discuss the realism of the module and/or its patch history, let's do so in good faith, shall we?

 

 

 

 

 

I agree, but let's not go the other direction either. The Jf-17 is a great product, but it's still an EA product with some aspects over-performing at release (e.g. SD-10, the aforementioned radar notch). Bringing that up in a constructive (ie, not the way Cap with this 'scientific tests') way should be welcome.

I completely agree TL, I guess to not be a nitpick I guess that’s what I wanted to see from Cap, atleast some awareness of patch history. If he read the patches about JF-17, I really think he would change his tune a bit.

The patch history is very important, and IMO is the greatest factor in being able to say “what problems can be fixed, will be fixed”

It’s becuase of that patch history I have faith in Deka. If the plane was in similar state as release, I might enjoy flying it occasionally for my modern jollies, but would say “we can’t really be sure until it’s out of EA or not how complete and realistic it will be, or what will be fixed.”

But over the patches the biggest issues people notice have been improved, so I have faith everything else will be addressed when they can.

I mean if this thing leaves EA even by the end of the year, it will blow away all the EA to release times of the other fourth gens! They have done a lot, and if anyone thinks something can be more realistic, I’m sure they will listen. Next patch we won’t be able to change DTC with canopy closed:megalol:

I completely agree TL, I guess to not be a nitpick I guess that’s what I wanted to see from Cap, atleast some awareness

Never, ever lose that sense of optimism. :thumbup:

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.

IDK what you're talking about with the block 3 thing. Your last two examples are long-since fixed, so what're you complaining today for? What features in the JF-17 right now do you think are inflated to make China look better?

Right now a majority of the community is in agreement that Deka is the most biased of all the 3rd party developers

I have no idea what their bias is or isn't, nor do I care. The only thing I care about is whether it's an accurate simulation, and all of my research on this around the internet has led me to believe that is is probably one of the most accurate (and complete) simulations available in DCS. Yes, the plane is a pretty good multirole jack-of-all-trades master-of-none. Why is this a surprise to anyone, when it's a design that's 30 years newer than the NATO fourth gens in the game?

BTW, I am American, and in another context would happily tell you everything I think is wrong with China. But Deka is not one of those things. Lay off it.

Community opinion is also irrelevant in the face of SME input. The "community" will often cite performance figures from various conflicts without paying mind to the variant of aircraft involved among other things.

Patch notes here, released by Deka themselves: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4258844&postcount=8 Before that patch, the radar could basically not be notched.

 

If we're going to discuss the realism of the module and/or its patch history, let's do so in good faith, shall we?

 

i am not talking about before TL i am saying the current condition cuz JF now can be notched yet people still talking about old JF i am not disagree with u .... yes before it was unnotchable u are right but people how talk dont have JF and dont kepp tracking bug fixing and patch updating and some of them are talking about the first day JF and they need to wake up cuz a lot changed ( a lot ) and i totally agree with u

So...you dont have the module? and yet you know without using it yourself, its is overpowered........

I agree with this.

Overpowered my 4$@

In A2A (MP pvp) arena the Jeff almost sitting duck where the SD-10 became quite unreliable, easy to notch and has big tendency eating chaffs with odd guidance. Tbh I simply stop flying it online. And I no longer saw many people flying it in MP, only a few.

Not sure why anyone is taking (DCS) Grim Reapers or any youtuber seriously. Regarding the political talk, I genuinly care very little. None of the jets in DCS are accurate to their last bolt.

I play DCS over other Flight Sims, simply because of the level of detail we can have on each aircraft. For me, the main selling factor is the amount of functions and features provided.

Deka have done a remarkable job with simulating this plane. I cannot deny the effort that went into this module. At the moment, it is one of the best modules I have flown. The fact that this plane does not pretend or fly like a spaceship or superjet is very entertaining. When controlling it, we have to think of the hull stress over time from overuse, system limitation, over G remifications and even pilot's health. This jet has so many little things modeled which overshadow the superiority tag that other jets have going for them.

For me if Deka keeps on adding these little details and add more quality of life to the airframe itself. So far, anyone who has flown this jet have loved it and understand how capable these devs are.

This aircraft really showcases its own unique personality which is quite different from western mentality.

Regarding Deka not feeling welcome, I personally think this comes more from those trolls who currently pretend to be knowledgeable and chinese but then they call JF-17 a cheap fighter and other "bad" things when compared with other Chinese jets. It is a cannibalistic mentality which welcomes people who don't even own the module but want to collect reason why JF-17 should be worse than F-16. A rather rubbish comparison if you ask me.

For anyone who is a collector of very high quality modules, who are not just looking for the best superior fighter. This one has very heavy code-work done under the hood. One of the reason why I compare it to F-14 from heatblur.

Not sure why anyone is taking (DCS) Grim Reapers or any youtuber seriously. Regarding the political talk, I genuinly care very little. None of the jets in DCS are accurate to their last bolt.

 

I play DCS over other Flight Sims, simply because of the level of detail we can have on each aircraft. For me, the main selling factor is the amount of functions and features provided.

 

Deka have done a remarkable job with simulating this plane. I cannot deny the effort that went into this module. At the moment, it is one of the best modules I have flown. The fact that this plane does not pretend or fly like a spaceship or superjet is very entertaining. When controlling it, we have to think of the hull stress over time from overuse, system limitation, over G remifications and even pilot's health. This jet has so many little things modeled which overshadow the superiority tag that other jets have going for them.

 

For me if Deka keeps on adding these little details and add more quality of life to the airframe itself. So far, anyone who has flown this jet have loved it and understand how capable these devs are.

 

This aircraft really showcases its own unique personality which is quite different from western mentality.

 

Regarding Deka not feeling welcome, I personally think this comes more from those trolls who currently pretend to be knowledgeable and chinese but then they call JF-17 a cheap fighter and other "bad" things when compared with other Chinese jets. It is a cannibalistic mentality which welcomes people who don't even own the module but want to collect reason why JF-17 should be worse than F-16. A rather rubbish comparison if you ask me.

 

For anyone who is a collector of very high quality modules, who are not just looking for the best superior fighter. This one has very heavy code-work done under the hood. One of the reason why I compare it to F-14 from heatblur.

Well said sir. :thumbup:

Considering anti-china is so popular these days, it should not be a surprise Deka getiing A LOT pressure of giving REAL manuals and name our SMEs, from inside and outside of dev community, which means Deka should suicide.

someone want intellegence from Deka, and someone want anti-china drama get hotter.

 

Deka have a feeling: we are not welcomed by people inside and outside of ED.

 

On the contrary, a guy at paf-def site, precisely tell the manual version we use, claim dcs JF17 is uderpowered.

yes, he is right.

Sucks you feel that way. I think you know there's plenty of people out there who put the politics aside in this space and welcome everyone who wants to develop for DCS. I think you do fantastic work. The people complaining here forget about Phoenix magic updates, Hornet magic TWS, the Mirage being able to maintain STT through terrain, etc etc etc. I think people forget ED was built on red air (Flanker, IL2 and Black Shark).

To be fair, Cap gets his share of criticisms, and he may crack on the JF17, but in his checklist tutorial video he was telling everyone it's an excellent and very well done and complete module and recommending people buy it. I think he just hates eating red air fox 3's.

You guys have my support :thumbup:

No, please do not misunderstand me, I dont mean players, I mean inside.

All public infos are treated as false and fake, even they are from the developer of real thing.

We are lucky to find a report with PL12/SD10 acmi video,

we tested dcs version sd10 with the same parameters of shooter and target in the video,

we found dcs SD10 performance is a bit underpowered, but still within acceptable difference, 3%.

I like Cap and the GR. They produce easy to understand tutorials, however, his passion is obvs cold war era jets. That's fine but what makes a simulation great is choice. I never understand people banging on about certain jets or weapon systems. If one is wanting to play a balanced game online, then just remove the option 'in-game' on certain systems.

I'm a SP & as long as the systems are accurate (as much as possibly known), then I'm happy. I love the JF17 and the reason I play DCS. I love it's systems. I love modern weapons technology as well as 'retarded' technology. What's great about DCS is, I have choice to deploy these systems, or not.

If DCS was about a certain specific era jets or nationality of jets, I would not play it.

Keep the simulation open and interesting and leave it to the consumer how they want to play the sim.

Not sure why anyone is taking (DCS) Grim Reapers or any youtuber seriously. Regarding the political talk, I genuinly care very little. None of the jets in DCS are accurate to their last bolt.

.

Starting from ED that implemented Aim-9X shooting down AA missiles and scanning fighters with the sight from 10km even without visual contact.

What is the Problem now. People complain about the Chinese/Pakistani jet. Go ED and ask the same overpowering Bias with new weapons added to the new westerns birds...

Starting from ED that implemented Aim-9X shooting down AA missiles and scanning fighters with the sight from 10km even without visual contact.

 

What is the Problem now. People complain about the Chinese/Pakistani jet. Go ED and ask the same overpowering Bias with new weapons added to the new westerns birds...

1. Pretty much all missiles can. Try it with R-73, very fun

2. In real life it’s probably pretty good at it anyways, with that IIR FPA seeker

If anything the AIM-9X is too susceptible to flares

1. Pretty much all missiles can. Try it with R-73, very fun

 

2. In real life it’s probably pretty good at it anyways, with that IIR FPA seeker

 

If anything the AIM-9X is too susceptible to flares

No, please do not misunderstand me, I dont mean players, I mean inside.

All public infos are treated as false and fake, even they are from the developer of real thing.

 

We are lucky to find a report with PL12/SD10 acmi video,

we tested dcs version sd10 with the same parameters of shooter and target in the video,

we found dcs SD10 performance is a bit underpowered, but still within acceptable difference, 3%.

It is not an specific problem with Deka IMHO. Its a problem of some Egos.

Deka is doing a great job, you commit mistakes like everybody but you know, some people from inside has a very big ego, so he cannot recognize that he committed a mistake, so it should be your work! :megalol:

If he made an acceptable work now, great!

If ED doesn´t learn how to cooperate with third parties, talent will go to another platforms. That´s life.

Deka is right though, they're being held to a higher standard simply due to their background, which is just an absolute shame given the monstrous amount of content available in the JF17. Its not like all other modules are perfect and *don't* have issues with their FMs, its not like they *don't* have issues with their missiles due to the outdated missile API. The fact they've worked so hard to work around said jank in the DCS engine to try and reflect the real life capability is something to be celebrated, not criticized.

I made my account specifically because the hate here is ridiculous, and I just want to shout out to Deka that the detractors are in the minority, just very vocal. Your module is amazing and the people who enjoy it really appreciate the hard work you've put into it, and look forward to what comes next.

Cheers :)

You are most welcomed to the ED community DEKA!

Haters gonna hate. Don’t let them pull you down! It’s their only way up.

Your module was in an almost complete state unlike most other modules. Not saying tuning hadn‘t to be done but that’s totally normal. That was a great accomplishment there! Your JF-17 itself also is.

Keep up the very good work! I‘m looking forward to your next module!

I don't think very highly of the Chinese government, but that doesn't mean I don't like the Chinese. Rather, they are important creators of the present and future. They are human beings too, and the question of quality depends on the individual. As a Japanese, I understand that very well.

I don't need for DCS developer the aircraft in the simulator to be Frankenstein. However, JF is in a transitional stage to be completed. In the meantime, they are trying to replicate the real thing with a series of functional upgrades. We need to make reasonable compromises for their efforts, don't we?

What's more is that ED has been developing current aircraft like the Viper and the Hornet that stick to a certain era. That creates a difference in the age of each plane, and as a result the argument is made that JF is OP. If it's an existing aircraft then it should be recreating that up-to-date situation or telling all developers to adapt to a specific age, but it's clearly ED that is failing to do so, and DEKA is doing a good job with that situation. It's not only China and DEKA issues. I will continue to love the JF-17 in DCS as long as its quality doesn't diminish.

Love from Japan to the developer.

Cap is a biased idiot.

 

Some things were changed on the JF and they were changed for the better. Fuel flow got fixed and now the engine consumes fuel as it should, drag on the SD-10 was adjusted, not it behaves like expected, almost matching Nighthawk's CFD perfectly. The range is still very good. So far there is no reason to be worried about "nerfs" for the sake of balance.

 

A ton of people pick on the JF-17 because it is good without being a NATO aircraft. A ton of people are just biased, Cap is one of them. But with the current history of patches for the JF-17, I see no reason to be worried about anything. It is a good and very capable plane.

Enough said. I mean each dev has their own problems. I mean the phoenix for over a year was absurdly modeled due to the old missile API. Or the fact the F14 can jam everything but is totally unaffected by even the simple noise jamming we have at all. I won't even mention the cornucopia of issues with razbam modules. But I don't see the nato pitchfork brigade complaining about it, so it strikes me as fairly dishonest.

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.

Yeah Max, maybe don't take your 3 friends and claim "its the community" you don't even own the Jeff. So where exactly are you on an unbiased opinion of the jet if you've never flown it? And speaking of "mix master" jets, please specifically tell me what year of harrier do we have? Or the M2k? From everything I've read here since its been released, its basically a bloc II jeff.

And yes, Deka has worked on the Jeff, since it still in EA, the FM bad? Oh you mean like the super cruising mig19 FM that took 6+ months to fix? How bout the hornet or Viper FM's that are more or less still a WIP. Or the SD-10 missiles that were fixed upon feedback from ED, unlike the stupidly OP phoenix that still has barely been looked at since release? And then if only to improve its CM resistance to keep it "competitive? Or the magic never miss 530D from Raz? Gimmie a break. As for the radar, at the time of its release its true you couldn't notch it, but that was a "feature" of the viper and F18 radars back then too, but its been notchable for months now, and they are still working on it.

And if there is one "truism" here is that Deka is actually pretty responsive to various shortcomings in their module as opposed to say HB with the F14 flying Tank, and its gloriously well modeled magic ins yeet missiles. Not to mention the fact this is literally Dekas first FF module, and it arrived "more complete" than pretty much any other module aside from the F14, which is also still a WIP. And for that alone I'm willing to cut them some slack.

Yeah Max, maybe don't take your 3 friends and claim "its the community" you don't even own the Jeff. So where exactly are you on an unbiased opinion of the jet if you've never flown it? And speaking of "mix master" jets, please specifically tell me what year of harrier do we have? Or the M2k? From everything I've read here since its been released, its basically a bloc II jeff.

 

And yes, Deka has worked on the Jeff, since it still in EA, the FM bad? Oh you mean like the super cruising mig19 FM that took 6+ months to fix? How bout the hornet or Viper FM's that are more or less still a WIP. Or the SD-10 missiles that were fixed upon feedback from ED, unlike the stupidly OP phoenix that still has barely been looked at since release? And then if only to improve its CM resistance to keep it "competitive? Or the magic never miss 530D from Raz? Gimmie a break. As for the radar, at the time of its release its true you couldn't notch it, but that was a "feature" of the viper and F18 radars back then too, but its been notchable for months now, and they are still working on it.

 

And if there is one "truism" here is that Deka is actually pretty responsive to various shortcomings in their module as opposed to say HB with the F14 flying Tank, and its gloriously well modeled magic ins yeet missiles. Not to mention the fact this is literally Dekas first FF module, and it arrived "more complete" than pretty much any other module aside from the F14, which is also still a WIP. And for that alone I'm willing to cut them some slack.

Not trynna take sides here, but the AIM-54 problems are for the most part in ED's hands, like the magic INS etc. Other than that and the desync (again out of HB's hands, and simply an artifact of the long TOFs), I dont see whats wrong with the 54 rn, at least as in what HB can fix. And the improved CCM was much needed, the old AIM-54s were far too suspectible to chaff. In mot sure why so many people seem to pick on the AIM-54, all the stated issues are up to ED to fix. And even granting its issues, its hardly OP. Its still super easy to notch, and at hi alt not terribly manueverable anyway, and fairly easy to defeat if you know what you are doing. I do agree tho, I dont see the need for all the hate directed towards deka. While I dont agree with everything theyve done/said, they overall have been pretty good handling this, esp for their first FF module as you said. And the SD-10, I dont see what people dont like about it tbh. It's performing quite reasonably kinematics wise and as you said they took advice from ED on how to correct the issues it did have, and they did correct it rather quickly, when you compare how long its taken for the AMRAAMs to get updated as they needed to be as well. I think the problem is that amidst all the unreasonable criticism, its hard to tell those that genuinely have questions/concerns, and those that simply cant take redfor having a comparable plane.

From everything I've read here since its been released, its basically a bloc II jeff

(My time has come)

AFAIK only hardware block II feature we have is AAR. There are things like weapons that perhaps might be newer and requiring software, but block II also includes KLJ-7V2 radar, payload upgrade up to 4600kg, LED landing lights, OBOGS, I’m sure I’m missing a few things.

PAF has often said there intention is to upgrade previous Block I with AAR a few years ago, but no idea if plans were carried out. Our JF-17 is built using Chinese data and sources, so I guess you could say our JF-17 is closest to one of the older test fleet of Chengdu, or what a JF-17 block I purchased from China with most of its available Chinese weapons and AAR retro fit may look like. After all the original AAR refueling prototype, 228, I believe was even built without AAR initially and had it retro fitted. Now that’s the old South African prototype probe, but it’s been done.

This is just my rough idea, I could be wrong on a few things

Who knows maybe down the road a couple years there will be data enough to make the Pakistani weapons, like Taqbir REK. I don’t expect there to be enough data about Aselsan Aselpod to ever make that