AN/APG-63v3 and JHMCS?

[BronzeBuddha]

According to the unofficial ED schedule thread, JHMCS for the F-15C is under consideration. If this actually makes it in along with the AIM-9X, wouldn't that be rather overpowered?

 

As a side note, might we see the AN/APG-63v3 AESA in the future? I can help but feel that such a setup would be unfair, even against an Su-27SM (provided they actually make the AMRAAM effective).

[Exorcet]

It's a sim. Balancing sides artificially shouldn't be a goal.

 

Also it's not unbalanced given that the mission designer chooses what goes into the mission and what the mission is composed of.

[SDsc0rch]

^^+1^^

[Alfa]

It's a sim. Balancing sides artificially shouldn't be a goal.

 

No but un-balancing it needlessly shouldn't be a goal either.

[lunaticfringe]

An APG-63 with PSP or a -63v1 against a Su-27SM is unbalanced against the Flanker. The Su-27 is not capable of going 1:1 with the F-15 BVR. Stop calling it unbalanced. Balance is generated through applied doctrine and scenario design- not false equivalency.

[*Rage*]

Depends on variant of eagle and flanker. 'Flanker' includes alot of different planes. Your statement is arrogant and deliberatley misleading in its vagueness.

[lunaticfringe]

No, my statement is functionally accurate and deliberately pointed.

 

Depends on variant of eagle and flanker. 'Flanker' includes alot of different planes.

 

No, it was a specific aircraft, as qualified in the exact same sentence.

 

Following along with the rules of English is not especially difficult.

[Exorcet]

No but un-balancing it needlessly shouldn't be a goal either.

That's hard to do unless the ME starts disallowing you from using anything but the best aircraft/weapons possible.

 

Adding HMS and 9X to the sim just gives us more options, just like AIM-120 is an option that can be willed out of existence by a mission builder. And it's nothing compared to a DCS EF-2000 that we're supposed to be getting at some point anyway.

 

I'd like to see different levels of aircraft modeled (I'd buy DCS F-15A even if DCS F-15C was in my collection) but with FC3 level fidelity you get something pretty close to that by just playing with different set ups.

[falcon_120]

Absolutely, more options are always welcome. Altough it would be enough for me to get 2000-2005 eagle with asm, that would be quite enough, we wouldn't need jhmcs+9x.

[SDsc0rch]

maintain fidelity to realism

 

"gameplay" or "fairness" or "balance" be damned

 

if a mission designer wants to affect "balance," he should overcome technical shortfalls with numbers - but leave the modeling alone

 

!!

[GC1993]

I don't think JHMCS w/AIM-9X would be unfair at all. Out of the Eagle and the Flanker currently I much prefer dogfighting in the Flanker, purely thanks to the lethal combination of the off-boresight mode and the R-73...

 

I know the eagle has the VSS option but it's just not the same and it still takes a few seconds to actually lock the target.

 

SU-27 w/helmet sight and R-73 vs F-15 with JHMCS and AIM-9X would produce very exciting results in DCS.

[Alfa]

An APG-63 with PSP or a -63v1 against a Su-27SM is unbalanced against the Flanker. The Su-27 is not capable of going 1:1 with the F-15 BVR. Stop calling it unbalanced. Balance is generated through applied doctrine and scenario design- not false equivalency.

 

I could probably respond better to that if I had any idea what the hell you are talking about.

 

There is no Su-27SM in the sim. There is the old "plain vanilla" Su-27 its original ~1984 configuration(minus aspects that aren't modelled) versus a ~ 1992 upgraded F-15C(AMRAAMs) - again minus aspects that aren't modelled.

 

The F-15C is already far superiour to the Su-27 in BVR and(if both were modelled to their full specs) likely would have been even without the AMRAAMs. Why in your opinion, would it need the latest gadgets such as JHMS, AIM-9X and AESA radar?

 

"False equivalency" would be to add to- or subtract from actual capabilities of a platform in order to obtain some sort of overall parity - needless unbalance is to model one aircraft type in a 30 year old configuration and its closest(even older) equivalent with the latest upgrades from the day before yesterday - regardless of applied doctrine and scenario design.

[Exorcet]

needless unbalance is to model one aircraft type in a 30 year old configuration and its closest(even older) equivalent with the latest upgrades from the day before yesterday - regardless of applied doctrine and scenario design.

The Su-27 isn't in the sim for the singular purpose of fighting F-15's and even if it was it wouldn't need to be equal in performance.

 

I understand a desire for balance, but adding these features to the sim isn't taking anything anyway. Outlawing the 9X on a server gets rid of it. A disable option for HMS would be nice, but even if we don't get one the F-15 is still going to be saddled with only the AIM-9M to use it with (or 9P if someone is feeling mean).

 

I don't think the difference made will be huge at FC3 level, and if it was it wouldn't be too hard to undo.

[Frostie]

The F-15C needs all the tricks it can have because i'm going to be shooting them down by barrel load in the Eurofighter. :D

As for the Su-27S it's the new MiG-29A. Time for a new Flanker, Su-35 please.

[TAW_Blaze]

There's no JHMCS or ASM on FC level. Whenver that happens we're talking about DCS:F15C. I wonder how you want to model AESA if they haven't even managed to model the old one yet. AIM-9X is due this year but all the other stuff, probably nowhere in the next 5 years.

[Exorcet]

The F-15C needs all the tricks it can have because i'm going to be shooting them down by barrel load in the Eurofighter. :D

Unless someone happens to consider the EF a "blue" fighter. Then Eagles will just sit back and watch Meteors falling from the sky while pretending to be AWACS.

 

As for the Su-27S it's the new MiG-29A. Time for a new Flanker, Su-35 please.

Who doesn't want one? But if no one wants to deal with scarce info and filling in blanks, I say why not model the earlier gen aircraft? We're only missing the F-15A really. The MiG has an A version in sim and the Flanker is kind of stuck in A mode (or technically B mode or S or something).

 

There's no JHMCS or ASM on FC level. Whenver that happens we're talking about DCS:F15C. I wonder how you want to model AESA if they haven't even managed to model the old one yet. AIM-9X is due this year but all the other stuff' date=' probably nowhere in the next 5 years.[/quote']

 

No ASM at FC level of course, but I was under the impression that JHMCS would be more or less like the Russian FC HMS. If ED said otherwise that's good news.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Exorcet

[GGTharos]

The F-15C is already far superiour to the Su-27 in BVR and(if both were modelled to their full specs) likely would have been even without the AMRAAMs

 

In real life sure, IN GAME, no.

 

Why in your opinion, would it need the latest gadgets such as JHMS, AIM-9X and AESA radar?

 

Because they're cool and available - well, the AESA radar isn't. :)

 

This is one of those discussions that is difficult to have without a good analysis of all available hardware and operational software.

[GGTharos]

Who doesn't want one? But if no one wants to deal with scarce info and filling in blanks, I say why not model the earlier gen aircraft? We're only missing the F-15A really. The MiG has an A version in sim and the Flanker is kind of stuck in A mode (or technically B mode or S or something).

 

The Su-27 wasn't in danger of meeting an F-15A for very long. And it wasn't in danger of meeting an F-15 without PSP. Right now what we have in FC3 does not represent even the original APG-63 in terms of functionality, though it IS getting much better lately. Same can be said for some of the flanker's systems as well.

 

No ASM at FC level of course, but I was under the impression that JHMCS would be more or less like the Russian FC HMS. If ED said otherwise that's good news.

 

Er no. JHMCS is nothing like the HMS, and I really doubt ED would represent it as such.

[Grim_Smiles]

As for the Su-27S it's the new MiG-29A. Time for a new Flanker, Su-35 please.

 

I wish, but unfortunately we aren't going to see this from ED, only way we'd get it is if a third party decides they want to deal with the holes in the information for it. Since it is unlikely to happen, I think the best option is to go backwards on the timeline since going forward doesn't seem to be an option with all aircraft right now.

[lunaticfringe]

The F-15C is already far superiour to the Su-27 in BVR and(if both were modelled to their full specs) likely would have been even without the AMRAAMs. Why in your opinion, would it need the latest gadgets such as JHMS, AIM-9X and AESA radar?

 

Have I stated that it requires these tools? Nope. I have no problem with the F-15 not having JHMCS, Sidewinder-X, or APG-63v2/3- I only have so much time in my day to cope with whining. :D

[Exorcet]

The Su-27 wasn't in danger of meeting an F-15A for very long. And it wasn't in danger of meeting an F-15 without PSP.

Right, I did forget the whole timing issue with the two planes. Still you could probably cook up a situation where they would meet in some capacity, even if you had tweak history a little bit. Any major NATO vs USSR war is going to be fictional anyway.

 

 

 

Er no. JHMCS is nothing like the HMS, and I really doubt ED would represent it as such.

Well I know it's more advanced than what we have in sim now though I'm not overly familiar with it, but just to be clear I was saying that a hypothetical FC3 level JHMCS might be HMS like, though if it goes beyond that I'm glad to be wrong and won't complain.

[Alfa]

In real life sure, IN GAME, no.

 

No I realise that GG, but thats what I meant by "if modelled to full specs" - i.e. that an MSIP upgraded F-15C from ~ 1985 modelled with all its actual capabilities/Sparrows would be a superiour BVR platform compared to an Su-27S modelled to its full specs :)

 

Because they're cool and available - well, the AESA radar isn't. :)

 

Well I think the above would be "cooler" :) .

[USARStarkey]

Yeah I cant see how anyone would complain about getting more realisim in a sim even if it means one side is going to get more op. The F-15 would already be OP if the missile guidance was accurate + data link etc.

 

The Eurofighter will be even more op, and i could care less. If you want balance in terms of modeling go play aces combat or hawx or something. i cant wait will Eurofighters come out and we have a plane with a AESA radar, and a reduced RCS and super cruise and super agilty. It will be fun to be the person with the OP fighter and just as fun flying things like the flanker/mig29 and trying to figure out how to kill it

[Alfa]

Have I stated that it requires these tools? Nope.

 

No not as such, but you did argue that introducing them would be fine and that dealing with the disproportonate increase in capabilities the F-15C would gain against any other aircraft in the game could be solved simply by "applied doctrine and scenario design".

 

I have no problem with the F-15 not having JHMCS, Sidewinder-X, or APG-63v2/3- I only have so much time in my day to cope with whining. :D

 

Lol

[USARStarkey]

Speaking of the Radar, in FC3 right now the F-15 has only a smidgen more range that the Flanker Radar in game. I find that very hard to believe. Hopefully we will get a fix for that. If you fly a Flanker and a Eagle at each other Co-alt and same speed, the Eagle will see the Flanker about 3 seconds faster in game. Anyone know that actual radar performance against 1m^2 targets?