Jump to content

DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion


VEPR 12

Recommended Posts

I dont unfortunately, but i do have this handy chart of the specs of each model. xD

 

nUV9awI.png

 

What is the source of those? Just curious since they don't match the data I got from the Royal Swedish Airforce aircraft identification manual. :huh:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My computer specs below:

 

CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K@4.2GHz | CPU Cooler: Corsair Hydro H100 | GPU: MSI Nvidia GTX 680 2GB Lightning 2GB VRAM @1.3GHz | RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 | SSD 1: Corsair Force 3 120GB (SATA 6) | SSD 2: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB (SATA 6) | Hybrid disc: Seagate Momentus Hybrid 500/4GB (SATA 3) | Keyboard: QPAD MK-85 | Mouse: QPAD 5K LE | TrackIR 5 + Track Clip Pro | Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog | MFG Crosswind | OS: Win7/64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree. Hope (but don't really expect) we will get JA Viggen too but if not, I also hope ordnance available to AJS Viggen will be kept realistic.

 

This!

 

 

I am surprised no one has mentioned one reason as to why we might not see the JA 37. At least not a fully functioning one...

 

At the time of the J 35 Sweden introduced STRIL 60 (a combat/tactical control system) which introduced "datalänk" (data link) for sending data between aircraft. I think the J 35 was the first fighter in the world to use a system like this. With the JA 37 "jaktlänk" (fighter link) was introduced in the 1980's with the same purpose. This system has since been developed for the JAS 39 into "flygplanslänk" (aircraft link).

 

I think (not 100% sure though) that parts of the old "jaktlänk" system is still classifed since the latest system is based on it. A JA 37 would be pretty useless in-game if this wasn't simulated properly.

 

This is mostly speculation on my part but it would make sense...

 

I also wonder what the reason for this decision is.

PS.: Swedish seems like a funny language :D


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS.: Swedish is a funny language :D

 

Yes of course it is! We borrowed most of it from the Germans! :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My computer specs below:

 

CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K@4.2GHz | CPU Cooler: Corsair Hydro H100 | GPU: MSI Nvidia GTX 680 2GB Lightning 2GB VRAM @1.3GHz | RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 | SSD 1: Corsair Force 3 120GB (SATA 6) | SSD 2: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB (SATA 6) | Hybrid disc: Seagate Momentus Hybrid 500/4GB (SATA 3) | Keyboard: QPAD MK-85 | Mouse: QPAD 5K LE | TrackIR 5 + Track Clip Pro | Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog | MFG Crosswind | OS: Win7/64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although its nice to simulate a scenario that occurred, it's not an unreasonable use of a sandbox to simulate a scenario that never occurred. Whether a scenario that never happened is likely or not is not the point, else governments wouldnt fund scenarios with little green men.

 

If I can sell you that logic you'll get a lot more out of DCS.

 

You're right, a fictional conflict doesn't bother me. Of course most scenarios in DCS are going to be fictional. My point is that the Viggen doesn't fit in any theater of conflict outside of Northern Europe, where other jets are more versatile. Can the F-14 fly in Northern Europe cold war scenario? Yes. Straight of Hormuz? Yes. Georgia? Yes, even though it was retired during the time period it's still plausible.

 

Now, if you like the Viggen all of that doesn't matter. You would fly it anywhere because you just like the jet and want to enjoy the chance to fly it. It is possible I could end up purchasing the Viggen because I desperately want a high speed strike jet in DCS like everyone else. I own A-10C but I could never get into it. The A-10 is just so SLOW it drives be nuts.

 

Even though I'm personally disappointed in the Viggen choice by LNS I'm still happy its being developed. It just shows the variety of air frames we are getting in DCS. There's something for everyone.

 

The only thing that confounds me is the fact that no 3rd party developer has taken up development of the F-16 yet. It's probably the single best modern jet to model in a combat flight sim. Arguably the most successful multirole fighter ever built, flown by over 25 nations worldwide, the list goes on and on.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't happen to have a profile comparison of the two that compares and contrasts their external differences?

 

The visual external differances are not that obvious at a glance with the most obvious one probably being the rudder.

 

Its hard to find pictures of a JA and a AJ standing next to eachother.

 

But ive been able to find 2 pictures with a similar angle.

 

AJS 37 (AJ)

 

se-dxn-swedish-air-force-historic-flight-saab-ajs-37-viggen_PlanespottersNet_400570.jpg

 

 

JA-37

saab-37-Viggen_photo_04.jpg

 

One detail i noticed no when looking for pictures is that some JA-37s had those Small finns on their back while others did not.

(have no idea what the finns where for or why some had them and some not)

 

Tried to find one for the comparison but could not find one with an angle as "comparable" as this one.

 

So Those finns is not something that should be used alone to tell them apart since Alot of JA-37s did not have those finns.

 

Example of JA-37 without finns but at a very different angle.

 

 

flyg20sept-07-1024x668.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised no one has mentioned one reason as to why we might not see the JA 37. At least not a fully functioning one...

One reason we might not see the JA 37 is because the AJS 37 was listed as the steam folder target so we assume we get the AJS 37 specifically and not a another variant.

Unless I misunderstood you the question over how easy it is to have multiple variants was answered back in this thread with the differences in models, systems and avionics, some of which you highlighted, like the datalink, but radar type was different (Ground with sea and mapping PS 371/A not airborne PS-46) loadout and even physicality of the plane was different. Cockpit is very different.

 

In terms of development time tweo things may appear different but their makeup requires many man hours to configure.


Edited by Pikey

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One reason we might not see the JA 37 is because the AJS 37 was listed as the steam folder target so we assume we get the AJS 37 specifically and not a another variant.

Unless I misunderstood you the question over how easy it is to have multiple variants was answered back in this thread with the differences in models, systems and avionics, some of which you highlighted, like the datalink, but radar type was different (Ground with sea and mapping PS 371/A not airborne PS-47) loadout and even physicality of the plane was different.

 

 

I think what he ment was a reason why they chose to model the AJS-37 instead of a JA-37 might be that some systems in the JA-37 might still be classified and as such might be much harder to get enough info on in order to make a complete simulation of a JA-37.

 

But Since the AJS-37 systems are all retired and there is one Flying Today it much easier to get complete info on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(have no idea what the finns where for or why some had them and some not)

 

I think those fins are antennas for the FR29 flight radio system.

 

JA37_antenner_488.jpg


Edited by El Hadji

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My computer specs below:

 

CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K@4.2GHz | CPU Cooler: Corsair Hydro H100 | GPU: MSI Nvidia GTX 680 2GB Lightning 2GB VRAM @1.3GHz | RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 | SSD 1: Corsair Force 3 120GB (SATA 6) | SSD 2: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB (SATA 6) | Hybrid disc: Seagate Momentus Hybrid 500/4GB (SATA 3) | Keyboard: QPAD MK-85 | Mouse: QPAD 5K LE | TrackIR 5 + Track Clip Pro | Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog | MFG Crosswind | OS: Win7/64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what he ment was a reason why they chose to model the AJS-37 instead of a JA-37 might be that some systems in the JA-37 might still be classified and as such might be much harder to get enough info on in order to make a complete simulation of a JA-37.

 

But Since the AJS-37 systems are all retired and there is one Flying Today it much easier to get complete info on.

 

That was exactly what I meant. :thumbup:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

My computer specs below:

 

CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K@4.2GHz | CPU Cooler: Corsair Hydro H100 | GPU: MSI Nvidia GTX 680 2GB Lightning 2GB VRAM @1.3GHz | RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 | SSD 1: Corsair Force 3 120GB (SATA 6) | SSD 2: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB (SATA 6) | Hybrid disc: Seagate Momentus Hybrid 500/4GB (SATA 3) | Keyboard: QPAD MK-85 | Mouse: QPAD 5K LE | TrackIR 5 + Track Clip Pro | Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog | MFG Crosswind | OS: Win7/64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is that all single seat Mig-21s After the PFM could aswell.

 

Even if most Mig-21Bis operators did not employ the Kh-66 the Mig-21 bis could use it.

 

For one there is no reason while a mig-21Bis could not use it since it alread has the pylons capable of carrying it and it has the beam mode the Kh-66 needs.

 

And second there are multiple accounts that it can use them.

 

And also for the Mig-21 PFM only the centerline Pylon was Kh-66 capable while Later Mig-21 Variants (M,SM,MF and Bis) could carry them on some of the wing pylons aswell.

 

examples of

Sources

 

http://www.mig-21.de/english/technicaldataarmament.htm

 

and for a second good old "trusted" wikipedia xD

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-21_variants#Armament

 

If you can find somewhere that says definitely that later Mig-21s could not id be interested but all the info i can find points towards that they can.

 

Oh, yeah, I've seen those sources, as well. I'm, honestly, just repeating what Cobra has stated. He's stated in the past that the inclusion of the Grom was a gameplay choice as opposed to realism. I'm assuming he got that from Dolphin887 and I'm not about to tell a man who has way more flight hours than I do and in a way more demanding aircraft that he's wrong.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our sources indicate that the KH-66 could not be carried by the MiG-21bis as the Radar was not compatible. (However, sources also indicate that the KH-66 was upgraded at some point to allow for usage on the MiG-23, so even if not used on the MiG-21bis, it could eventually be)

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our sources indicate that the KH-66 could not be carried by the MiG-21bis as the Radar was not compatible. (However, sources also indicate that the KH-66 was upgraded at some point to allow for usage on the MiG-23, so even if not used on the MiG-21bis, it could eventually be)

 

We are glad for this inclusion! Makes MiG 21 more fun and was not unrealistic, as could be done. I hope you will do similar inclusions with AJS 37! Those who do not want do not have to use!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those fins are antennas for the FR29 flight radio system.

 

JA37_antenner_488.jpg

 

 

I read that a few if the late JA had a NATO compatible radios added for use since they were part of a NATO QRF of some kind. The finns are antennas for this radio. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the grom was a great inclusion because its as quirky and analog as the 21bis.

 

Agree, and honestly DCS is sandbox sim with many variant of aircraft, I do not think there is anything wrong with including weapon or system that could have easily been use

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who want some better air-to-air representation: Recall that LNS included the Kh-66 GROM with the MiG-21bis. It could be possible that they might add the Skyflash for the purposes of gameplay.

 

I'll omit it as I prefer to keep my experience authentic as possible, but that would also allow for the AJS-37 to pose as a JA-37 from the 80's.

 

As excited as we are, we don't even have renders yet, so who knows?

 

In the end, the Viggen is an aircraft that will fit a niche in DCS that, I feel, is going unattended. We're getting multiroles. We're getting air superiority. We're getting rugged little ground attackers.

 

But, what about the air to ground profile of low and very fast? I've always felt having something along the lines of the F-111, Su-24, or Tornado would be insane fun as you dodge mountains, trees, and other hazards before dumping a load of hell onto targets.

 

The Viggen could definitely fill this niche to a satisfactory degree.

 

 

 

BEWARE THE DANE.

 

HE CAUSES WAR.

 

HE SKALS.

I must have missed something. The Kh-66 GROM is an air to surface missile isn't it? I guess it's beam riding, so you could use it for air to air on larger target.

"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Leonardo Da Vinci

 

 

"We are tied to the ocean. And when we go back to the sea, whether it is to sail or to watch - we are going back from whence we came."

John F. Kennedy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must have missed something. The Kh-66 GROM is an air to surface missile isn't it? I guess it's beam riding, so you could use it for air to air on larger target.

 

My point was that it was added to give a little more gameplay variety. However, the same isn't possible with the Viggen as has been pointed out; the cockpit layouts won't allow it, really.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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