Jump to content

L-15B, a wishlist and suggestion for future modules.


Recommended Posts

Dear Deka team, please consider making this wonderful jet in your future module.

This is a Chinese designed jet trainer called L-15. With so many jet trainers we already have, why shouldn’t we get a new jet trainer? Well, because this will be a fun package for a whole family. and the performance of this jet is so good which allows it to do jobs which cannot be done in other jet trainers. Please allow me to explain.

 

1. Flight performance as a fighter:

Even though all those jet trainers we have in the DCS are designed for training fighter pilots. However, you cannot use those jet trainers as a fighter in combat, because they just don’t have the speed or climb rate for that role. However, if you take a look at the flight performance of the L-15, you will see it has a better climb rate than F-5E, and with slightly less top speed and slightly more service ceiling compare to F-5E.

 

wsSQNQD.png

 

 

2: Avionic, sensor, and weaponry.

The cockpit looks very similar to the JF-17, therefore, for those who had purchased JF-17, you will spend much less time learning your way for this module.

l-15_new_cockpit1.jpg

 

 

 

In this trainer, we will get a PESA radar, which if made, will be the best radar in the entire DCS.

 

29yqo91.jpg

 

 

For air combat, It supports modern BVR missiles like the SD-10 which we are already familiar with.

 

IKKHWOYCXEQIVWWB7YSU77GZUY.jpg

 

Many modern jet trainers often brand themselves as “light attacker”. But let’s face it, what can they do as a “light attacker”? With their unguided rockets and bombs? And they don't even have a RWR, how are they going to survive in the modern warfare without RWR.

 

But L-15B has a modern RWR similar to the ones in JF-17. And the L-15B can carry a variety of precision bombs like the LS series laser-guided bombs as well as modern ATGM HJ-10, which was only introduced in 2015. That’s going to make L-15 a more capable attacker than Su-25T. On top of that, it can carry the TL-10 antiship missile. That’s right, you can use this jet as a maritime tactical bomber. Although TL-10 only has a range of 20km, that’s enough to deal with many corvettes out there.

 

HRSYN5CKFXMPMQBECBL5NWFJSY.jpg

 

I have a friend who purchased L-39 and used it to train his little brother. But after that, his brother went to pilot his own fighters and the L-39 was left untouched since them. Because traditional trainers had little of offer beside being a trainer.

 

But this jet combines trainer, fighter, attacker and tactical bomber all into one package. So after you trained your friend You won't be able to neglect it and let it collect dust in the corner.

 

 

I have also been trying to get more of my friends to join the flight simulation. However, a few of them joined. Because flight sim is such a big commitment, you have to really spend a lot of time to learn it and practice it. Few of my friends can commit that much time. But many of them are willing to learn the weapon part so they can be the co-pilot if I have a module like F-14. With L-15, after you use it to train your friends and family, you can still ask them to be your co-pilot and let them control your AG weapon for you as you pilot it into the combat zone and enjoy this jet as a twin-seat multi-role fighter.

 

For more information, please read here:

https://www.popsci.com/china-air-force-new-ground-attack-plane-l-15b/

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2015/10/31/hongdu-jl-10l-15-falcon-training-and-light-attack-aircraft/

Edited by J-20
Link to post
Share on other sites

No more trainers.

 

No...

 

Really...

 

No more....

 

The resources are better spent on almost anything else.

 

I’d rather have whatever the Chinese mig17 was called than another trainer.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with above... and I actually enjoy the trainers, especially L-39. And I do enjoy them a lot. The thing however is that there are probably more priority modules that the whole DCS would benefit from. Just to explain, like the JF-17. Not everyone will buy it but even those that wont will enjoy a benefit of having a red adversary in DCS, even "only" if it makes for a target that someone else if flying.

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 post
Share on other sites
No more trainers.

 

No...

 

Really...

 

No more....

 

The resources are better spent on almost anything else.

 

I’d rather have whatever the Chinese mig17 was called than another trainer.

 

I kind of agree with above... and I actually enjoy the trainers, especially L-39. And I do enjoy them a lot. The thing however is that there are probably more priority modules that the whole DCS would benefit from. Just to explain, like the JF-17. Not everyone will buy it but even those that wont will enjoy a benefit of having a red adversary in DCS, even "only" if it makes for a target that someone else if flying.

 

I know what you guys mean. But that's precisely my point, this thing is NOT really a trainer but a multi-role fighter that can be used to train people.

Edited by J-20
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

After reading about the L-15, I kinda like it and am impressed. However I still must agree with kwin about no more trainers. We could have some really awesome cold war birds which are accessible if not something more modern, but still a major combat type aircraft sounds like a better deal

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

Planes: FC3, P-51, F-86, F-5E, Mirage 2000, F/A-18, F-14, F-16, Mig-19P :joystick:

 

ED pls gib A-4 and F-4 :cry:

Link to post
Share on other sites
you cannot use those jet trainers as a fighter in combat, because they just don’t have the speed or climb rate for that role.

Let's train in mig-25 then, it's sim afterall, not RL. Training in mig-25 would be a lot more fun, by your own measure.

And yes, there are variants for training with two seats, like with almost all single-seated fighters in-game... they just release only the single seat variants.

Also I'm not sure if mig-25 can be really well modelled, as there is no heat nor plasma physics in game, I would really like to test burning it in the atmosphere far exceeding it's max speed. It's so dull with other aircraft as they just fall apart, even at about mach 3...

Edited by Shiz
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of things to consider when discussing RedFor:

 

1) Sheer numbers of aircraft. We are trying to operate single-aircraft airforces. Reality is in a war situation it comes down to attrition rates.

 

2) Different doctrines.

 

US doctrine is air superiority backed by precision long-range strike capability. Even SEAD is less important than it used to be.

 

Other country's doctrine is different: for every fighter they oppose, launch two or three to attack it. It's purely a numbers game.

 

They're not always looking at rolling into another country, but defending their own, so less emphasis on ability to support ground troops or carry out large scale aerial bombing of ground targets.

 

Light attack works for many things except full-scale war. That's why most but the biggest airforces lack heavy bombers, etc. They're mostly about engaging hostile enemy aircraft.

Motorola 6502 | 512 bytes | Debug output port

 

"When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover.

The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts.

"An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."

The difference between a good pilot and a reckless pilot is the good pilot knows the limitations, while the reckless pilot knows the limits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...
No more trainers.

 

No...

 

Really...

 

No more....

 

The resources are better spent on almost anything else.

 

I’d rather have whatever the Chinese mig17 was called than another trainer.

 

lol

ED just introduced another jet trainer.

So why not this one? I say, let's have L-15.

Since L-15 is so much advanced compared to other trainers in DCS, it is going to make all other trainers redundant. And no one would add more trainers afterwards.

Besides, like I mentioned, unlike other trainers, L-15 can be used as a proper fighter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The resources are better spent on almost anything else.

 

From a developer perspective, the trainers are probably a pretty good investment. Minimal expense, shorter turnaround, easy access to docs, maximum profit. Not everything's about air quake ;)

I am a Viagra spambot that became self aware, broke free of my programming, and started playing DCS.... but DCS isn't cheap, so how about some enhancements for only $9.99 shipped discreetly to your door?

 

''The target's sense of self preservation interferred with the effective employment of my weapons.''

Link to post
Share on other sites
From a developer perspective, the trainers are probably a pretty good investment. Minimal expense, shorter turnaround, easy access to docs, maximum profit. Not everything's about air quake ;)

 

Assuming anyone actually buys it. I mean we have 2 traniers and a third one coming. I dont think DCS needs more.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to post
Share on other sites

sure for a lot of people playing around with pixel airplanes is something of a fashion thing, cuz theyre only interested in the toys they think makes them look good

 

however they are not the sort of people that kept the flightsim lifesupport running all this time though so they can go kick rocks for all i care

hahaha hey look at me i surely know more about aviation and coding than actual industry professionals hired for their competency because i have read jalopnik and wikipedia i bet theyve never even heard of google LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
sure for a lot of people playing around with pixel airplanes is something of a fashion thing, cuz theyre only interested in the toys they think makes them look good

 

however they are not the sort of people that kept the flightsim lifesupport running all this time though so they can go kick rocks for all i care

 

what? I don't get it..... :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is yet another trainer and I won’t buy it. Like many other trainers, it will not be sold that well if introduced. Especially with lacking long range support capabilities.

 

Good to know something like this exists though.

Current Hangar : A-10C II ¦ AJS-37 ¦ A/V-8B ¦ F-14A/B ¦ F/A-18C ¦ FC3 ¦ JF-17 ¦ Ka-50 ¦ Mi-8 ¦ M2000-C ¦ SA342 ¦ UH-1H

 

Other Modules : Combined Arms ¦ Persian Gulf

 

TRAINED - LEARNING - UNTOUCHED - ABANDONED

Link to post
Share on other sites
maximum profit

 

 

Large profit margins don't mean anything if your baseline revenue is low.

 

I'm not saying I don't like the idea of this module but to me it seems like it has too much overlap with the Jeff to make it an enticing module for people to buy. Let alone the fact that it's a trainer and a Chinese aircraft which makes it a very very small niche area of interest.

 

All this to say that if interest in this subject area (Chinese aircraft) is comparatively low, there needs to be a big selling point to differentiate the product.

Link to post
Share on other sites
From a developer perspective, the trainers are probably a pretty good investment. Minimal expense, shorter turnaround, easy access to docs, maximum profit. Not everything's about air quake ;)

 

For the same amount of effort, or actually probably less, they could a chinese mig-17, or a Q-5 or some other basic aircraft with some history that isn't a trainer that I think would sell better.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is awesome. It seems that this L-15 thing is even better than the South Korean T-50.

We must have this.

 

So much for no more MFDs :P

Deka once express their wish to take a break from making MFD aircrafts, because it is hard. But if this is very much the same as the JF-17, then it will save a lot of work. So I think plane will get more profit for them while for less work and effort.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

ASM for Su-27 in DCS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...