Jump to content

Why can't we have some modern Russian planes with clickable cockpit?


Recommended Posts

Because they're classified. Russians are much more secretive than the NATO, and fighter pilots aren't quite the cultural icons they are in the US (no Russian equivalent to Top Gun that I know of :) ). Moreover, the Western planes are from mid-2000s, a time when Russia lagged behind in terms of new aircraft, anyway. Realistically, vintage Russian planes like MiG-29A are the latest we're going to see, unless some 3rd party devs get their hands on documentation for something more advanced, and even then, don't expect full-color MFDs and all that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now we have tons of western planes: f-16, f-18,Mirage etc. Why can't we have some Russian birds. If you are worried about having conflict with your Flaming Cliff vintage plane set, you can do something like mig-29k or su-35.
Just watched a video on YouTube that said MiG-29 and 23 are in development.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As can be seen in the interview, ED cannot access any Russian aircraft data, as these are all classified!

 

 

 

 

From

(with the first look at ED's new Moscow office):

 

 

* MAC (Modern Air Combat) will be a "game" for "casual players". MAC is aimed at those users who already outgrew War Thunder, but not yet ready for DCS. Non-clickable cockpits, simplified systems, and multiple game modes and presets designed for shorter (30 mins or so) sessions. With ranks, achievements and other blings.

 

* ED will be running their own multiplayer servers for MAC. They also have plans for their own DCS MP servers.

 

* ED's two main criteria for choosing their next module: 1. Profitability (first and foremost) 2. Documentation.

 

* F-16 has been a huge commercial success for ED.

 

* ED would really like to make a modern clickable Russian module. They are trying to find a way to do it properly, and without breaking any laws. All legit data is classified. And what's available is insufficient for a decent product.

 

* The new weather system and clouds are almost done. We should expect them this winter, but no hard promises.

 

* The all-new explosions, fire and smoke effects are also nearly finished and now being fine-tuned. Will be released "soon".

 

* We should not expect Vulkan in DCS any time soon. They are working on it, but this task is monumental. DCS will stay Windows-only (no Metal).

 

* The new payware Ka-50 expansion is temporary on hold, as ED is busy with other projects. Will not be released in 2020.

 

* Someday: new pilot models and animations (ED is quite impressed with Heatblur's models).

 

* The new ATC for land-based aerodromes is still at a planning stage (ED is busy finishing the SuperCarrier's ATC). Due to many differences between Russian and Western approaches to ATC, ED will have to completely rework the current system, most likely splitting it in two.

 

* Animated ground crew for land-based aerodromes is a possibility, but not before the SuperCarrier is fully completed.

 

* As for the SuperCarrier, they have plans to add a briefing room to it, complete with its own animated crew.

 

* Combined Arms is not dead. They have plans to add player-controlled naval units. And someday, maybe, a fully clickable vehicle/tank.

 

* Mi-24: there will be multi-crew support, but later in the Early Access. AI co-pilot for Mi-24 will be more sophisticated than Jester.

 

* Dynamic campaign is currently in the active development. The strategic part (logistics, assets & resource management) is progressing nicely. The basic ability to assign combat tasks to AI units has been recently implemented, but there's still lots and lots of work to do.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

It has been mentioned in interview's, the Mig-29 is something we want to do, but permissions still need to be given, it is a difficult and long process.

 

thank you.

  • Like 3

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 10 Pro x64, NVIDIA MSI RTX 2080Ti VENTUS GP, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 32GB DDR @3000, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A long time ago I think ED said it wanted to do a Su-27SM or Su-27S, what happened to that

 

I have no information sorry.

 

 

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 10 Pro x64, NVIDIA MSI RTX 2080Ti VENTUS GP, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 32GB DDR @3000, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK it's down chiefly to 2 things:

 

1.) Lack of publicly available documentation.

2.) Licensing issues with the manufacturer/Russian MOD.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because they're classified. Russians are much more secretive than the NATO

 

Russia has plenty of people who knows how to keep their mouth shut. They don't have such a reasons to brag or tell things publically. It is just simple honesty in the work that it is done and it is not made a big thing about it.

 

, and fighter pilots aren't quite the cultural icons they are in the US (no Russian equivalent to Top Gun that I know of :) ).

 

Actually being a Hero of Russia is a high merit, and there is no similar thing in the USA at all. The Hero status in the Russia is part of their culture, where a average citizen has possibility to become a hero by doing well their job etc. It is not like a "heroes and superheroes" with "I am a rockstar" thing as it is in the USA.

 

Moreover, the Western planes are from mid-2000s, a time when Russia lagged behind in terms of new aircraft, anyway. Realistically, vintage Russian planes like MiG-29A are the latest we're going to see, unless some 3rd party devs get their hands on documentation for something more advanced, and even then, don't expect full-color MFDs and all that.

 

Actually Russia didn't lag behind the West. It is just that West don't usually know what Soviet Union and then Russia had. Yes the Economic War did require restart of the Russian economy, but it didn't stop the development and research in many key areas. Russia kept developing new weapons and new systems and all other things but just in smaller scale, and not trying to promote everything with the "rockstar" mentality.

 

Example, in 1992 the Su-27M (aka Su-35) looked like this in some prototypes:

 

su-35-serial-707-06.thumb.jpg.3d3bdd6986bdf3b4623e04597ee02c80.jpg

 

In 1993 there was something like this (Su-37, notice the side stick):

 

su-35-serial-712-03.jpg.4e3b34980078695b6ef16090b8463876.jpg

 

The Su-27M (T-10M) project was started in 1982 and ended in 1996.

New radar N011, RWR systems, ECM jammers, seats at 30 degree angle (same as F-16) etc.

 

If we would look what a Su-27SKM/SM offered in 2006, it would be IMHO superior that what the latest F/A-18C, F-16C or F-15C/E would offer:

 

su-27-sm-44.jpg.b08665ebb6330144c6a5c42c5947335c.jpg

 

The USA weapons manufacturers stopped developing F/A-18, F-16 and F-15 as they so much were waiting F-22 and F-35 to come out. Those aircrafts are anyways as well their "frontline" aircrafts as "crap for the enemy" unlike the 5th Gen that is praised and protected so it would be the technology that is given only for top pilots etc.

The 5th Gen fighters as well are likely put in the service such a way that you preferred give it only to new pilots that has better learning curve for adapting new technologies and new means to fight with most advanced systems.

Russians goes wild when they get to experiment things, try new ideas and they build complete aircrafts for just one idea to be tested. Then they might end up with complete fleet of fighters where each is different (similar to F-16).

 

The DCS community would go crazy if there would become a Su-27SM available to operate, it would likely be much newer than what example JF-17 is right now.

 

In 1997 a MiG-29SMT was as well IMHO likely better by avionics:

 

Izgled-instrument-table-MiG-a-29SMT.png.cf381c81164bb34ed7ce53d7103e890a.png

 

It would be amazing to actually get to see what all kind things that 90-2005 systems in Russia were capable to do etc, as the photos doesn't still tell so much.

 

 

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

It has been mentioned in interview's, the Mig-29 is something we want to do, but permissions still need to be given, it is a difficult and long process.

 

thank you.

 

Why not an FC3 level variant, perhabs with some full fidelity features? You could make a more modern version of either the 29 or -27/-30 that way. We need something, the russian side can not defend itself at all at the moment. https://forums.eagle.ru/filedata/fetch?id=6735775&d=1603062188

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because they're classified. Russians are much more secretive than the NATO

 

If they were secretive then the Mig-29 would not be so widely exported. It might be classified, but let's be clear that this is not a rational process.


Edited by gavagai
spelling!

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If they were secretive than the Mig-29 would not be so widely exported. It might be classified, but let's be clear that this is not a rational process.

 

It's not that simple, the F-35 is wildly exported too...

 

It might be that these countries who operate the MiG-29 are bound under some kind of contract to maintain security, as is the case with the F-35...

 

Seeing that it was mostly exported to countries that were members of the Soviet union at the time, I can imagine some kind of security contract being likely.

 

As for today, it's only really Poland that's a likely contender for sourcing a license and documentation, but no idea what spec their aircraft are (AFAIK, they're project 9.12 Fulcrum-As or possibly early Cs, some bought from Germany after they sold all of their 29s).

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right, it is not just one thing, but it is the whole picture.

 

Actually Russia didn't lag behind the West. It is just that West don't usually know what Soviet Union and then Russia had.

 

@Fri13 It's more likely the secrecy was precisely to conceal how far behind they were lagging. Any cockpit can have MFDs. It's the sensors they're connected to that matter.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't we have an FAQ that we can direct people to for questions that have been answered multiple times?

  • Like 1

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now we have tons of western planes: f-16, f-18,Mirage etc. Why can't we have some Russian birds. If you are worried about having conflict with your Flaming Cliff vintage plane set, you can do something like mig-29k or su-35.

 

Just by the your question I can tell you don't read these forums often because this question is thee top question that gets asked the most by newcomers that don't bother to do a little research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If they were secretive then the Mig-29 would not be so widely exported. It might be classified, but let's be clear that this is not a rational process.

 

Russia knows the US has Su-27s flying around Nevada. Even still ED needs government and Corporate permission if it wants its Moscow offices to stay in good standing. Just like they can't use publicly available classified information to make the blufor planes. They have to get the data through the proper channels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If they were secretive then the Mig-29 would not be so widely exported. It might be classified, but let's be clear that this is not a rational process.

 

Do note that the primary reason they're not making MiG-29 right now is presumably because they're busy with F-18 and F-16, neither of which is anywhere near ready. I'd rather have them finish those first. It's been often mentioned that MiG-29A should be OK, however this is not what a lot of people want (though I'd love that one). What they want is something from the latest generation, that could compete with F-18 and F-16 in multiplayer. That is a lot harder to do, MiG-29A, was widely exported and even operated by NATO (first Germany and now Poland), its docs are as easy to get as any old-ish NATO plane, but it wouldn't have the R-77-1, advanced radar or any MFDs. It's basically a souped-up MiG-21, even the FC-3 cockpit makes this painfully clear. If you have the MiG-21, you can guess what most switches would do if they worked. The MiG-29A won't stop the symmetric multiplayer whining.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Russia knows the US has Su-27s flying around Nevada. Even still ED needs government and Corporate permission if it wants its Moscow offices to stay in good standing. Just like they can't use publicly available classified information to make the blufor planes. They have to get the data through the proper channels.

 

To be clear, I'm not saying it is ED that is irrational...:music_whistling:

  • Like 1

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's more likely the secrecy was precisely to conceal how far behind they were lagging. Any cockpit can have MFDs. It's the sensors they're connected to that matter.

 

Yeah-yeah, for example R-73 was so lagging behind aim-9 through the 80s that it had to be classified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys are reading a bit too much into it,

Think a little fellas, ED has always said it isn't out of the question for a third party to do such a plane but its tricky for them.

 

Now let's put on a tinfoil hat for a second and think, If I had to wager to guess; why would the Russian MoD give potentially sensitive data to a company with close ties to western militaries and in some part run by a former CIA dude, on types like the Su-27SM Su-30M2 etc which only recently went out of production?

 

Back on topic I would be very happy if they gave us something like along the lines of a Su-27SK/SM or Su-30M2

 

Possibly even a partially upgraded Su-33 FF to be sold in a pack with the Kuznetsov face lift and Syria map

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...