Why no come any normal russian plane?

[Ghoost]

Why not make normal russian planes?  The russian planes 25yrs older then nato planes....

Why not make a balance? 

Why update the noskill hornet and viper always?

Nato simulator....

[Marroux]

Aloha,

 

There is the cubanace 's Su 57 Felon (https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/242354-su-57-felonefmasm-standalone/)...

 

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soukhoï_Su-57

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Ghoost said:

Why not make normal russian planes?  The russian planes 25yrs older then nato planes....

Why not make a balance? 

Why update the noskill hornet and viper always?

Nato simulator....

If it was possible they would do it and they really would want to, so don't act like you're the first with the idea.

[Morrov]

Russia has some strict laws regarding military information. Remember a few months ago when ED had to cancel the plans to update the Ka 50's systems (helicopter from 1982)?

All the info is simply classified, you can't make an accurate aicraft by guessing.

 

Besides, isn't there a MiG 29 in the works?

[Tank50us]

38 minutes ago, Morrov said:

Russia has some strict laws regarding military information. Remember a few months ago when ED had to cancel the plans to update the Ka 50's systems (helicopter from 1982)?

All the info is simply classified, you can't make an accurate aicraft by guessing.

 

Besides, isn't there a MiG 29 in the works?

There is. At the moment, the only way for them to make any Russian aircraft is if they're technically Soviet aircraft, and are no longer in service. At that point, you don't really need the governments permission, just an admission ticket to a museum that has one and a laser scanner.

[sergkar]

But those laws can only be applicable to residents of the federation. So a 3rd party could very well do it, provided they had the information. Also Eagle Dynamics is registered in Switzerland.

 

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

3 minutes ago, sergkar said:

But those laws can only be applicable to residents of the federation. So a 3rd party could very well do it, provided they had the information. Also Eagle Dynamics is registered in Switzerland.

 

Guess where the programmers still are? So long as there's a presence in Russia, there's always going to be concern about that. Take umbrage with that all you like, we certainly do, but our annoyances aren't exactly in the RuMoD's list of concerns.

Edited April 10, 2021 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Coxy_99]

13 minutes ago, sergkar said:

But those laws can only be applicable to residents of the federation. So a 3rd party could very well do it, provided they had the information. Also Eagle Dynamics is registered in Switzerland.

 

 

Correct 3rd parties have every chance to create Russian aircraft, Its only ED that can not, Modern ones atleast.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

9 minutes ago, Coxy_99 said:

 

Correct 3rd parties have every chance to create Russian aircraft, Its only ED that can not, Modern ones atleast.

Do they, though? ED still has final say in what gets distributed on their platform. I'd imagine that would come into question.

[Coxy_99]

6 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Do they, though? ED still has final say in what gets distributed on their platform. I'd imagine that would come into question.

 

Yes ED already have a list, 3rd party asks can we make X Y Z ED say yes or no depending in there list, Wags stated in a podcast 3rd parties can make Russian stuff.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Coxy_99

[Northstar98]

10 hours ago, sergkar said:

But those laws can only be applicable to residents of the federation. So a 3rd party could very well do it, provided they had the information. Also Eagle Dynamics is registered in Switzerland.

 

But the documentation isn't available so 3rd parties can't do it anyway - if it was available and publicly available then it wouldn't be a problem regardless.

 

I'm also pretty sure ED's main office is in Moscow even if they're registered in Switzerland, so yes, they're still going to conform to Russian laws so long as they have a presence in Russia.

 

The much more feasible solution is to do more BLUFOR aircraft that are contemporaries of REDFOR aircraft that we can actually do. Even the 9.12 MiG-29 from 1982 is a soft-confirm, "we want to do this" state - they're still assessing whether or not they can actually do it AFAIK.

 

And personally, I think going for as modern as we can get, post 2000s NATO aircraft, as great as they are, was kind of a shot to the foot for ED, given that their peer contemporaries on the REDFOR side are a complete non-starter, and so far the best we can hope for is the initial production variant of the MiG-29.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Northstar98

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

16 minutes ago, Coxy_99 said:

 

Yes ED already have a list, 3rd party asks can we make X Y Z ED say yes or no depending in there list, Wags stated in a podcast 3rd parties can make Russian stuff.

 

Oh wicked, that's awesome.

[sergkar]

8 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

But the documentation isn't available so 3rd parties can't do it anyway

 

That's not entirely correct. Russian jets are also flown by other nations. They try to export the same as any other, maybe even a little more relaxed in regards to whom they sell. Of course documentation on the most modern ones is limited, but that applies for NATO too. So maybe one can set hopes on chinese developers or indian ones?

[Northstar98]

29 minutes ago, sergkar said:

That's not entirely correct. Russian jets are also flown by other nations.

 

And the documentation still isn't available to my knowledge.

 

And so long as we're speculating, aircraft built under license probably have a contract in there, requiring that restricted documentation stays restricted. And domestic aircraft, or aircraft that aren't built under license (like the J-15) are still very much subject to domestic documentation restrictions and classification.

 

Quote

They try to export the same as any other, maybe even a little more relaxed in regards to whom they sell.

 

Maybe? Well again, so long as we're speculating it's likely that built under license aircraft have keeping classified documentation classified in part of the licensing. 

 

Quote

Of course documentation on the most modern ones is limited, but that applies for NATO too. So maybe one can set hopes on chinese developers or indian ones?

 

Yeah, but don't forget we have mid 2000s NATO aircraft, the more highly requested REDFOR aircraft are typically even newer than that. We'll see what Deka turns up as far as Chinese aircraft go (personally, I'm interested in a J-10A) but I have my doubts. 

 

Again, the much more feasible option is to develop older BLUFOR aircraft that are the contemporaries of REDFOR aircraft that are actually doable, and the list of potential candidates isn't exactly small.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Northstar98

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Just because a nation flies a particular aircraft, it doesn't follow that citizens of that nation can also get copies of its documentation. You also benefit immensely from SMEs and also access to examples of the airframe to crawl all over and get details of.

 

A lot of that might actually be out of reach for a lot of 3rd Party Devs. A lot of them are going to be limited to what's available. Getting ED's approval to do Russian aircraft is but one hurtle to clear.

Edited April 10, 2021 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Northstar98]

15 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Just because a nation flies a particular aircraft, it doesn't follow that citizens of that nation can also get copies of its documentation. You also benefit immensely from SMEs and also access to examples of the airframe to crawl all over and get details of.

 

A lot of that might actually be out of reach for a lot of 3rd Party Devs. A lot of them are going to be limited to what's available. Getting ED's approval to do Russian aircraft is but one hurtle to clear.

 

Exactly.

[sergkar]

 

5 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Just because a nation flies a particular aircraft, it doesn't follow that citizens of that nation can also get copies of its documentation.

That is of course true. All I'm saying is that it's not just about the russian laws and that I somehow doubt, that russian jets are more secret than others.

 

I see for example no barriers for a full fidelity Mig-29. It's not the newest, sure. But that was flewn by nearly all east block states. And for some time they kept some squadrons well beyond the cold war. From former eastern germany some were even transfered to the US - for study purposes.

 

14 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

the more highly requested REDFOR aircraft are typically even newer than that

Well, I don't know what is requested, but certainly all FC3-models are doable full fidelity. That is hardly a documentation problem. Yes, they are not very new, but still in actual use. Unless I oversee something here.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

11 minutes ago, sergkar said:

 

 

 

I see for example no barriers for a full fidelity Mig-29. It's not the newest, sure. But that was flewn by nearly all east block states. And for some time they kept some squadrons well beyond the cold war. From former eastern germany some were even transfered to the US - for study purposes.

 

 

It was, at one point. This stems from the change of MoD culture in the wake of the 2008 Russo-Georgian conflict, IIRC.  It maybe that which ever office the RuMoD that handles public outreach in this regard has loosened up on the topic. Still, they may be touchy about some things. So, 'MiG-29' is too wide for goalposts. It'll really depend upon the variant. The variant we're planned to receive, the 9.12, should indicate that perhaps the RuMoD sees newer versions to be more sensitive.

 

And just because a foreign nation, even a rival, receives examples isn't a guarantee. There are, actually, some -29s in civil hands in the US. Both that I know of are UBs, though. At least engine performance could be gathered. Also, I don't think any of those MiG-29Gs ever ended up in the US? I think the Luftwaffe just let American observers go over their examples in great detail.

 

So, I'd still expect some pushback from the RuMoD through ED, but if they're saying certain airframes are available for third parties? They could be warming up to this sort of interest. So, that's at least that particular barrier at least reasoned with.

Edited April 10, 2021 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Northstar98]

On 4/10/2021 at 12:56 PM, sergkar said:

That is of course true. All I'm saying is that it's not just about the russian laws and that I somehow doubt, that russian jets are more secret than others.

 

Russia is a bit more of a problem because the law here is quite vague, which makes it especially easy to convict somebody under it for obtaining information.

 

And what's deemed as classified is up to them to decide.

 

Quote

I see for example no barriers for a full fidelity Mig-29. It's not the newest, sure. But that was flewn by nearly all east block states. And for some time they kept some squadrons well beyond the cold war. From former eastern germany some were even transfered to the US - for study purposes.

 

It depends what aircraft they want to go for - former GDR MiG-29s were updated to NATO standards AFAIK. But I'm pretty sure ED will try and go for a Soviet VVS 9.12 MiG-29 circa 80s.

 

And again, a full fidelity 9.12 MiG-29 is still in a soft-confirm state, being something ED wants to do - and IIRC they're assessing whether or not they can actually do it. 

 

Quote

Well, I don't know what is requested, but certainly all FC3-models are doable full fidelity. That is hardly a documentation problem.

 

It depends - FC3 has simplified systems which can be made generic. The RADARs all work the same way just with different parameters and I think are missing modes and/or have incorrect performance. The good thing here though is that they're all basically out of service or at the very least completely superseded by successive variants, so there's less grounds to keep them sensitive - but that's up to the Russian government to decide (even the operation of the EW suite of the Avro Vulcan is still mostly classified and that aircraft was retired in the early 80s - that's the UK for you).

 

Quote

Yes, they are not very new, but still in actual use. Unless I oversee something here.

 

Mostly things like the MiG-29K which was introduced in the early 2010s, the Su-35 which was introduced in the mid 2010s.

 

The Su-30MKI was introduced in the early 2000s, but that's more of a GREENFOR aircraft. The baseline Su-30 isn't that much more modern or capable (to my knowledge) than our current Su-27S. The Su-30SM and M2 are also much more modern.

 

There is the Su-30MKK which would provide some more multi-role capability, but that's if (presumably Deka) can actually do one. As I understand it the current JF-17 (as fantastic a job as Deka did) is a hybrid of a Block I and Block II aircraft.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Northstar98

[sergkar]

The german airforce "got" in 1990 20 29-A and 4 29-UB. They were in the forthcoming years heavily modified/modernized to comply to NATO standards and systems and around 1999 sold to Poland and are - as far as I know - still in use there. So, fair enough, old models. Nevertheless I would think, that many would be happy to have even those in full fidelity.

 

I'm not a developer, so I don't know if that's somewhat possible, but I would think that it might be possible to modify a model once it is build in full fidelity. So theoretical it could be possible to start with one version and then derive from that as information allows. Isn't that so?

[Mars Exulte]

5 hours ago, Ghoost said:

Why not make normal russian planes?  The russian planes 25yrs older then nato planes....

Why not make a balance? 

Why update the noskill hornet and viper always?

Nato simulator....

 

 

This has been discussed dozens of times. We don't need to go through all this crap again.

 

 The armchair expert's saying they think this or that is irrelevant. They've said they can't and won't and that's that. Your agreement is not required.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Mars Exulte

[Ghoost]

6 hours ago, Marroux said:

Aloha,

 

There is the cubanace 's Su 57 Felon (https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/242354-su-57-felonefmasm-standalone/)...

 

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soukhoï_Su-57

Its not offical... and low quality mod

[StevanJ]

5 minutes ago, Ghoost said:

Its not offical... and low quality mod

The first Hi fidelity mod will come the minute Putin steps down as PM.
The team have got you covered.

[Vonotar]

44 minutes ago, StevanJ said:

The first Hi fidelity mod will come the minute Putin steps down as PM.
The team have got you covered

This mean never

[Dragon1-1]

The problem with other nations using Russian hardware is that they're just as, if not more, secretive about it. India is very tight-lipped about its own birds, especially modern stuff, and China seems to have some sort of agreement with Deka, but are also very cautious about what they release to public. Other countries that use modern Russian jets are similar. 

 

MiG-29A is an exception, being flown by Poland and Germany, but it's an old aircraft. There are also English manuals for it available, and that's what we're going to get. IIRC, ED also recently stated that a Su-27S isn't off the table at some point. I'm quietly hoping for Su-33 as well, since it has the same avionics (it's basically Su-27S with AAR and carrier ops). Interestingly, there are privately owned 27s in the US, though they seem to have been stripped of the original avionics.

 

In any case, for most of the 2000s domestic Russian hardware was in a bit of lousy state. Best stuff went to India and China, with domestic forces stuck with late Soviet equipment. It wasn't until early 2010s that they really got their act together.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Dragon1-1