40-60 MiG-29SMTs? Can’t they decide?

The F-22 is completely different. Everything about it is classified. No information about it is hard fact yet. Have you even seen a picture of its cockpit? I have seen plenty of footage of Hokums attacking ground targets.

Of course I’ve seen the F/A-22 cockpit. Haven’t you? 🙂

Actually- have you seen the true, honest-to-god Ka-50 cockpit (not the Ka-50N mockup cockpit)- I haven’t (this is irrelevant to the discussion, I’m just interested).

And I say again… the stated reason it was dropped was because the F-15s avionics were more complicated to implement than expected. Not a lack of knowledge of the Su-25TM.

When was the Su-25TM cancellation announced? If we can find the forum discussion (if it still exists), that will settle the issue.

How do you know that? I have seen images taken from videos published in magazines showing the Shkval-M being used. In fact one Photo published in AFM or AirInt showed a Vikhr about to hit a Tu-16 drone in air to air mode.

Information is more widely available for Russian aircraft these days than for US aircraft. The different modes of the Kopyo radar are relatively well known… it is offered as a Mig-21 radar upgrade.
Shkval-M has been used in combat and information about it released. Also being Russian developers they have access to the wide range of Russian material on the subject and probably contacts as well.

Perhaps, I’m going off what I remember Matt Wagner claimed on the forums rather than any knowledge of what Russian developers should have access to, I admit.

Yes, if someone like me, on the other side of the world with just the internet and magazines to find out can know such things there is no way these Russian developers could know anything… 🙂

See above admission.

I am sure Boeing opened its doors and archives for these Russians. Having plenty of sources is not that great if they are conflicting… and as most will use estimates they undoubtedly will conflict.

Who said anything about Boeing?

Yes the Mother of all Fools is always pregnant.

LOL

I assume you are talking multiplayer here… I am not interested in Multiplayer games.

Blasphemy! Single player simming is my first love, but FLANKER 1.0 2.0 have always been immensely popular multiplayer games, especially in Australia (odd).

You stated above that they should do their best or not bother. They haven’t upgraded the Mig-29 or Su-27 models… in LOMAC 2 should they just drop them and put in planes that are really wanted? … Tornados, Harriers, Tomcats, F-16s, F-18s, Gripens, Rafales, Typhoons, M2Ks…

The Su-27 and MiG-29 were only slightly improved, it is true, but it’s not like they were lacking in features from their previous incarnation in FLANKER 1.0 & 2.0- they were already pretty damn good.

[quote]They needn’t be all in the first release. Perhaps 3-4 in the inital game (as they are all rather different) and then 1 plane added with each major upgrade (adding new ground and non flyable vehicles and aircraft too).

Which three were they? The Su-33 and Mig-29 were in Flanker 2.5 . Flanker Attack was to add the Frogfoot (Su-25)… hense the attack in the name, but then they got more ambitious and went for MAC which required some sort of balance.

MiG-29 9.12 (Soviet and export), MiG-29S 9.13S, and Su-25. As a result, mostly, the ubisoft boards were filled with nothing but whinging at “too many Russian aircraft, too few American” (blasphemy) and “I want F-16/F-14/F-22/F-whateverthehell” whiners.

The Su-39 only used podded radar for BVR AAMs (R-27 and R-77) and for all weather day/night ground attack. Most of its other capabilites like the use of PGMs and improved navigation, and ECM did not rely on the radar. In fact its primary target detection and engagement system was Shkval-M. Descriptions of its mission suggest that it was a mini Tornado. It could autopilot from takeoff to landing. 10-12km from the target area the Shkval was turned on, the target detected and locked… all the pilot had to do was fire. The system was so sophisticated that if he was in a flight of aircraft their flight paths could be programed to come into the target from different directions at different times to confuse the target… automatically of course. The auto pilot would then take him back to base or he could attack the target again or select a different target.

It was also supposed to be equipped with a FLIR pod of some sort, but it seems that it was a premature development (I guess SAPSAN would be it now)- you’d have to have that in there as well (and I don’t think they did)- I suppose they could’ve added a Kop’yo radar, but consider the F-15C avionics- which is almost entirely a radar issue, I would bet- there’s probably a lot more work in there than they could put in a patch.l

First of all we are talking about an alternate reality. It could well have gone into service.

That doesn’t change the fact that it’s unknown, because this is not that alternate reality 🙂 It’s the same as trying to model an F/A-22. We sorta/kinda know what it can do, that doesn’t mean we know exactly how it does it.

Also much of how it works and what it can do is known. You don’t actually think the Russian developers had access to detailed US information on the F-15Cs ECM suite or classified info on its true radar capabilities do you?

No, but it’s as faitful as they can get without access to classified material- advantage to it being so well known and around for so long. The Su-39 is not the same.

[quote]Or for that matter the exact details of the Su-27 or Mig-29S? You’d need military clearance to export it.

(Note the primary avionic requiring modelling would be the Shkval-M electro optic system that is the same as fitted to Ka-50 Hokums.

Which doesn’t help, because the Ka-50 is virtually in the same boat- they didn’t know the first thing about the Su-39s avionics apart from the fact it had Kop’yo radar, Shkval-M etc. HUD modes etc? Clueless. I’d rather have it done as best as possible, or not at all, not some bodgy approximation that they just made up.

Being pod based the Kopyo could be added later with the patch that adds the air to ground radar with the F-18… the Shkval would be sufficient to add Vikhr ATGMs and give descent TV and LGB capability and the new built in air defence suite would allow ARMs like AS-11 and AS-17 to be used.

That’s exactly the kind of bodgy approximation I’m talking about- it’s capabilities/operating modes and basically what’s required to faithfully reproduce its most important features are unknown. The F-15C, on the other hand, I can pick out information on its various radar modes, what the HUD acts like in those modes, and how it performs from a myriad of books.

If they need to make it Falcon 5 to make it sell who cares if the franchise dies? For some reason some seem to believe that you need to have American aircraft to sell games. If that were true where are all the games that portray just American aircraft? The real problem is lack of sales of Flight sims. Betraying the people who actually bought your other two games is not a good way to support your customer base. I guess noone bought IL-2… that was a Soviet Plane wasn’t it? Sure there are morons out there. I have actually heard of an American customer that returned IL-2 because he said he got it home and found he could only fly communist or fascist aircraft… he wanted to fly American planes.

You also haven’t heard of the people who never picked up IL-2 in the first place because they didn’t know what the hell it was 🙂

LO:MAC was not a ‘betrayal’- it was a next step. God knows I’m sure the Flanker community was kind of sick of blowing each other’s Su-27s up.

If that were really true then why bother at all with flight sims… just make FPS.

That is closer to reality than you think.

By Flanker 2 they had created a market… now they are turning their back on that market because there is currently a gap.

I would hardly call adding three (MiG-29A,MiG-29S, Su-25) Russian planes to the mix and two American to an already excellent product a ‘turning their back on the market’. Unless you are defining the market as ‘I will fly nothing but the Su-27’ types.

You missed my point. You said a pilot flying a PVO mission might be too boring. I stated that the game would always be scalable anyway… realism vs gameplay. ie a Flagon with unlimited missiles and fuel vs 20 bombers and any cruise missiles they might fire, or a more realistic challange of engaging 1 bomber but with only two missiles and two cannon pods. 100% realism is of course not possible… I meant as much realism as they could manage with all the technical requirements to keep the perfectionists like me happy, but with the ability to make someone who just wants to fly around, launch missiles and blow things up happy too. With such a simplified flight model the actual shape of the outside of the aircraft (ie aircraft type) is irrelevant.

But they wouldn’t be able to keep the perfectionists happy- not with that many aircraft. The more aircraft you add, the less chance you have of producing them all with an equal level of detail.

From what I have heard the engine doesn’t allow for twin cockpits or air to ground radar. The potential addition of the Hornet suggests that the air to ground radar problem will be solved… I doubt they will change enough to add a second aircrew… they will be focussing on bug fixing now as we speak.

Yeah, the first patch is already out.

Yeah, the focus on the new market has led to very little being done to change and update the Russian aircraft models and one Russian aircraft to be dropped. I am sorry but I don’t see that as a good thing.

Considering three extra Russian aircraft were added, and the dropped aircraft was a complete unknown that they can’t even talk to anyone about (unless Sukhoi is feeling talkative about the intimate workings of its avionics- fat chance), I really don’t think anything was lost at all.

I am pretty sure it could be accurately modelled now. They didn’t drop it because they couldn’t model it, they dropped it because modelling the F-15s complex avionics took longer than they had expected. It is the first step on a slippery slope. Most of the add on aircraft will be western and the theatre will change so they can be used properly. Then… hmmm this program is getting a bit big… lets overhaul it… which aircraft do we need.

I remember when the Su-39 was cancelled- one of the reasons was that they didn’t feel they could do it properly. I already wasn’t happy with the Kop’yo missing, and adding something like that in a patch- I doubt it.

Yes, I am quite aware that LOMAC followed Flanker 2.0’s tradition of accuracy. The Su-25TM was designed circa 1985 in anticipation and based on experience in real combat in Afghanistan and translating that to a potential European theatre. (ie the better nav and jamming systems weren’t necessary for Afghanistan but were deemed necessary for use in a “real” war.)

Yes, but it’s not in service and it’s avionics capabilities aren’t known enough to be modelled faithfully. You could make something up, but it’d be pretty lame.

So was Flanker 1 and Flanker 2.0. Why should what equates to being Flanker 3.0 be any different?

Because Flanker 1.0 and 2.0 didn’t sell well- there are few enough hardcore modern flight sims out there as it is, god knows I don’t want to see them kill the franchise by crappy sales.

So why do you think such games would be guaranteed successes if no other software company will gamble money on them?

Because people (American sim grognards especially) love the A-10. Give the people what they want, get money. It’s not the software companies that don’t wanna do it- it’s those ******** publishers.

Why not just call it Flanker 3.0. Why does there need to be balance? How much balance is there in Falcon 4?

As I said, sales.

LOMAC tries to accurately model MAC… you think set on full complexity it is going to be fun for everyone? There are those that want a game to shoot down enemy planes and those who want the complexity of flying the real thing… or as close as possible. Both those needs could be met with any combination of game structures… ie 100% realism to 100% arcade and lots of stops on the way.

The effort required for 100% realism for those planes you mentioned would make the project much more expensive, and publishers won’t stand for that, especially with planes that unfortunately most people have never heard of. Besides, pretty much the MiG-31/B/BS would be the only plane that would fit the MAC part, and it’s a huge job in itself. Though I wouldn’t mind an expansion doing both it and the ill-covered F-14A/D (depending)

True but then this is like Flanker 3.0. I was not PO’ed when Falcon 4 came out and the only aircraft you could fly was still just a boring F-16.

I hated Falcon 4 🙂 F-16, *yawn* snooze. Flanker 2.0 was good, but it lacked ‘soul’ – it was technically excellent, but cold. That it was the first proper hardcore russian jet sim was what did it for me, but it didn’t do too well in the US- throwing some American aircraft into the mix is a good thing- widen your customer base, add balance for more interesting multiplayer, and increase the prospects of a cool sequel/

Originally posted by GarryB
[B]The Su-39 was dropped because the Avionics for the F-15 took longer than expected. If it was the fact that it wasn’t in service and it is set in the near future then the German Mig-29s shouldn’t be there either.

No, it was the fact that it wasn’t in service *and* it was new. The German MiG-29s weren’t hard to model, they are barely that much different from the Russian MiG-29- which was well known to the Russian developers. The Su-39 is almost completely unknown. This is a hardcore sim, not some cheap arcade nonsense like Jetfighter, for example.

BTW, it’s not set in the near future, it’s set in an alternate reality mid-1990s.

I personally would ahve preferred they dropped the F-15 and A-10 and just concentrated on Russian aircraft.

Sales suicide. Most Americans don’t want to fly Russian aircraft, they want to fly the A-10 and F-15s. Sad, but true.

There are already plenty of games for A-10s and F-15s

Actually, there hasn’t been a single dedicated A-10 sim since the early 1990s (some old game made by Dynamix). The cancellation of Jane’s A-10 was a huge blow. As for the F-15C, it hasn’t been modelled in nearly a decade. The F-15E is another matter- but this is about air combat.

and for that matter F-18s as well.

True, but it’s better than an F-16- and the point about balancing out the predominantly Russian lineup (Su-25, Su-27, Su-33, MiG-29, MiG-29S) is valid.

Flagons, Firebars, Foxhounds, Foxbats, Fiddlers, and even Backfires, Bears, and Blackjacks would be more interesting. [/B]

Interesting, but it wouldn’t generate sales. Not to mention flying most of those PVO interceptors would be boring as hell, and piloting huge bombers is out of the scope of the game and would require a ridiculous amount of extra time and moeny.

Russian AGAT seeker, intertial navigation, and datalink eh? Not surprising. I’m sure our Indian members will remember this the next time some Pakistani nationalist talks about how the SD-10 will of course be superior to any missiles the Indians put on their Su-30MKIs 😀

Yemen is getting 24 MiG-29SMTs.