I would have to disagree, there’s plenty of basic stuff on it, it’s just up to gaijin on its implementation.
If that were the case, a lot of top tier wouldn’t exist.
Also the T-90M with 2A82-1M doesn’t exist
1 Like
Su-33 is going to be filler for the USSR/Ru. Unless we get a later model, we can’t even guarantee it will get the R-77. It’s heavier, and is not quite as agile as the Su-27 (in spite of the canards).
F-18 is going to be a turbo F-5, and probably cancer, but I guess it’s not important until the AIM-120’s are added.
aim 120 100% will be added before the F-18
2 Likes
FWIW, I think if US gets F-15C or really any plane with Fox 3s, it’s safe to say the SMT or other RU jet is getting it as well.
4 Likes
It’s a related development to the Su-27*. If the sole characteristic one had for an Su-27 was to be carrier worthy, then the Su-27K, and later, the Su-33 (basically same plane, just post-Soviet) are a direct successor. Given the expansion of the Su-27 family, I see it more of a lateral variant, than a down the development path variant.
Came from the T-10K. Su-27K is the initial production name given to the Su-27K.
The difference is that the Su-30SM is both a multirole and an interceptor, and has TVC, a new radar, fcs, flight computer, reshaped LERX’s, as well as other technology gathered from the Su-35. It is night and day different from the Su-27. Compared to the Su-27K/33, the Su-27 just can’t fly off of Soviet aircraft carrier ramps (basically).
Other than a few late 80’s early 90’s T-72/80’s, of the few tanks left to come, I want the Obj. 195 the most. What a dream.
bruh way to fucking soon man , just to let you know , some of the passed to dev’s from 2018 and earlier haven’t shown up yet , so you can wait for that one XD
The same way the Su-24 is a development of the MiG-23, and the same way the Su-30, 34, 35, and 37 are all developments of the Su-27.
This does not mean in any way that their capabilities are similar, nor does it justify its addition.
That’s what I was meaning to say. I’m glad somebody agrees, though I would like to add that the Su-27K and Su-33 both have minor differences.
What would be even harder about the implementation of the Su-33 is which version to add. It’s gone through refits and upgrades throughout its entire service life.
I would prefer the analogy between the T-72b and T-72b (89), there are few differences between the Su-27 and 33, like canards and +3t weight, and L-150 after modernization ( no rwr before ), same radar, irst missiles and etc
The F-15C retains the same A2G ordinance as the A models. Depending on what upgrades they give it would have access to a TGP for LGBs without buddy-lasing. It also gains some additional Ground radar functionality.
Yes, have you read this part of my comment?
Pretty much everything you listed has also been changed on the Su-33.
It has new engines, an upgraded radar, a fully digital FCS, and an entirely redesigned airframe, wing, airfoil, and fuselage geometry. As well as other technology gathered from the Su-30…
If anything, the Su-33 is far closer to the Su-30 than to the Su-27. It might as well be a 1-seater version of the legacy Su-30.
1 Like
I think DCS has people lumping the Su-33 together with the F-18. When it was announced in the early to mid 00’s, it was rumored to be the most advanced Su-27 yet, so a lot of old sources have speculated things about it that never came to be.
When it comes to the F-18, the two planes are really quite different. F-18 can just come whenever, but the Su-33 is basically guaranteed to be an event vehicle unless we get a later variant. It’s phasing out of service even now, so it makes little sense to obsess over more than maybe one or two Su-27K/33’s.
I will pick a bone with you in saying that the Su-37 is a development of the Su-27. While true, this underplays the significance of both the Su-37 and 47. As a one-off tech demonstrator, the 37 helped develop the Su-35. It is basically responsible for a significant portion of super-maneuverability for both the later Su-30’s and Su-27SM’s.
With canards. I guess I need to catch up on the Naval fighters section of Yefim’s Flanker, but I just don’t see much coming out of either plane. Perhaps I’m a tad wrong.
So long as this happens, I come full circle to the MiG-29SMT with Fox-3’s or Su-30M cope.
1 Like
There are a lot of differences, read my most recent comment just before this one. I mentioned one of my comments where I listed them, though that got swept away quite quickly.
As far as I know, the Su-33 still operates SPO-15, not SPO-32.
It has a different radar with a much more capable TWS function, and the missiles make no difference when those are standard across all planes.
As for this, I’d give that analogy to a comparison like the Su-27 and Su-27SM. The jump from the T-72B '1989 to the T-72BA '1996 would be the Su-27SM to the Su-27SM-2.
1 Like
They newer have SPO-15. Before L-150, Su-33 just don’t have RWR.
N001 on Su-33 have very small difference between N001 Su-27.
Mig-29K 9-31 be much better than su-33
I think this is a better solution. Still give it R-77s, but it finally gets 4 pylons per wing. It closes the capability gap without jumping the flight performance into canarded TVC with A2G loads more comparable to an F-15E.
2 Likes
DCS has people believing the Su-33 actually exists xD
It technically was the most advanced version of the lineage. It had refined systems found on even upgraded Su-27s, and was effectively a more capable Su-30. Both were carrier-capable aircraft, the only difference being the Su-33 is a 1-seater… Which kind of holds the stigma of “more capable” against other aircraft.
I feel a late Su-33 could be a nice tree addition, or something like a squadron vehicle. If the game gets to the point of adding an Su-30, it would be the perfect “free” counterpart to it, much like how the M1A1 AIMv2 accompanies the M1A1HC.
My point was that the Su-37 was as far from the Su-27 as the Su-33 is from the Su-27.
Does the Su-30M not have canards?
Yeah, there isn’t much to differ. The only point of adding them would be for the variety and fine-tuning of personal preference, and I’d love to see more variants of every plane for this reason. I’ve personally been heavily involved with F-16 Block 42+[+]s, which I’d love to see in-game.
If there are more specific variants of every plane, gameplay could be much less stale. Different variants with different engines and capabilities, different weights, different levels of maneuverability and speed, and almost all of it comes down to personal preference.
The issue I’ve been trying to state, though, is that to have these variants we’d need functioning base models to begin with. We don’t atm.
The base model Su-33 was introduced in the '90s with SPO-15, and upgraded to SPO-32 in 2004.
The N001K has better naval optimization, as well as a better FCC.
Thanks for sharing?
OG Su-30 is just the production redesignation for what would’ve been the Su-27UP, which would’ve been a two seat version of the OG PVO Flanker. Biggest changes were a new radar and new missiles (R-77) in what was intended to mostly be a Far East deployed type of Flanker on interception duty. Testing determined that a second operator (basically a WISO) for radar duty would increase crew performance and flight time. I’m going to just say right now, unless it’s the latest Su-33, that the second operator/WISO in the back is more valuable than anything else the Su-33 has. IIRC the FBW is the same, only major structure and fuselage changes are different. So I’d say less capable imo.
It can go in the TT, but the Su-30 HAS to go in the TT, it’s too iconic, too critical.
No. Su-30M is the first upgrade of the Su-30, and simply adds some MFD’s and the necessary fire-control components to give the Su-30 multirole capability. The export version to China is much more well known, Su-30MKK.
Canards on the Su-27K were basically meant to help achieve more lift on ramp-assisted takeoff. I believe the later Su-33 FBW might take more advantage of this, but yeah. Su-30SM is the first supermaneuverable Flanker, and is the Russian designation for the base plane that is the Indian Su-30MKI (M-multirole K-export I-India). That is the first serious canard Flanker.
Also, MiG-29K might actually be the best Fulcrum out there, and would likely be better overall than the 27K.
Edit: Also, technically, the first Su-30 prototypes flew before the end of the USSR, and the production line started up production just before the fall as well. In all likelihood, the earliest Su-30’s were USSR production.
Yeah, what I meant was the Su-30M when I had said the legacy Su-30. I had entirely forgotten the little stopgap design of the base model Su-30.
Logistically and in an IRL sense? Absolutely. In-game? Not really…
Yeah, I can see that. Maybe a '2004 variant of the Su-33 with the improved radar and RWR? I’d say at that point the Su-30M would be a perfect pair-up for that.
I must be wrong about it entirely, then. I’m not too familiar with the Su-30 series. I primarily look into domestic vehicles, so please excuse all the wacky shit I’ve been getting wrong.
9-41? Absolutely. 9-31? Eh…
1 Like
Russia still has plenty of MBT’s left to add, most are just prototypes tho, but they are very real and we have decent info on most of them. The T-14 isn’t actually that much of a mystery to, especially when you consider that the Type 10 is already in the game. We have a good guess at about how thicc the Armatas armor is, and can guess how effective it is, especially since we know it uses Depleted Uranium. The armor layout of Armata should be similar to Object 195, which is based off of Object 187, both if which could come before Armata anyways.
As you can see, it’s a thicc ass block of composite. The welds in front of the drivers hatch mark where the composite array begins
4 Likes