exec

Currenthill thank you for your work. I just wanted to say that I'm glad you started reducing the accuracy of different SAM missiles - it's a good step towards better realism. So thank you for that as well!

@Nightstormregarding shooting yourself with AIM-120D I've tried several things and generally I had to do some balancing and compromise - but this is what worked best for me: t_b = 0.1 t_acc = 2.3 t_marsh = 11.0 loft_factor = 1.8 ==> Reduced it because the higher the loft factor the higher the chance to shoot yourself down or to overshoot when doing long range high alt shots.. active_radar_lock_dist = 30000 ==> I've uncommented this one because otherwise when doing high altitude, long range shots, the missile overshoots because it locks on too late. controller = { boost_start = 0.1, march_start = 2.4, }, I left autopilot delay = 1 sec. And also modified model data and boost/march missile motor data to reflect the shorter delays in missile motor starting. And although I've set it to 0.1s and the motor indeed starts sooner - it's not REALLY 0.1s so the separation is big enough.

Hey @Nightstorm - have you changed/added something new in the single player version zipfile? I'm asking because Windows Defender is constantly preventing me from downloading it because it "detects a virus" and deletes the file immediately after download finishes...

Hi, In the past increasing autopilot delay by about 0.5s helped - otherwise AMRAAMs would just try to loft into your F-22...

I don't think so.

I think he meant what he said - a radar blocker. Like this one:

Well, you suggested that such 'stories' are just crap.

And of course all of them make things up and lie. :music_whistling:

Yeah, sure what can they know? They surely have no clue about operations in which they took part. So either they are just making things up or just lying, right?

Maybe. I just don’t think it’s impossible to detect.

No, I think you don’t get it. When you’re ping by a radar in search mode you actually don’t know where exactly the adversary is. He even might be 100 or more kilometers from you. He might not even be interested in you. He might just scan the space in front of him just in case, or he might be chasing some other targets, or he might just want to know what to avoid. STT tells you that the adversary is close enough to maintain stable lock and is interested in you, that he’s got you in his sight, that right now he’s lost all other tracks and tracks you alone. He can fire anytime now. That’s a BIG difference. I don’t think that’s true. I think it depends on sensitivity of the RWR.

Understand – not the same way. There could be dozens of fighters airborne with TWS on and you get dozens of pings. TWS is just like saying “I’m just looking around”. Each of these fighters might see dozens of contacts on their radar screens and you don’t know which is going to be attacked. When you hard lock somebody it’s like saying “hey, I’m aiming at you, I can shoot you any moment now”

Not really. When you hard lock a target then you warn him that you are close enough to hard lock him and that probably you are preparing/considering attacking him. When you select a target in TWS mode he gets no warning. His RWR only tells him that your radar is active and scanning(but when there are many aircrafts airborne there are a lot of pings coming in).

Even that one picture is enough. But we have Russian sources confirming that picture (diagram from Russian manual). I don't think so buddy. Also, the maximum ranges in that picture of the R-27 goes from 72 to 130 km, compared to the 100 km on the export R-77. I really don't see how the miraculous fact that the AIM-120 outranges them all are present. That’s for different versions of the missile. We are talking about R-27R. R-27ER should have greater range than R-77 or AIM-120.

I'll jump in again with missile ranges (last time I promise). If someone is still not convinced: R-27R http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/Vympel/R-27.jpg R-77 http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/Vympel/RVV-AE.jpg (25% more than the R-27R) AIM-120 - russian manual + range we've seen on F-16s HUD confirms that AMRAAM has longer legs than R-27R and R-77.

LMAO :D (actually there is other source about the OLS-35 and it claims 90km detection range, rear hemisphere, AB)

Because there isn't any discussion with you - you're just a waste of time. If it's without AB then the detection range would be greater with AB, so maybe that's not max detection range. Maybe the 90km rear hemisphere detection range is also without AB(or maybe even with engines turned-off -I can't prove that this is not the case) so the detection range with AB should be like 200km.:D Of course then there is no explanation why there is so big difference between frontal and rear hemisphere detection ranges. Personally I think the frontal hemisphere range of 35km can only be achieved when there you there is a fire in a cockpit. Otherwise the range would be much smaller. Prove that I'm wrong.

Don't tell me that you didn't know that IRST are optical sensors?:doh:

Soviet era is over. Russia is now exporting things better than what they have (R-77, Su-30MK, Bars Radar and so on). Well if you think this is downgraded version then I think this is upgraded superb export version. Yeah right, and I call it trolling. I gave you official OLS-35 data and now you want me to prove that its real OLS-35. And if I post OLS-35 data in Russian then you'd want me to prove if it's not some kind of fake. So first you want evidence, when the evidence is presented you want to prove that it's not a fake. And when it comes out that it's not a fake you want to prove that this is not about something degraded or stripped or something else. And even if I could prove that this is not something downgraded you'd want me to prove that the proof is real! :D You always bring the discussion to impossibility. It IS pure trolling. Well if it's MAX range then it should be with AB. Look better. Because Su-35 is much bigger and easier to spot by optical sensors? For BARS radar check rosobronexport catalogue or NIIP website. For APG-77 range check ATF requirements, for APG-81 I think there is information somewhere on NG website or some NG documents. Why should I give you anything more? No matter what I give you - you disregard it. Spend some time and dig something by yourself. No, but it's easy to find. I did it in less than 60 seconds.

I have already showed it to you. If you have a problem with that envelope and don’t believe it’s from Vympel then you can check it. You know from official Vympel statements that R-77 range is at most 20% better than R-27R then you just have to use your brain and take R-27R envelope as a starting point and extrapolate ranges. Guess what – when you do that, you’ll get results almost identical to what you can see on the R-77 envelope. LOL I can’t believe that! I’ve already proven that the estimation is false! I gave you OLS-35 specification from manufacturer! It’s OLS-35 not some degraded version. Prove that I’m wrong. Popular belief? LOL :D So now you take popular belief and Kopp’s estimations over official manufacturer data! This is crap right? So you demand official sources and data but it doesn’t matter if I give you any source, even official one. You just disregard it and call it crap. This is pure trolling. BTW: Su-35 is a large aircraft and has big IR signature. SH detection range will be even smaller. Why do I need to do that? Official data is just crap, right? You can find official data for Bars radar on NIIP website. 140km look-up detection range using long range detection mode vs 3m2 target. Why on Kopp’s website there is 160km detection range vs 1m2 target? Tracking range for the APG-77 is close to 120 nmi (requirement was 110 nmi, but it was beaten by 5% at least). Carlo takes that range and put it near ‘detection’ ranges of radars like BARS and it looks like these two radars have similar performance. Why doesn’t he compare the R-77M to hypersonic scramjet version of JDRADM II? How can you prove that in US they don’t have this kind of weapons? I already did! Ok, just take calculator and do the math. Empty weight + half fuel + 2k lb / wing area. You’ll get the same results. Yes and that proves it’s not objective, but heavily biased. Yeah well, if you believe that you can reduce Flanker 20m2 RCS by just adding some RAM here and there to the level of the Super Hornet then it’s your choice. Hornet was redesign to have small RCS. It has blended airframe, S-ducts with radar blockers, some RAM materials, canted stabilizers which are aligned with the intakes and so on. Even Pogosyan said that using RAM treatment you can lower radar cross section by an order of magnitude at best. Well, Carlo believes something different. And you believe him implicitly. And about engines: also Pogosyan said that if the development stats now the engine will be ready in 10-12 years. Again – Kopp seems to know better.

Vault, all you do is contradict everything we say, and you clearly don’t want to know the truth. There is a lot of sources about ranges of this missiles. Exact capabilities of the missiles are classified, but there is a lot of available information which we can use to understand their capabilities. I can understand why you don’t want to accept AIM-120A chart – because its Russian. But there is evidence – F-16 HUD picture with flight parameters and range displayed. Why you don’t want to accept this is beyond me. Especially when the shot was taken inside [a]American[/b] aircraft and it confirms the Russian chart! We know Adder has 20% better range than R-27R and we know exactly what is the max range of the R-27R. There is a lot of facts there. Enough to draw accurate conclusion. Of course if one want’s to draw that conclusion. Now you present selective memory. What about other things: 1. OLS-35 – false frontal sector detection range information. 2. Radar charts – comparing apples to oranges (long range mode detection range for Ru radars and tracking range for US radars on one chart). This is clearly a bias because he’s trying to make an impression of Russian radars having longer range than US radars. 3. False radar range data – for example 160km detection range vs 1m2 target for Bars radar when manufacturer claims 140km vs 3m2 target. 4. Comparing yesterday’s Us missiles with future(sometimes with unfunded and uncertain development status) Russian missiles. For example R-74 vs AIM-9M or R-77M with AIM-120C… 5. Biased/false charts for example: Graph with combat loaded (50% fuel + 2k lb weapons) Su-35 vs Super Hornet. The chart shows superior wing loading and T/W ratio of the Flanker. Reality check: T/W ratio F-18E: 0,90 and Su-35: 0,86. Wing loading F-18E: 80 lb/ft, Su-35 83 lb/ft 6. Biased tone – when the Flanker is better at something he writes “Flanker outclasses Hornet”. When Hornet is better at something he writes “Hornet should be better, but Russian scientist are working on this so the Hornet won’t hold that advantage for long”. 7. Exaggerating/misleading information: “add some RAM here and there and the Flanker will have signature reduced to the level of the Super Hornet” or “40k lb supercruising AL-41 engines are already in LRIP so the Flankers soon will have better engines” Reality check: next gen supercruising engine will be ready in 10-12 years.

My sources are dubious? In which part? Do you mean that R-77 chart? Again: manufacturer claims 80km max range for the R-27R (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_44d3OT-xI3U/SOyaa43X-QI/AAAAAAAAAPU/2TLyVszOfn4/s1600-h/R-27+BVRAAM.JPG) and this of course for the best case scenario (20km alt head on shot). But that’s nothing unusual because all those max ranges are for the best case scenarios. Range for R-77 is quoted as 80-100km. It’s not much bigger, is it? When you compare charts for R-27R and R-77 you can see that the difference between them is actually close to 20% Then you have official AIM-120A chart from Russian manual and as a confirmation you have the shot from F-16 HUD (http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/513/f16hudv.jpg). 35km range at 3,35km altitude and 1900 km/h closing speed. This is 50% greater range than the R-27R.

I gave you enough sources. If you have brain you should be able to understand them. I gave you various sources, but nonetheless you want me to do something impossible. You know that I can’t give you such Raytheon’s charts so you will still contradict everything I say just because I don’t have that source you want me to have. That’s just trolling. You just want to live in your dream world so badly that you refuse to accept anything. So, summarizing: 1. Two sources for AIM-120A range (one official Russian, and one from a real aircraft giving us range for 3,35km altitude and 1900 km/h closing speed) 2. Various sources for R-77 range (official max ranges + range chart for comparison) 3. Various sources for R-27 range (official max ranges + official chart from MiG-29 manual) Every source closely confirms each other, so I don’t know where’s the problem? This data is all what is needed to know about max ranges of these missiles.

Such fins have some advantages (better maneuverability), but they do more drag. And one more word about AIM-120A range. There is a shot of F-16 HUD on this forum with AMRAAM selected and target locked. Closing speed = ~1000 knots, altitude 11 000 ft. Max range displayed 19 nm = 35km. Now you can compare this with that conservative Russian diagram for AIM-120A that gives only 31-32km range at that altitude. Then you can compare it with official Russian chart for R-27R (from MiG-29 manual) that gives this missile only 20-21km range at that altitude and closing speed. We also know, according to Russian sources, R-77 max range (stated 80-100km) is ~20% greater than R-27R range (stated 70-80km). So the range at 11k ft altitude should be like 24km. Even if you don’t like my chart for R-77 official data and diagrams corresponds with that chart. For example 20% more than R-27R (35km) for 10km altitude means 42km and this is exactly what can you see on the R-77 diagram. The only MRM missiles that match or I’d even say exceed AIM-120A range are R-27ER and R-27ET. And now we have that new RVV-SD which also probably has similar range to AIM-120A(or even better).

Oh it does.