SFJackBauer

Not dismissing your arguments, but isn't that a bit difficult to base your expectations off on videos? For example, I am a fanatic Formula One fan, and participate on some F1 fan communities. One of the arguments that always pops up is that the onboard F1 videos shows the racing drivers pushing hard those machines so easily... that it makes almost possible for we regular folks to drive one of those. Yet when regular folks jump into these machines they almost kill themselves in the first 100 meters. There are a lot of variables missing from our desktop simulations - beginning even with the control hardware. How many pounds of pressure on the stick is needed to get it into full deflection, at speed, to do the kind of maneuvers we do on our desktops with a flick of the joystick? One USAF pilot in exchange with the Luftwaffe, said this about the handling qualities of the MiG-29: I know it is a different aircraft but I'm not sure if the flight control system is entirely different. I would love to see some objective assertions on the Flanker.

2h long

I like that :megalol:

My understanding (from reading the forum and from experiment) is that the radar antenna sweeps are not, in ILV mode, individually simulated with different PRFs. Instead, the detection ranges from approaching and receding targets are reduced in ILV when compared to the best scenarios in the specific PRFs.

Sure it does, how the system would differentiate a friendly from a hostile missile?

Ah yes, I was looking at a -34 from 1981, this selector did not existed back then.

If you want to show them a video, then why not sending them some HD youtube video of DCS, or recording one yourself using FRAPS?

Maverick, in the line you quoted I was speculating about the real F-15. I am not that brain-damaged (yet??) to contradict myself in the same single post :) Actually, from what I have verified, the real bird does not even allow its pilot to select the PRF directly. Perhaps we are able to do it since in the real Flanker it is available (is it?), and since all fighters share a common framework this ended up available in the F-15 too. Anyway, to underline my point, this should be at least explained in the manual, because I got slapped in the face after a newbie said to me "I read the manual and it isn't there." If we can't refer newbies to the manual, then what would we do?

It doesn't do anything after a missile launch, but it does for target detection. How do you directly select a PRF? No keybindings for that in-game.

Hi. Let me begin stating this: The TWS mode inherits the current PRF setting of the SCN (in Su-27) or RWS (in F-15) mode. Now, I and surely most others knew about this behavior, but only last night when I was teaching the basics of radar mechanization to a friend that it crossed my mind that it is never mentioned anywhere in the F-15 manual (I dont remember how I learned it, I guess its because the Flanker symbology explicitely displays the PRF while in TWS.). Due to its counter-intuitiveness it surely could wreack havok with the newbies learning the sim, since a target that should appear on TWS, depending on your PRF setting, may or may not appear. Given the TWS mode can be used in the F-15 for engagements, I chose to post here instead of other forums, but this applies also to the Su-27 (and perhaps for the other planes) as far as I've tested. The thing is - in RWS mode, a fighter-sized, co-altitude, high-aspect contact appears on radar at: - HPRF: 62 nm - ILV: 47 nm - MPRF: 30 nm However if you transition to TWS at HPRF, you can see the target closing at 60 nm. Then go back to RWS, change to MPRF, then go back to TWS. It isn't there. Now I dont have any concrete data on which PRF the TWS mode on F-15 should operate. But if its in-game behavior is correct then please this should be added to the manual and disseminated so people know what is going on. But I would speculate that, in the real F-15, TWS mode is interleaved only.

I find no problem at all the lack of external tanks. Actually, its even better since, without the extra drag and weight, the F-15 is so slick you can take-off at mil, climb to 30k feet and cruise for hours at M0.7 at 90% RPM. Remember you need fuel to carry fuel. But of course it is a bug and should be fixed. The true problem is that people join multiplayer unaware, load bags, and then when in flight they jettison it and lose instantly half their fuel.

Me too. It is quite interesting though seeing those feelings from a psychological standpoint... shows how irrational people (me included, sometimes...) are when we react to a thing without considering its context (ex. a swastika in a dojo). Look, I consider myself a WW2 buff, but... how the hell I missed this fact. Thanks for pointing it out :)

"And then Putin woke up..."

HOvAtAX3DT0

OK, now you guys are arguing over a 5x5 pixel frame. You must be seeing things in some wavelength I don't. :P

Also FLOOD mode does not gives a lock warning on target RWR, only a search warning :music_whistling:

I fly quasi-regularly in MP and TeamSpeak. Not-so-long ago, I join TS and there is already two guys flying together in Flankers; I join them in a three-ship. We talk a bit during spool-up and taxi, and they are nice fellas, like almost everyone you would meet in DCS MP. Also seems reasonable on their knowledge of the aircraft systems and weapons. We takeoff, I am happy to hang out a little behind in an Eagle. They then see a target, point their nose at him and run straight at him. The exchanged information in TS (target aspect, range) has little tactical value and no engagement/evasive plans are agreed beforehand. Its just running. They lost track of altitude and begin to drift higher and contrailing. They know about the Eagle TWS mode, but disregard the lights ticking out in the Beryoza (I, flying a Flanker, always assume being painted by an F-15, lacking better intel). They then fire an ER, the bandit goes defensive, and from "nowhere" as they say, the slammers come and... its too late to defeat. Both get killed within seconds, and I am watching from further back, analyzing the actions and reactions. They get frustrated in TS (never admitting their lack of SA and tactics :music_whistling:), but quickly shrug it off and we take off again. This time, I think, they will do diferent. No. Its almost a replay of before, with only slight differences. This time they run nose cold, only relying on EOS, to get more close and "undetected". By the time they decide to turn the radar on, they get killed again, this time by an ET shot by a low-flying flanker, and from an Eagle at 40k feet. They get frustrated again, and quit. Now here is my point: - Should I blame them for their failures? No. They are not taking it "seriously", they are just having fun, so you take the consequences of not applying yourself to it. But also they dont come to the forums whine and complain about things they have no idea about. - Should I blame DCS, perhaps, lack of realism, or symmetry, or assymetry, for their failures, or even my failures? No. If a person hops into a Flanker against Eagles in MP, he better 1) know (as in study) his choice of weapon and the enemy's choice) and 2) come up with a better tactic than running blindly into radar blips that he dont know if are "packing heat" (in this case... ARHs). Even if that means he lands in the end with zero kills. Or this person can remain in denial and think he is right and the world is wrong.

At 1:55 he gains altitude, just by the fact that the camera is slightly below both aircraft. On 2:05, he gains very little (would get a 9 out of 10 from me, if I was the judge), and the contrails are deflected due to the change of exhaust direction.

Meaning that, in the midst of combat, it is more advantageous to maximize Pk (even if it involves the target knowing where and who you are) than trying some esotheric way of guiding the missile to the target silently that has almost nil chance to work, given your hardware. Its almost like you are asking "why fighters have to lock a target to guide a missile, thereby making the target RWR scream?" Its because the missile could not be guided otherwise. Now if you excuse me I won't write the 20-page wall of text that describes in detail the whys of this (including explaining why this can be done in the F-15 TWS mode, or even why this can be done on AESA radars), but I'm sure that there is a lot of material on this forum, and even on the internet that you can find if you know how to search.

Systems -> MFD HDD mode (for me is not bound to anything by default)

So your argument is that the feature that DISABLE THE PITCH AUGMENTATION should somehow compensate for trim? Bizarre. Changing subject, is it normal that my Flanker tries to auto-wing-level? Autopilot is not engaged, trim is neutral.

I think that even someone who has flown a Cessna would understand better how to fly the Su-27 with PFM than someone who hasn't. It all boils down to understand the aircraft envelope, aero characteristics, longitudinal stability, trimming etc. The improved FMs remove the "on-rails" flying once you depart regular conditions, but if you respect the aircraft (as you would do if your ass were in the line, if you were in the cockpit), I dont see how you can have any problems at all with this PFM.

Excellent video - you cannot clearly see the performance difference at around 0:06, where all of three are pulling 9G. Then at 0:10 you can see that the G-load for the F-18 has decreased to 7.42G, while the Raptor continues at 9 and the F-16 has decreased just a little to 8.5G. But if you continue the video, at 0:17 the Raptor pilot turns off the thrust vectoring accidentally (you can clearly see, if you zoom in with a specialized software, that he was going to scratch his mustache but his hand knocks the TVC switch) so this gives the lead to the F-16.

That was a nice video! That said, don't get me wrong, but that is not a good reference on tactics/radar employment. First engagement was a EOS kill, a good kill, but a bit of a brainfart from that F-15. He had an inbound 27ER, didnt looked at its source for whatever reason. If he did, a 120 would be certainly inbound the Flanker. 4:30 - The RWR indicates a hostile very close, if an F-15 inside launch zone with TWS. But the Flanker keeps pressing ahead. 5:03 - as expected, slammer inbound. The Flanker incorrectly identifies a friendly popping flares, which is totally opposite the hostile heading, as the bandit. And then proceeds to reduce his energy still with a slammer inbound. Only survived because of DCS missile stupidity. 5:21 he says "defensive again" but thats actually still the same missile. 5:29 you can see the AMRAAM narrowly missing him, while someone else takes down the hostile that didn't launched any more missiles, for whatever reason. 5:59 entered a turning fight with an F-15, but didnt used any of the close-combat radar modes, or the helmet mode. 6:41 trying to use the long-range scan to lock a nearby target, ended up locking another hostile way far. Should have used the boresight radar mode. Last engagement also could have used any of the close-combat radar modes to lock the target within visual range. Also there was a lack of usage of radar range (number on bottom of hud), elevation and azimuth to scan bvr. Dont take me wrong, the video was entertaining and, in the heat of the combat, the mistakes are what make good stories. :)