SFJackBauer

Hi. Can you/someone clarify this line?

Another thing - run DCS in windowed for a while so you can alt+tab with no issues and see if the crashes disappear. The crashes may be related to frequent alt+tab in fullscreen, where the DirectX state have to be restored frequently.

Why throw time in the trash bin by running prime? One of the overclock rules is, if anything on an overclocked computer crashes, even if prime passes, it must be tested without the overclock to see if it happens again. So back to stock settings, run DCS and other games for a week, and see if it disappears. If it does, then stay stock (as your system is perfectly good for running DCS, ARMA3 or whatever you want to run - I don't know why people messes up with things they don't understand).

Ah Pete Bonnani... the quintessential 80's fighter pilot, with his mustache and bare chest :thumbup:

And the MiG-25 and 31 have roughly 2x the wing loading of dogfighters like F-15 and Su-27, which means they bleed speed faster in a turn and cannot sustain high-G for a long time.

I think his statement that "Tiger would eat Firefly for breakfast....." still holds true as it points that the Firefly armor was no match to the 88mm at any range. But the French landscape + a number of other factors (thankfully) never favoured the sniping Tiger, so... BTW a lovely site for WW2 buffs - http://tarrif.net/ (click the flags at the top)

Hey thanks for remembering my birthday!

Watch in 1080p and volume on 11!

Is this real? :shocking: http://www.eliteaviator.com/

GGTharos must be referring to the 0:29 in the video, where you drop two tanks and leave the center one. "Bag" = "External Fuel Tank" And... yeah, your FOV is way too high, perhaps you are used to it from FPSes, which this isn't.

Not even tried a gun kill? Doing an immelman at that situation is not a good choice either.

Think of radar as underwater echoes. A submarine, standing still close to the ocean floor, can hear a ship "pinging" him, but not necessarily the ship, as a result of the pings, can detect the submarine. Since the sonar receiver on the ship has to reject and filter a whole bunch of underwater sounds, due to natural background noise and reverberation, it may end up rejecting a true echo from a submarine, which is (roughly, may I say, as I am being very primitive here in my analogy) what happens when you enter the notch. Again, in reality, the RWR is actually saying to the pilot that a radar is focusing on him, since he is receiving EM radiation of the same frequency and power several times per second. That's what triggers the "locked" signal - the own RWR programming. There is no magic involved.

Again, you are approaching it with a "gamer" mentality of... "OMG I discovered this fail proof tactic", without taking time to understand the underlying system. RWR keeps displaying a threat for a couple of seconds even after the emissions have stopped being detected. Why? Because it is not a precision instrument. It works with a filter, displaying emissions above a certain power and within a range of frequencies. Why? Because if it didn't used a filter, it would be flood with static and background radio noise. The electromagnetic background is literally full of crap. If our eyes were able to see the entire spectrum, we would be blinded since there is EM radiation everywhere, from cell phones to TV stations to cosmic radiation. Looking at this POV, an RWR must be a fine instrument to be able to reject all the crap that is floating aroud us (in terms of EM radiation). Now, imagine if two fighters are going head-on, some 100km distant, but separated by some mountains, so they do not have line-of-sight to each other. Fighter A turns the radar on, climb just a bit above the mountains and, quickly, descend again. The radar waves, during that split second, had time to travel to fighter B and back, but due to the distance, the return was so weak that fighter A sees nothing on his radar scope. Fighter B RWR, however, lights up. Now, if RWR only lighted up for the time it detected the radar waves, it would only blink for a fraction of second, and pilot B wouldnt be able to use this information. But since the RWR keeps displaying for a couple of seconds, even if pilot B was not looking directly at the RWR (scanning outside) he now can see there is a threat, and see its rough direction, and react accordingly.

Wrong. The RWR is pointing a radar source. Of course, if your RWR blinks, it is because some electromagnetic radiation has reached you. Any basic physics knowledge can teach you that the RWR cannot know anything else than the arrival of a electromagnetic radiation of a certain frequency, with a certain power and from a certain direction. If you think that, with this information, the RWR could tell that, as you said, "that the radar was looking at YOU", then you need to think again. And that does not mean that this electromagnetic radiation can go back to the emitter and indicate a target to him. For example, if you are in the notch, radar is being reflected from you to the original aircraft, but his radar computer is rejecting you. Therefore even with your RWR flashing, he can't see you. Also the radar waves lose power as the square of distance. So its easier for an RWR to pick up a radar from afar, than a radar picking up a target. All this is about reality though, and it could be that the some aspects of the in-game implementation do not follow reality.

What about you guys use your superior skills to leave the thread space for a moment and come back to the discussion at a better aspect? Its not as any of you are making any progress at this... :) But really, I have to agree with Blaze on this one. He never said that the high alt/speed tactic won't work sometimes, but that you can't rely on it always, like a one-trick pony, even more now that you stated your "superior tactic" in a public forum.

You mean the "engine systems". When some people in this thread said "systems", I assumed they included the radar (thread topic), comms, nav, countermeasures etc.

"We've been in contact with Eurofighter itself to see if we can gain exclusive acsess to the realism and physics of how it works" Fail lol! The problem is the creator markets this as a realistic simulator, when obviously is not, while he could use his skills to pursue something more appropriate like a sci-fi shooter in the lines of Descent or Terminal Reality. When I see things like this that I think I really ought to man up and put some time to implement the concepts I have in my mind...

You are assuming several things: - that the F-22 didnt splashed or at least put the Su-35 into defensive before getting into WVR - that the F-22 doesn't have at least an equally powerful jammer as the Su-35 - that an airshow is proof of a real-life combat situation If there is nothing revolutionary about the F-22, then why the hell Russia is investing in PAK-FA? And being able to: 1) use your radar to scan the airspace, without being detected by the enemy RWR from long ranges 2) close the distance without being detected by the enemy radar 3) using datalink to share real-time information between all the aircraft and even the missiles in the air in order to ambush the enemy Does not present a significant advantage?

Nice idea! Wasn't here somewhere an utility that did this, and then when the track ended it reverted to the original settings? Or am I imagining things? Surely there is a way to call dcs.exe so it starts a track passed by parameter, at least that's what the GUI is doing when you want to replay a track. Question is how exactly... and if the track can start right away instead of paused... Actually, this last bit (and the 10x speedup) could be automated by something like autohotkey... hmm time to do some research.

Valery who? Who's Valery? Anyway Happy Birthday Valery, whoever you are :)

Watched the ACMI, and the reason the first slammer misses is pretty clear. If you see just the numbers you'd think the missile should have hit as it had still enough kinetic energy and crossed very close to the target. At launch the distance was 20nm, both crafts head-on. However the launch aircraft was at 25k feet, 600 kts and the target was at 42k feet 530 kts. Burnout occurred at 14nm, missile at 28000 feet and 2400 kts, target at 41k feet 560 kts. Then the target began a shallow dive, with little change in heading. Missile was still clearly guiding until closest separation, which was 63 feet, at 30k feet altitude, missile having 1100 kts and pulling 4-5g, and target having 660 kts pulling also 5g. But if you watch from the point of view of the target itself, you see it changes heading just after the launch. It either had a launch warning from STT or knows by experience and by watching the F-15 on its radar scope the tell-tale signs of a slammer launch. It then releases countermeasures when the missile crosses the 3nm range, which seemed to have no effect as the missile continues its lead pursuit trajectory. It then rolls 90 degrees and begins a 5g "last-ditch" turn. The timing indicates the target visually-acquired the missile, or again knew by experience watching the RWR when to pull. Perhaps the sudden direction change made it warp and helped its survival? I dont know, the tacview doesnt show warpings. But if not, it was a hell of a defeat, and a very risky one. Had Maximus fired another slammer after the first one perhaps he would have gotten the kill, as the MiG-29S didn't return fire, and the second missile would be harder to defeat. But it was far from a non-maneuvering target.

While HoJ does not give indication of launch (I am not sure about that), it does give indication of lock right? Because when I fly MP with music on, sometimes I have the lock tone on SPO-15 Beryoza (continuous tone, and red circle lit), from distances much farther than if I had music off. Now that I think of it, perhaps even launch warning is given, as sometimes some novice think they could shoot an HoJ R-27ER at you from 80km and hit. I think the ECM implementation is very confusing in this aspect - it seems you are constantly radiating, while you would want the ECM work only if someone tries to lock on you to break the lock right? On the other hand, you are constantly radiating to prevent the lock, but then you know when the other guy has locked into your emissions for a HoJ shot. Anyway it seems that the OP misunderstood something, and I think posting a track from his point of view would help yes, because then we could see the exact range and angle offset between the two aircrafts. And the missile type.

The g is there in the first equation since it is used to find the mass flow rate from the weight flow rate. Since weight W is mass m * g (at least on Earth), then the mass m is equal to the weight W / g. Note that in the first equation legend, it seems there is a typo since W is the weight flow, and it should've appeared in the equation in place of M. See also http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/mflchk.html and http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/wcora.html.

Thats a bummer, for some reason my card gets rejected by Sage, even though it works fine on other sites and Paypal.

Dude I would suggest you edit that post immediately and remove that pic... Why are you giving up for everyone the serials for the products you bought?