okopanja

So what is going on with the new SPO-15 in new module?

P-12/P-18 were also used for SA-3, and in fact P-18 was the one which detected F-117 when it got shot down. Present SA-3 in DCS it totally blind to stealth aircrafts.

Aside of the your proposal it would be interesting to have also P-12, P-18, P-15, P-35/37, P-40 as more mobile variants which were used in combination with different SAMs. Between different SAM sites (e.g. SA-2, SA-3, SA-6, SA-5), some of these EWR radars were interchangeable elements when attached directly to the batteries. Another interesting topic is that better coverage and resilience toward the ECM could be achieved by connecting two different radars (e.g. P-15 and P-18) to the same battery at the same time. In this case the rotation of antenna's were synchronized and picture displayed on the same circular situation display (SNR-125 - SA-3). One such combination was documented to be used by Finland. Furthermore they could have been integrated in IADS as part of larger network, and this way were able to reduce the reaction time of many systems. E.g. SA-3 acquisition of target for SNR-125 could be fed from such system, the elevation/azimuth were slaved, so the operator could lock the target way faster when using normal stand-alone workflow. I assume that benefits only extended to the more advanced SAMs.

Yes for better immersion, we miss here at least P-14 and matching PRV height radar.

It does not need to be on that level but SNP2 launch probably should not result in i stant RWR warning.

While the description in this not too technical article could be applied both to R-27R and R-77, we can not be sure that R-77 operates precisely the same. Simply the level of details is not enough, this is informational article for someone who is not too deep into electronics. Furthermore they had to place additional installation into the radar itself.

The upgrade includes the replacement of computers I have mentioned. It just confirms that for R-77 radar had to be changed to add compatibility with R-77. With this computers also came better ECM resistance.

For 9.12a to get R-77 radar upgraded is needed. This involves replacement of C100 with C101/102 (offer to Yugoslavia from 1996, sadly never accepted), which bring new modes. In addition the radar installation itself extension so it can actually guide R-77. Is this what you meant?

Thanks, I still stand by every word there. You can fire 2xR-27(E)T or 2xR-73 in TWS2.

Well the pictures show a hump, which means this departs from 9.12a airframes...

Location near the coordinates from that photo: https://maps.app.goo.gl/ubDt8mW4G665RFSL8 Looks like hangar from 2021 pics.

@NytHawk

I would prefer first completely functional basic 9.12a. As for Mig-29MU1/MU2, I am kind of skeptical, since cockpit looks exactly the same and it appears they have used "hacked" avionics to place those missiles in place of R-27P. Over the years UKR did offer lot's of upgrade marketing material for soviet stuff (ewr radars, missile seekers, SAM upgrades), but we saw very little substance of those upgrades in reality. Given the level of corruption in ex-Soviet republics (including Russia), doubts arise over actual scope of work. All things I found so far mostly pointed out to improving reliability of avionics (e.g. radar) + adding limited multi-role capabilities, similar to Russian upgrade packages offered around 1996 minus the R-77. Around that time they may have been even collaborating together on this. Maybe the existing software got some improvements over the soviet one, but if this is MU2, then we are not talking about large functional differences, hence it may be a low hanging fruit once the 9.12a is completed. Also, ED might decide to offer this as paid upgrade to a basic module.

One brief digression question: will you also take care of the existing non-CH assets or is this something ED would need to do?

Not a bug, but rather incomplete unit. Even among ED SAMs there are many examples of missing sensors. Examples include KUB, Neva, OSA, Tor, Hawk... Along sensors goes often wrong behavior. And if we are talking human controled units you quickly arrive at conclusion that further extensions of human machine interface is needed. I hope that wit CH inclusion Combined Arms will get more love from ED in future.

This later is difficult, since pilots are entitled to their flier's supplement.

maybe we can remove the bottle since it's mass is stated in the manual...

This would indicate HOJ mode launch. Also the jammer itself could affect RWR, but not sure if either of these are modeled in DCS.

Problem: At the moment ground units placed into single group can not be moved from F10 individually. Attempt to plot the path from F10 leads to whole group being moved in pre-selected formation. Individual movement is possible only by jumping directly into the unit and then driving it manually, which is often impractical. Why: achieve better tactical usage of units. E.g. if commanding larger group the default formations will place them in sub-optimal positions, thus often causing the units to be completely useless. E.g. you do not wish to place radar in a ground hole where it can not see anything. Proposed solution: Introduce additional formation called Individual, represented as a singl3e white dot in drop down menu. When this formation is selected and specific unit is selected, plotting the route shall be applied only to selected unit. The player should be able to plot each of the units individually without affecting already moving units. I hope this would be a low hanging fruit, as long as the order of formations and their corresponding identifiers are not changed.

Any news?

The list goes like this: Air base Željava, near Bihać. Demolished by crew once enemy forces closed near (fuel and ammo burned for more than 6 months). Air base Slatina, near Priština. 1 entrance hit one side, causing rocks to collapse and cover entrance. Left unrepaired intentionally to give the pretense of being fully destroyed. A the end of the war the Mig-21s exited the on the other side and flew to Batajnica airport near Belgrade. The base was inside intact, but currently not in use. Air base Golubovci, near Podgorica, hit by NATO, blast doors were not closed and Mig-21 , filled with 3t of fuel and parked at entrance caused the burning fuel to spread inside. Demo team G-4s got destroyed in resultling fire. Airbase commander got trialed for this and kicked out (the bombs used by NATO would not penetrate the base if blast doors were closed and buffer zones kept clear of flammable stuff. Today this is a wine cellar. This is the only one you can freely visit without knowing somebody to take you in. Air base Divulje, near Split Also along the coast (e.g. Boka Kotorska) and islands in the Adriatic See.

I was wondering have you compared the radar ranges given in soviet, german and yugoslav manual as well as number of radar modes?

There were at least 23 more such bases.

Yes m, but stritcly for tracking there are 2 variants, and they can be hood-ed thus giving them rather unique appearance.

Yes, but it is not the best.