KlarSnow

Just because it is harder to use or difficult does not mean ineffective. What you also have to look into in those kills (which would be very hard to find any kind of reliable details) is what were their targets doing, most of the ones I've seen relate to the targets flying straight and level at a relatively high altitude. The tactics we employ in DCS/modern tactics were barely starting to be a thing in the early 80's (cranking/notching) in western airforces. Also who knows if and how well the iraqi RWR's were working, and whether or not they told them anything about the phoenix/awg-9 combo. Essentially there are lots of variables that go into those kills beyond pure radar performance, so I wouldnt take it to mean anything in particular other than it can be effective if employed properly. Just like the Phantoms radar could be very effective if employed properly.

Apg-63 had mprf/ hprf from the start, I’m no expert on why the awg-9 couldn’t do MPRF, but considering they never upgraded the AWG-9 to do that over its 40 years of use, and its a fairly significant limfac, it was probly not possible without completely rebuilding the radar (like they did with the APG-71). The APG-63 had its own teething issues, as new technology, just like everything else, but it was still a massive leap forwards in use ability and capability over what previous radars provided.

Compared to the APG-63 series of radars and how much easier they were to use, and the fact that they have MPRF all equates to those radars are going to have a much cleaner/easier to read display, hold locks better and require much less effort on the part of the aircrew to employ. So did it suck over land vs over water? It has a lot of power, and many features that CAN make it capable in the right hands, however the more modern radars in f-15s in particular are going to result in a faster, better picture, and a quicker and more stable lock at range in just about any circumstance compared to the AWG-9. May not have as long range a raw detection, but that trade off in reliability and ease of use was probly worth it (as every other modern US A/A radar has been based off the APG-63 family since). Keep in mind the AWG-9 is really a 1950/60s radar molded into a 1970s jet. It’s origins and core go back a long ways and it’s technology was outdated within a few years of being in service. But it was what they had, and it did the job of supporting the Phoenix quite well. Compared to the Phantom radars it was replacing it was light years ahead, compared to the APG-63 series of radars that came out a few years later, it was rather antiquated.

Oh I'm very familiar with CM and notching affecting the missiles instead of host radar in DCS, by your post earlier it seemed like you were saying the opposite, thats all.

Theres a difference between the guidance emitter which is emitting CW and the mode the radar is using to track the target. the CW emitter is essentially boresighted to the radars antenna, so where the antenna is pointed is where it illuminates. If you break the radars lock thru a notch, it will no longer be pointing at the target, thus the sparrow will not guide. Thats real world, no idea if its meched that specifically in DCS or if it just magically guides due to radar lock. Either way the effect is correct.

It was a dutch F-16, not danish

Another option for a quick setting (as long as its not a super look down scenario) is to decrement the range on the TID to below the targets range, set the coverage at that scope range so that the bandit will be between its coverage and then swap back. Quick and dirty, requires no math, and especially out at range can work like a champ. For example if it didn't make sense the way I explained it. If I know there's something at 20,000 feet 35 miles away. I could set my elevation to encompass 20,000 on a 50 scope, but if hes too close, he might be in or outside the coverage (since the elevation coverage only applies at the edge of the scope) so I drop to a 25 mile scope and make sure 20,000 is between the coverage at 25, then switch back to a 50. Now he will be on the scope at that altitude, at least until he transitions inside 25 miles.

I mean, considering the original cost differential between FFB and non FFB sticks, we are square in the same brackets for way better quality. Original MSRP for Sidewinder Precision 2 was 45$ Original MSRP for Sidewinder FFB2 was 109$ Original MSRP for Logitech g940 was 299$ and that one is notoriously sketchy in terms of reliablity and quality Closest equivalent non FFB Hotas of the g940's time period with similar capabilities was the saitek X52 which ran between 100-150$ (no rudder pedals) and also had its share of quality issues depending on which version you got. Then of course there is the thrustmaster warthog which is currently running 400-500 MSRP depending on where you look (new) So double that for a niche independent producer that has all the features you could want? I'd say that sits pretty squarely where I would expect it. Quality of the build/reliability need to be verified beyond four youtube videos and some pictures, but if its of the same build quality and support of (current) virpil and VKB products, I'd say its right about where I'd expect a product with FFB to fall in this niche market. Nobody is making a high quality NON FFB stick base for less than 3-400 bucks these days, FFB is going to exponentialy increase upon that. Look up the next best thing which is the professional level products like Brunner or any of the companies that make things for real world professional sims, you can get a one off from them, but it probly won't be as nice or as feature complete as this product will be, and it will also cost you in the 2-5 grand region for a non FFB replica. You want FFB I don't even want to know what that will cost. Is it a lot? Yup. Is it too much for what it is? Probly not. Is it worth it for you to buy it? Only you can decide that. Personally, I can absolutely afford it, it comes with an F-15 specific grip (be still my heart) and is compatible with my virpil T-50CM2 grip and inbound Tomcat grip and Warthog grip... FFB and damping are the two things I have been severely wanting to re-enter the commercial flight stick market since I can remember, so will I purchase it? All depends on what the quality of the build, the accuracy and precision of their sensors and force feedback are, and the quality of their provided support. For me this could very well be THE stick if it meets all those requirements, in which case 1300$ over (assumed at least) 5 plus years of use? That's not a bad deal at all. What other commercial FFB sticks of note are out there?

The thing that has caught me and my group out more often than not is being in cruise mode vs A/A mode in the front seat, if you are in TWS it looks exactly the same in cruise vs A/A except you wont get a hot trigger.

Thats incorrect, if its GMTI is using doppler it can detect moving targets no matter the size (assuming not smaller than a vehicle) at just about any range, if it has doppler shift and a return it should show up, just like an air target. Think it removes the doppler notch filter completely or drops it down to ~2 knots and then caps it at around 100, anything showing a velocity between 2 and 100 knots should show up as a target if its using doppler as a discriminator. Should look somewhat like a clean air to air display. Detecting a target using doppler is separate from the radars resolution using SAR or DBS, and is not limited by the resolution of the radar, only by the size of the doppler return and the RCS of the target. You won't be able to take a SAR image of the mover or do anything other than (like an air target) have a track file that your radar is updating.

APG-82 is not being 100% standardized, it will be like the APG-63's in the C models, some are V0, some are V3, don't know what their numbers are but its definitely not 100% AESA. For the APG-82 its the same, squadrons will have some AESA, some Mech scanned. At least for the currently planned upgrades. The new UFC offers no additional functionality over the old ones. Its pretty much 100% uniform across the fleet of USAF strike eagles. You can literally rip it out and replace the old one with the new one or vice versa while the engines are running. LRU's are great. I've flown with an old one once or twice, they are still in inventory and if the new ones are being worked on, if they have an old one they will throw it in there. Only real difference/benefit (other than the much clearer and brighter display) is the new ones specifically have more lighting options so as to be more compatible with NVG's and night lighting in general, the old ones still work, just arent as good to look at through NVG's.

All of lakenheath's Strike Eagles have -229's, Seymour and Mountain home have mixed -220/-229, it all depends on which squadron you go to. I can't remember off the top of my head, but some squadrons at Seymour/ Mountain Home are only -220 squadrons (the B-course for example) some are mixed, and some have only -229's. Its about 50/50 for the entire fleet being -229 vs -220

Funny story, resting G tolerance is highly dependent on body composition and individual factors, on average its around 5 G's unaided and without a G strain. It can be down as low as 3 G's for a tall skinny person, and as high as 8-9 G's for a shorter fatter person. Its all about blood pressure, less about fitness (for your body's natural unaided G tolerance) A short, fat high blood pressure individual will be far less affected by G's than a tall skinny super fit individual. Women usually have a higher resting G tolerance than men due to the average women being both shorter and having a higher blood pressure than men. Now Fitness and training all come into play because G's and the G strain are physically taxing, and just because you don't pass out, doesn't mean you can continue to function while under G, but a G strain plus the G suit is sufficient to get the vast majority of individuals in any platform up to 8-9 G's. I don't know how much tolerance the Falcons seat gives compared to the G suit and the G strain, but I'll bet its not more than 1.5 G's. happy for any one who knows what it actually gives to correct me on that.

Its much easier if trying to keep formation to try and hold an airspeed and then turn in a level turn than to try and set a bank angle. For example, fly at 350 knots, then make a level turn in mil (maximum non afterburner) power without slowing down or speeding up, you will then fly the exact same turn parameters (bank angle, G, turn radius/rate). If you are trying to match bank angles in a close formation, its better to just be looking outside the cockpit at your formation reference (the other aircraft) watching and just matching it visually, than trying to fly it off of instruments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect :P

Sorry, F-15E's have flown more defensive counter air CAP's (Air to air) in the last few years than any other platform. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

dude, you have no idea, F-15E WSO/Pilots are both fully involved in air to air and air to ground. The example RShackleford gave was specifically of something that nothing but a two seat jet can do. Has nothing to do with the air to air/air to ground utility of WSO's. Thanks for telling me what my job is, next time I'm flying in an air to air sortie, I'll make sure that I don't talk or say anything thats not specifically related to air to ground and strike stuff, can't step on my pilots toes or help him out at all. Definitely wont touch any sensors or systems that is like half the curriculum of the B-course/MQ/upgrade cycle and half the role of my job. I'll just go and tell all my instructors that I had to brief over and over again, my air to air gameplan when I was going through the WSO flight lead upgrade, that sorry, what I briefed is useless, only listen to me in the Air to ground part. I definitely won't think that anything I do will matter when it comes to completing the mission, cause WSO's are just there for the air to ground, definitely isn't my fault when the defended asset gets bombed, my pilot Frats someone, we targetted the wrong dude which lead to somebody else dieing. When my pilot gets buried in the goo and loses track of the timeline, sorry bro, I'm just doing air to ground stuff, you got the radar, I'm definitely not going to help you out with that cause I have no idea what the hell is supposed to be going on there. When we are tripping defensive response, I'm most definitely not going to remind my pilot hey man, notch range is coming up, we are spiked lets notch south. When I hear the crucial piece of comm on the radio that nobody else has acknowledged about the low group that has end run around us and is about to have an unimpeded run to the defended asset, sorry I don't know anything about air to air, definitely not gonna talk up about that. I definitely won't call out jinks or anything defensively related when we are wrapped up in a dogfight with a flanker, thats the pilots job, and if he aint good enough, guess I get to die as well huh. If my pilots too fast going into his breakturn, I'm definitely not going to be telling him that, so the over-G that happens from being transonic is 100% his fault, not at all mine. When he gets slow in the break turn, I'm not gonna call out opt turn, or unload. Definitely not gonna tell him to tighten down when I see a heat nose from the bandit, most definitely not going to flare. WSO's/Pilots are aircrew and are both actively involved with every phase of the mission. you have no idea what you are talking about, at all.

Straight out of the heatblur manual for the elevation control.

Entering the speed for the JDAM is for achieving Desired Weapons effects on a hardened target. IE 700FPS may not have enough energy for bomb Y to penetrate X feet of concrete, but 900 may, depending on the impact angle etc... Honestly, not really necessary at all in DCS unless they do something more advanced with bomb impacts where delaying your fuze has a huge impact on the kind of damage you do to a structure or target set, and where you have to do a lot more than just get the bomb onto the target, in order to have the effects desired.

Its made with that in mind, its a PDF so you may wanna snip the screen image and throw it in the folder, or import it with kneeboard builder (my personal poison for this)

F2 view, ask jester, have the wingman check you out, remember what you dropped, otherwise.... nope. I don't think the little windows on the ACM panel have anything to do with bomb status, and they would be the only thing that could possibly show you.

I just made one yesterday for GBU's I just use the bomb body type. Did not include rockets yet. Its assumed you are taking the aircraft empty weight (42k) and then adding whatever your fuel gauges are showing you to it, followed by whatever ordnance is remaining. Thus I have not included internal fuel weights (although I may since its a good thing to know) https://www.dropbox.com/s/zqtunp294l2meax/F-14%20weight%20and%20told%20sheet.pdf?dl=0 Grabbed the data out of what I could find in various pub collections that people have posted up regarding the on speed and takeoff speeds. They should be correct for a B model with the CG's in DCS, but I make no promises they are perfect. Max E is correct as far as I can tell, all references I've found for it say to hold 10.0 on the AOA indicator and no matter your altitude, that is Max E The cruise and climb mach numbers are middle of the range numbers, theres a relatively small range for climb (.71-.76 per the charts) based on your drag index, so I just picked one in the middle. I'm probly gonna update it when I find a good KCAS so think climb at ~300 knots until you hit .74Mach, then fly .74Mach in your climb. The cruise is just one that seems not too fast or slow, no idea what standard cruise would be for a tomcat, you can also fly an AOA for that, but again, it varies slightly based on altitude and drag index, so I just picked a number, fly what you want.

Mig-23/ Su-15 Initially, After the mid 80's Su-27/Mig-29, and possibly the Mig-31 if in the right theaters. Keep in mind these are contemporaries/ what they would have expected to encounter, and less match for match equivalents.

Navy Expeditionary (non boat) squadrons will have regular ILS installed. So its not 100%

In the F-15 you can "latch" your cursors to an entity, and then it will tell you the range and bra and you don't have to manipulate your cursors when you look at your SA page equivalent you get the range, Also you build rules of thumb on the SA page equivalent, for example if I'm on a 80 miles scope, then our 20 mile wide formation needs to be 1/4 the width, or put the wingtip of my indicator on the SA page on the PPLI of my wingman will equal ~x range. EDIT: What RShackleford said