KlarSnow

The apg-70 has had the ability to track a moving target with its radar since the very beginning. I’m aware of the apg-63 and it’s upgrade train and no the v1 is not as good as the 70, they never got the same set of signal processors, nor was it purpose built for those tasks like the -70. Is it a good radar, yes, is it as good as it does it have all the capes of the -70. No. Apg-70 also has sea search and track modes.

First I've heard of the APG-70 not being able to do GMTT considering I used it all the time in combat and elsewhere. I would strongly contest the APG-63(v)1 being a better radar. The APG-70 is about as good as you can get for a mech scanned fighter radar these days. The APG-82 is currently the best fighter AESA radar, it has the advantages of not having the developmental problems that the APG-63 series had as it was developed (think developed specifically as an AESA from whole cloth as opposed to implemented in parts), And the biggest aperture, power, and cooling to throw through that AESA to boot.

Not a bug, they use the same antennas and systems. if Datalink is on, TACAN MUST be on as well.

60 to 1 math. at a range of 60NM, 1 degree equals 1NM or ~6000 feet. You can run the formula back and forth to figure out the amount of elevation/azimuth covered at various ranges and settings. running this all the way back 1 degree equals 100 feet per nautical mile of elevation. Thus If I am scanning for something at 50 miles, and he is 10,000 feet below me I should center my scan 2 degrees low. (1 degree at 50 miles = 5000 feet of elevation)

Ah, k that's all just the big MFD screen and display upgrades. Sorry to bust the bubble but USAF F-15E's can't carry JDAM on the cheek stations, they aren't 1533 wired :( Only the 6 lower stations, Station 5 (centerline) and 2/8 (wing pylons) are wired up for smart weapons. No joke the greatest impact on performance I've ever seen was actually from GBU-12's. carrying 4 on one side is a ton of drag. They have a much bigger impact on your takeoff roll and flight performance just due to the extra drag than carrying 5 GBU-31's does.

Current Strike Eagles just got Aim-9X last year, so thats brand new, JHMCS, MPCD's, and the ADCP have all been around longer than I've been flying em (4 years). Dunno when exactly they showed up. ADCP II is coming someday about the same time EPAWWS shows up (thats the *two weeks* joke of the Eagle community). Strike Eagles have had Snipers much longer than any C model unit has. All LANTIRN TPOD's have been phased out as of 2016 as far as I'm aware, its all Sniper now Other thing to keep in mind when you are talking about C models is Guard vs Active duty. The guard jets will have a ton of upgrades and things that you may or may not see on Active duty C models, because they have their own pot of money and chain of command to go through to get that stuff done. Instead of having to wait for the Air Force to get around to it. Active duty C models are just now getting Satcom, E's have had them forever (longer than I've been in the jet). No idea what PASS/PAD, FPCI or VDSR are, you'll have to elucidate those acronyms cause I'm not familiar with em, maybe we call them by a different name? APG-82s are the bees knees, best AESA radar out there right now. Big aperture with lotsa power, plus AESA goodness, plus not the developmental nightmare that the APG63vX series was for so long. As far as I'm aware MHAFB is complete, no idea what the ratio of -70's to -82s are, can't say for sure if its 100% or not.

Start looking up how expensive it is to maintain these jets, and then you will understand why there are not any/many of them flying. Military jets, especially twin engined ones are ridiculously expensive to maintain. Especially once you consider that any sources for spares have probably dried up, so you are now fabricating your own or scavenging them off of other aircraft. This is not to say that dedicated collectors/millionaires/groups cannot do this, but it becomes fairly obvious why certain aircraft (mig-15/17, Hawker Hunters, the occasional F-104, T-38s) that are relatively simple have been maintained on the personal market/airshow circuit, and others have not. Also look at how many of the more complex aircraft (hunter, F-104 etc) there actually are that are flying and realize that those are going to be far simpler (for the most part) than any of the heavy metal we would like to see. Bottom line, military aircraft, especially twin engine fighter jets are prohibitively expensive to maintain and operate safely by anything other than government level budgets.

Alerax, quick question cause this is awesome, but can it handle a carrier that changes course? My group uses a script to turn the carrier into the wind and dynamically set the BRC based on what the local wind conditions are, can this script handle that? Also can it be used with two separate carriers at once?

What if any are the plans for the mission editor and editing routes for multiplayer? I know there are 3rd part apps in development for the mission planning side of things, but with the ability to have 3 routes stored in a jet, are there any plans for a way to create and transmit for a lack of better terms the data cartridge or at least the route between players on a server. Same for when things like the SA page have lines and graphics and threat rings that should be able to be edited and would be helpful to be able to have commonality between members of a flight.

Not sure if reserves are supposed to receive the info/email or not, but I have received nothing so far, also unable to connect to TS server

In the F-15 what you are seeing on the radar screen is a digitally processed and filtered result, anything IRL that you see on the screen has passed whatever filters and processing is in place in the radar to be displayed as a contact. You do not see anything like a raw radar return on the scope. They all look the same, no way to tell RCS. IFF is indeed something the F-15C is known for, is partially why in Operation Desert Storm the F-15C's were running the A/A CAPs into Iraq, instead of for example the Navy's Tomcats. The Tomcat did not have the IFF capabilities that the Eagle did, and with the ROE set in place and the congested coalition air environment that was decided so as to reduce the potential for fratricide.

CW or PD doesnt change the fact a SARH missile needs constant RF energy on the target for terminal guidance. We still have the CW horn in the radar on the E model with APG-70's. Have never trained or done anything for the sparrow since its old as dirt and the USAF retired it well before I went through.

So for SARH missiles how are they terminally guided to their targets IE how do they go from their mid course flight to impacting/getting close enough to fuse on a small maneuvering aircraft. They do this with the CW illuminator that just provides a spotlight of energy on the target so the SARH missile can always see the brightest reflection with a continuous update rate as it is making its final and usually most aggressive maneuvers. So even if you could TWS shoot with SARH missiles and they datalinked their way out to targets until terminal, you would still need the CW illuminator for the endgame for each missile, which (unless you are a MiG-31 with its fancy pants Flashdance radar) you only get one of. The idea that lead to the first active missiles (phoenix) was to move the CW illuminator off the aircraft and into the missile. Thus removing that need for terminal guidance from the launching aircraft, while increasing the standoff range. It eventually became simpler/more capable to just give the missile its own radar and guidance logic, which leads us to present day AMRAAM and similiar Active radar missiles. Remember missile datalinks aren't magical and give the missile the full data of the lock, at an instantaneous refresh rate.It is limited by the antenna, the technology, and whatever method the transmitting aircraft has to send it. So there is latency and an update/refresh rate. Which is far slower than the speed of light(RF) updates the CW illuminator will give.

Yup Hughes made the radar but the overall point is the people designing the user interface and how it all works and is displayed to the pilot/aircrew for the F-15C/E were a totally different set of people with different design philosophies and needs and requirements than the people doing it for the F-16. Also remember that even though there is reprogrammable/replaceable hardware (LRU's) and OFP's, there are also still quite a lot of hardware limitations to how this stuff works, which can limit the modes and capabilities you have. There is no such thing as a standard, or best set of practices for this stuff. We are honestly pretty lucky that a bunch of conventions translate fairly well from one to the other.

Because thats not how TWS and RWS work in the F-15. Just because it is an american jet and follows similiar conventions to what is in the F-16/18 does not at all mean the HOTAS or mechanization is similiar. I would expect the hornet to be a completely different beast as far as radar mech as well. The F-15 radar (mech scanned version) does not "Soft lock" things. Commanding a lock puts you into STT just like in DCS. You have to actively switch to TWS, again just like in DCS. There is a lot more functionality there that we don't have in the sim but the basic mechanization is spot on for the F-15. If you want why its like that. Two reasons I can think of off the top of my head. First: McDonnell Douglas product v Lockheed product. Think iPhone V Android, you can get a lot of the same stuff done and certain conventions are the same, but how you get there is very different. Second: F-15 radar and HOTAS was designed in the days when men were men and your only BVR missile was the Sparrow. Since you are only going to be shooting one target at a time you want to immediately go from search to a shootable lock, no wasting around in other modes since they are not as conducive to seeing and shooting immediately.

After 450+ combat hours, and 850 hours flying the Strike Eagle, I have heard regularly female A-10 pilots, Female F/A-18 pilots, Female F-15E Pilots/WSO's, Female F-16 pilots, all Female tanker crews (at least on the radio). The best AWACS (best at providing SA and doing things in a way that helps instead of draining SA and time) voice I heard while flying out there was an extremely sexy female voice that we were applauding in the cockpit after she made the best damn picture call of the entire six month rotation. Women and their voices absolutely have a place in military airpower and fighter aviation, they have done everything that men have done and have had to fight uphill the whole way. Something I just learned from the wikipedia article on WASP's concerning their sacrifice: "Thirty-eight WASP fliers lost their lives while serving during the war, all in accidents. Eleven died in training and twenty-seven on active duty. Because they were not considered military under the existing guidelines, a fallen WASP was sent home at family expense without traditional military honors or note of heroism. The army would not allow the U.S. flag to be placed on the coffin of the fallen WASP." Just do a modicum of research as has already been shown and you will see that they were there. Lydia Litvyak and Yekaterina Budonova are a great place to start. Side note: One of the most memorable experiences to me in a flight sim was as a 10 year old playing X wing Vs Tie Fighter and realizing that the screams of agony and whoops of joy from my fellow Rebel pilots as we bravely fought the empire included both male and female voices, it definitely impressed upon me that girls can fight and die for freedom and what is right just as much as the boys can. Was it real? Historically accurate? No! Was it a simple act of inclusion that helped me (at least) immerse myself in a situation and realize that diversity meant strength. And when my little sisters asked me what game I was playing I could say look! Girls fly for the rebels too! End Side Note: If the inclusion of female voices in DCS makes one woman (or man) feel more comfortable and gives them the little extra "something" that makes them love the sim that we all love, then it will have been worth the time. And more realistic to boot! Absolutely nothing to lose so +1 from me!

Signed up for 1 v 1 Klarsnow

I agree with these things. Just a thought for MVP, going off of pure score is one way to do it, but it also does not allow for unscorable intangibles, things like whose strategy was it, who lead the team and kept it coordinated, who kept everybody's SA up, or pulled a save out of thin air. Stuff that we who participated can definitely all talk to, but that will probly not show up in the scoresheet. Team voting for MVP is a possible solution in these kinds of matches. IE everybody rank everybody else on your team for MVP secretly, and that gets factored in to the MVP calculation. I would vote for Tek as well, due to his pushing our Alpha strike that gave team Fishbed such a strong lead and solid momentum for the entire match.

Stuge, just wanted to check, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm seeing a lot of invalid respawns for redfor in the match resulting in several lost points. I'm pretty sure in the match briefing that Hooks OKed selecting role instead of rearming, due to the viggen situation and various bugs(R-60M tone). At least that was the impression I was under. Not knocking anybody here, just want to make sure that didn't get missed somewhere. Thanks!

-Callsign :Klarsnow -Current SA Ranking : no ranking Squadron Name: Lone Wolf Squadron Website: N/A Nationality: American Location : England Available on December 10th: YES Chosen aircraft: Mig-21