Jump to content

Sharpshooter

Members
  • Posts

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sharpshooter

  1. So the Su-30 really was the Su-27 but double-seat ? If it was being developed then it must have something new, what is it ?
  2. If I could ask only one question, it would be: Does the Kutznetsov even carry some A2G ordenance for their Su-33s ? I think that if someone could answer that question we would know if the Su-33 was intenden for some emergency A2G mission or if it was not intended to fulfill that task at all. Sorry if this has already been answered, I try to read all posts :)
  3. Maybe I´m the only one surprised by this statement, I thought that the west hadn´t looked at the Su-27 more than in photographs or airshows. Or at least, nothing they would publically admit. Never heared of it. Still its weird. Is your source secure? The source is your source. Look under customers, it´s the last line.
  4. Anyone knew about this ??? Maybe I´m the only one surprised by this statement, I thought that the west hadn´t looked at the Su-27 more than in photographs or airshows. Or at least, nothing they would publically admit.
  5. I think this is different, you will see the card on the shelves at the end of the year. Even if this card doesn´t hit it, I´m sure another will pop up, some competiton must be already developing a similar type of chip.There are some major investors in this and the Unreal Engine 3 is using this technology. Plus the chip already saw action on an expo, I don´t remember which. Defenetly we won´t see on 1.2, I´m talking about the LO:MAC succesor. To me the possibilities that this card doesn´t hit the shelves are slim and none.
  6. Not off the programmers, but off the CPU... :D Wouldn´t it be from both ? It seems to me that there has to be some standarized dev tool to use the PPU. It should take some workload off since the PPU should do automatically some kind of math operations (perhaps differentation or integration as GGTharos said) since that`s what it is there for, and that´s what it was designed for (physics specific calculus). Otherwise it would be like another CPU. I´m just guessing since you are the dev.
  7. Who would have known that the answer is just on it´s way ? Take a look at this: http://forum.lockon.ru/viewtopic.php?p=47586#47586
  8. Terrific Idea !!! If we have a Processing Unit for Graphics, why not for the growing factor of realistic physics ?. Takes workload off the programmers :)
  9. Let´s wait for the final version of 1.1, MAYBE that performance is caused by somekind of other problem that has already been fixed. If the final turns out to be that way, then ED will hear some complaints.
  10. a hundred percent agree. Marketing stuff is always optimistic, otherwise it wouldn´t sell, and that´s the whole purpose of marketing anyway. I was considering the opinion of the pilot buddy of ruggbut and I thought: How many 120s would a real pilot have seen fired in it´s career ?, probably against drones. Maybe he saw like 5 120s fired and they all hit (assuming he didn´t fire against a real life maneuvering target that are on extinction nowadays). So he said this "real life" hits plus all the papers from the Airforce that say it´s a killer missile, then it must really be a killer missile. But then how many virtual 120s fired we have seen ? I´m thinking of hundreds, and I have seen a lot hit, and I have seen a lot that have been fired when they shouldn´t have, and I ´ve seen some impressive maneuvers trash the missile. But then maybe I am wrong, and a few minutes from now someone comes very angry and proves all I´ve said is BS.
  11. I agree with you, the 120 can be defeated. But how would you make the 120 better, tell us that, not that the 120 doesn´t hit enough times or that it isn´t invincible. Tell us you identified the problem with the missile and are asking for it to be fixed. Do a track or something. At least tell us the parameters, because telling that you just pulled the trigger doesn´t help. You could tell us what did you say to your pilot buddy that made him state that the 120 modeled in the game isn´t even a match for the A version. Just, don´t get mad.
  12. (Before we start, all of this assuming you have the missile efficiency slider in the ACE position) Of course two aircraft can merge, but the possibilities are getting slimmer and slimmier with technology and SA. When I said no missile in the air I was assuming your long range shots had failed, and you were planning to fire another as he was pointing at you. Or another assumption, you were fighting another A/C and when you finish with it you realize that there is an F-15 in the neighborhood. Or perhaps the F-15 was flying low and you´ve just found it. There are tons of situations I can think of, of course it doesn´t happen when you´ve been patrolling that area for months (Homeland defense) and that is like the first time you see something out of place. Anyway it doesn´t matter if you fired or not, the point is that head on, the AMRAAM is likely to hit. Especially against the AI, they are just not good at evading missiles, they get lucky sometimes though, and sometimes is just the firing pilots fault. The only AMRAAMs being decoyed by chaff I´ve seen are the ones that barely have energy to follow their target and get a complete picture of the area (because their lead pursuit is not that, well, leading), and thus there is more possibility the missile will see the chaff, attempt to follow it for half a sec. and get the A/C out of the seeker view. What the heck is 'ACE' position? I keep mine in 'realistic' position, right at 50%. REAL missiles have significant seeker settling time, more so than the 50% position even simulates. Regardless, this setting doesn't affect the techniques mentioned since defeating the missiles is kinematic, and this option doesn't change the kinematics, only the vector errors (which SHOULD BE THERE ANYWAY!) Yes I meant half way the slider, realistic position. I thought that if you changed the difficulty to ACE it also chagned the missile slider to the medium position, but it doesn´t my mistake.
  13. Not if you use right. Beaming for me, is only useful for breaking SARH locks in terminal phase. Look at the way the AI employs it, it seems to have a sixth sense for knowing when the SARH missile is aboput to hit. When it´s about to hit they beam, break the lock, trash the missile. They get back and shoot you ARH missile :evil: . If you use the technic I said of looking up with you radar then you can´t be notched, but be aware that you end up in a bad position if there are more enemy fighters. I have a story when I was a young F4 pilot. Two Mig-25s notched me then fly straight towards me, notch again, until they were very close to me, as I didn´t see them with my radar, I had no EOS(F-16 don´t anyway :P), and I didn´t have a visual on them, adcquiring them was not easy. So as they were two and I was one scared little F-16 pilot they shot me down with it´s silent IR missiles. That is the end of what happened but bear in mind two Mig-29s were coming up, if I didn´t finish with the two Mig-25s they would kill me in no time when I were dealing with Mig-29s. If I tried to finish the Mig-25s the Mig-29s would splash me in no time, and the sky was pretty big to be maddoging AMRAAMs all over the place. All that if you don´t bear in mind that I had only 1 AMRAAM for each of them. Yes, you F4 pilots got it right is the AMRAAM training TE. PS: This Thread is ON FIRE. Good grief, you do realise I'm referring to using it in real life, don't you? i.e., "in PRACTICE". Mmm, no, I didn`t realize, but if it were possible (as many claim it is) those are some of the ways to use it. And don´t you think that if it didn´t work like that then real pilots wouldn´t bother to try it in first place, and if it worked then there are some ways to efficiently use it, making your statement that beaming in practice is getting yourself killed really, well, pointless, unless you back it up with a source. PS: When I said on fire I meant that, we are continiously posting on it. We meaybe not talking about missiles ballistics and logic, but we certainly do talk abpout everthing that revolves around missiles(ie. tactics, radar, ect.), I consider those topics as important and that are worth mentioning in this thread. Where did I say anything about; "...making your statement that beaming in practice is getting yourself killed .." I said NOTHING about beaming (because beaming is extremely effective for a number of well established reasons). I spoke only in relation to DOPPLER NOTCHING; there is huge difference. If you don't want to discuss the topic of this thread, then start another thread about a topic which you do want to discuss. I meant notch I´m sorry for the confusion. I don´t think it would be practical to create threads for every sub category, but this thread is turning into a mess anyway. Regardless a lot of relevant opinions have been stated, and that should clarify lot of things about current missile modelling and what should be done in the future with it. Until the moderator´s decide what to do (if they see fit to change anything).
  14. Yeah, Hard meneuvering is the way to go, but it doesn´t always work, you have to bear in mind you assume you know where the missile is by the F-15s radar emission power, but what if he turned away because he saw that big big smoke the R-27ET left, instead you didn´t see no smoke from his 120, it´s pretty tough to gain a tally on the missile without padlock. Also it is that Hard maneuver or nothing, if you didn´t time it right, you are toast. I guess you dont quite understand what I mean. The SPO-15 will always show you where the missile is because it has its own radar, and what the F-15 is doing has absolutely nothing to do with it. Hence you dont need to look for any smoke from his missiles. You will see a lock and launch warning followed by a rapid increase in emission power. That means the ARH missile is on its way. You just need to do what i desciber above and make a sharp turn towards the missile when its about 85-90%. And I dont see how, considering all this, is it possible to time it wrong?? I was wrong, OK ??? Question is if the SPO-15 always shows emission from the missile(ARH), ie because it is the most dangerous target or because it is an ARH, I think it is and then I think you are right. I didn´t consider that before.
  15. Not if you use right. Beaming for me, is only useful for breaking SARH locks in terminal phase. Look at the way the AI employs it, it seems to have a sixth sense for knowing when the SARH missile is aboput to hit. When it´s about to hit they beam, break the lock, trash the missile. They get back and shoot you ARH missile :evil: . If you use the technic I said of looking up with you radar then you can´t be notched, but be aware that you end up in a bad position if there are more enemy fighters. I have a story when I was a young F4 pilot. Two Mig-25s notched me then fly straight towards me, notch again, until they were very close to me, as I didn´t see them with my radar, I had no EOS(F-16 don´t anyway :P), and I didn´t have a visual on them, adcquiring them was not easy. So as they were two and I was one scared little F-16 pilot they shot me down with it´s silent IR missiles. That is the end of what happened but bear in mind two Mig-29s were coming up, if I didn´t finish with the two Mig-25s they would kill me in no time when I were dealing with Mig-29s. If I tried to finish the Mig-25s the Mig-29s would splash me in no time, and the sky was pretty big to be maddoging AMRAAMs all over the place. All that if you don´t bear in mind that I had only 1 AMRAAM for each of them. Yes, you F4 pilots got it right is the AMRAAM training TE. PS: This Thread is ON FIRE. Good grief, you do realise I'm referring to using it in real life, don't you? i.e., "in PRACTICE". Mmm, no, I didn`t realize, but if it were possible (as many claim it is) those are some of the ways to use it. And don´t you think that if it didn´t work like that then real pilots wouldn´t bother to try it in first place, and if it worked then there are some ways to efficiently use it, making your statement that beaming in practice is getting yourself killed really, well, pointless, unless you back it up with a source. PS: When I said on fire I meant that, we are continiously posting on it. We meaybe not talking about missiles ballistics and logic, but we certainly do talk abpout everthing that revolves around missiles(ie. tactics, radar, ect.), I consider those topics as important and that are worth mentioning in this thread.
  16. Yeah, Hard meneuvering is the way to go, but it doesn´t always work, you have to bear in mind you assume you know where the missile is by the F-15s radar emission power, but what if he turned away because he saw that big big smoke the R-27ET left, instead you didn´t see no smoke from his 120, it´s pretty tough to gain a tally on the missile without padlock. Also it is that Hard maneuver or nothing, if you didn´t time it right, you are toast.
  17. Not if you use right. Beaming for me, is only useful for breaking SARH locks in terminal phase. Look at the way the AI employs it, it seems to have a sixth sense for knowing when the SARH missile is aboput to hit. When it´s about to hit they beam, break the lock, trash the missile. They get back and shoot you ARH missile :evil: . If you use the technic I said of looking up with you radar then you can´t be notched, but be aware that you end up in a bad position if there are more enemy fighters. I have a story when I was a young F4 pilot. Two Mig-25s notched me then fly straight towards me, notch again, until they were very close to me, as I didn´t see them with my radar, I had no EOS(F-16 don´t anyway :P), and I didn´t have a visual on them, adcquiring them was not easy. So as they were two and I was one scared little F-16 pilot they shot me down with it´s silent IR missiles. That is the end of what happened but bear in mind two Mig-29s were coming up, if I didn´t finish with the two Mig-25s they would kill me in no time when I were dealing with Mig-29s. If I tried to finish the Mig-25s the Mig-29s would splash me in no time, and the sky was pretty big to be maddoging AMRAAMs all over the place. All that if you don´t bear in mind that I had only 1 AMRAAM for each of them. Yes, you F4 pilots got it right is the AMRAAM training TE. PS: This Thread is ON FIRE.
  18. Nope, I was using just one pitbull launched AIM-120 in the air at a time against the lead Su-30s (there were two, one trailing several miles), The first pitbull missile missed the closest Su but the second missile killed it, however the second Su-30 manoeuvred aggressively against the AIM-120 and lost it while dumping decoys, but once the Su had finished its missile avoidance turns it was now facing toward me more squarely :!: ... once I saw the AIM-120 miss I launched an AIM-9M at about 2.5 nm range, head to head, but the Su got off an R-73 a second later. I was super-sonic with full tanks and externals so couldn't turn (I had just topped up the tanks), and he was in an energy sink from the turns and could not escape, so we both got hit (yeah, should have dropped external tanks but the Su's were going after my tanker and getting very close to launch distance ... :shock: ) Finally some actual eivdence. Range when you fired your first 120 ? Aspect ? You mean pitbull as radar lock, then seeker going active then drop lock ?, or you mean maddog, 120 fired without radar lock ? All I could say is with a plain head on the F-15 always wins. Look man, this is simply untrue. Go online and fly an F-15, throw AMRAAMs at people. Most will get blown up when you launch inside of 10nm, but you'll find a bunch of guys out there who'll trash it every time and slap you with an ET or something. The AI isn't smart enough to do what a player can. Remember that now the ETs don´t have datalink. The disadvantage of that is that people get warned the very first moment the 120 is released, that´s why they are able to defeat it. The defeat it´s because it´s energy is very low compared when launched from 10nm, so they manuever, a little chaff to the recipe, and it´s done. Remember that the netcode could be actually be making the missile less effective. Better than making tha 120 deadlier, is to make it´s launch realistic. The target A/C shouldn´t have warning until the seeker goes active, nobody seemed to be bothered by that, in my opinion it is a huge advantage. I´m claiming the same thing for Russian SARH (don´t know about AIM-7), they claim the missiles have datalink, but what it is good for if the launching platform always sends the seekers guiding signal from the very first moment of launch, instead of sending it in the terminal phase like it says in those Datasheets (Datalink guidance for mid-course, and terminal SARH homing) The way it is modeled now the targets RWR is lit up from the very first moment of the launch, the other way only in terminal flight (at a predefined distance fo the missile from the target). This gives the arget less reaction time.
  19. All I can say is that you seriously need to adopt some new missile avoidance techniques if that’s the case for you. :wink: Inside 20Km with circumstances I explained in my last post. Seriously speaking about my skills. Head-On F-15 AMRAAM AI against Me Su-27 ER R. I have a 50% chance of winning, the AI is so stupid that throws out his 120Cs at max range, I have better probability of defeating them at that range, I fire ER, descend and drop chaff, crash the 120 into the sea, looking up ith my radar the ER has 60% chance of hitting, if it doesn´t then the F-15C is in a vulnerable position (because of the beaming he´s done) so I fire the more maneuberable R-27R and win :P All of this assuming I crash the 120 into the sea, otherwise i´m screwed because I have to drop the lock, then the 15 gets closer=dead me. I have not found a better tactic to defeat a 120 while not dropping the lock. With only R-27R (R-27T and TE out of my arsenal now tht they don´t have datalink) I do the same but I will have to do with firing my R-27R after he fired his 120. What tactics would you use ?, I can always learn you know. The 120 being undermodeled or not, we talk about winning battles not defeating missiles.
  20. (Before we start, all of this assuming you have the missile efficiency slider in the ACE position) Of course two aircraft can merge, but the possibilities are getting slimmer and slimmier with technology and SA. When I said no missile in the air I was assuming your long range shots had failed, and you were planning to fire another as he was pointing at you. Or another assumption, you were fighting another A/C and when you finish with it you realize that there is an F-15 in the neighborhood. Or perhaps the F-15 was flying low and you´ve just found it. There are tons of situations I can think of, of course it doesn´t happen when you´ve been patrolling that area for months (Homeland defense) and that is like the first time you see something out of place. Anyway it doesn´t matter if you fired or not, the point is that head on, the AMRAAM is likely to hit. Especially against the AI, they are just not good at evading missiles, they get lucky sometimes though, and sometimes is just the firing pilots fault. The only AMRAAMs being decoyed by chaff I´ve seen are the ones that barely have energy to follow their target and get a complete picture of the area (because their lead pursuit is not that, well, leading), and thus there is more possibility the missile will see the chaff, attempt to follow it for half a sec. and get the A/C out of the seeker view.
  21. Nope, I was using just one pitbull launched AIM-120 in the air at a time against the lead Su-30s (there were two, one trailing several miles), The first pitbull missile missed the closest Su but the second missile killed it, however the second Su-30 manoeuvred aggressively against the AIM-120 and lost it while dumping decoys, but once the Su had finished its missile avoidance turns it was now facing toward me more squarely :!: ... once I saw the AIM-120 miss I launched an AIM-9M at about 2.5 nm range, head to head, but the Su got off an R-73 a second later. I was super-sonic with full tanks and externals so couldn't turn (I had just topped up the tanks), and he was in an energy sink from the turns and could not escape, so we both got hit (yeah, should have dropped external tanks but the Su's were going after my tanker and getting very close to launch distance ... :shock: ) Finally some actual eivdence. Range when you fired your first 120 ? Aspect ? You mean pitbull as radar lock, then seeker going active then drop lock ?, or you mean maddog, 120 fired without radar lock ? All I could say is with a plain head on the F-15 always wins.
  22. I´m not saying you can´t, only that if you do you end up in a position that you wouldn´t want to be into, you´ll get splashed anyway. I say if an eagle pilot has 120s and you are like 20km from him you have 20% chances of surviving, provided he knows were you are and he is somewhat trained. All this counting that you still don´t have a missile in the air, if you do you could splash him, but he´ll splash you to.
  23. R-73 ... 40 km?! Very funny, as is the R-27TE = 130 km ... what a crock. :D Well I guess that if you set up a drone that flyes head on towards the aicraft at 3500Km/h and that has a huge heat source installed in it´s fuselage(probably lots of flares) and the aircraft is doing normal speed, then I think you could get the R-73 in LockOn to get a signal at that range and intercept the drone. What is strange is the R-27TE, not even the world´s most powreful heat seeker could lock on an atomic bomb at that range (I´m going crazy), so it might indicate that it has somekind of Datalink :), or it might indicate that it was fired blind hoping to intercept a target.
  24. Let´s make it easier for everyone. You do at least two tracks where you defeat an AIM-120C fired at let´s say 8nm. I know I have done everything you said and came up with different results. I tried defeating it from 8nm, 10nm, anyway at ranges where it´s energy it´s very high. I´ve managed to succeed few times and it made me turn my tail and be the chased one. The only one I know tha works and doesn´t make you turn your tail is driving the missile to the ground. I also tried with an Excelent Su-30 to see if he could do something. From twenty kilometers and closer ranges he got slammed every time, with good firing parameters (the eagle pilot wasn´t doing nothing funny just ponting his nose and thus missiles directly at the target). I tried two Su-30s, and then 4, all the missiles that the F-15 fired hit. The no escape zone has specific parameters I know. But for that zone to work the pilot has to know how to use it, he doesn´t just pull the trigger. You can´t just pull the trigger at any situation an go saying "Hey ! The no escape zone is BS !!!" (I´m not saying you did)
×
×
  • Create New...