TucksonSonny

Merry Christmas / Happy Babushka / Happy Holiday Anyway this was Christmas Day in Bastogne Belgium on 26 December 1944. Troops of the 101st Airborne Division watch C-47’s drop supplies to them.

Ok, but a 5th generation Su combat aircraft with new engines could do it without stress. (Still under development of course) An Su-27M has begun flying with AL-41F1 engines. First flight was some time ago. The original Al-41F engine which was designed to let the Mig-1.44 supercruise at mach 1.66 could be used for the Su-27. With the original spec AL-41 the Flanker should supercruise to Mach 2 with a minimum load. AL-41F1 is supposed to be 140kN (31473lb), according to the Jane's MAKS 2003 report, and AL-41F is 175kN (almost 40,000lb).

I am working at the office with a Dell desktop (Intel 3Ghz) You don’t need SF to freeze your Dell especially after writing CD’s. (My colleague has the same problem)

Konkussion, I just don’t believe in that 6:0 kill ratio against the F-15C. Anyway the 22 was already killed once in recent exercises (I think by an F-16) Thus outnumbering is a problem. BTW, I live in Belgium (NATO HQ)

It could be important with an ET on your six. BTW, there still is mid air-refueling. Of course I do understand that there is a huge advantage for the 22 to penetrate deep into enemy territory. There is also another question open: Is the 22 save in a SA-10 (latest versions) environment.

Pfff, what is the deal. Almost a year ago the hundredth eurofighter went operational and more than 700 will follow. Occasionally I cruise on line for about 60km at mach 2.3 with the Su-27 @ 15km alt with 2 R-73’s left. The Raptor can’t even go over mach 2. :icon_supe

I have converted about 30 Falcon4 pilots with photo into FC. I have also created about 20 new Russian pilots (with photo). In all my custom missions I have replaced the pilotx.name into real names. You need to make them all back to live after a couple of missions because otherwise you end up with a death squadron. (replace all the “status=0 with status=1” in the “pilots.xml” file with an editor) The idea is to make it more personal. It is nice to see AI pilots do promote and let them make career too. Call it superstition but having the F-15C expert AI pilot “Pete Bonanni” is a tougher opponent.:D BTW, once back alive they do accumulate stats again.

My preinstalled Nero express still burns CD’s (and DVD’s in single and dual layer) after installing of at least 2 different games using SF. Ripper program also has no any problems. Good bye $1000. :biggrin:

Even without facing plasma technology I have doubt that the F/A-22 will do the job. I read somewhere that the Su-27 upgrade program (finished by now/in progress?) also includes a radar-absorbent paint. together with N011M radar, GPS, refuelling probe, provision for targeting pods, VOR, DME, new navigation computer. (Missile support includes R77, Kh31, Kh59T, Kh29T, KAB 500 and 1500 TV guided bombs). Russian SU-27/30 BM (Big Modification. this upgrade brings the SU-27s to the SU-30MKI standard) and SU-27UBM (Parallel upgrade to the SU-30KN) My point is the F-22 could face a complete different kind of Su-27 fleet using multiple jamming and of course data link similar with western Link 16. How would the F-22 deal with this kind of opponent? One Su play the AWACS role and the others shut off radar. Once the AWACS role playing SU is under attack it could switch off his radar and another su would take over the AWACS role. I understand that the F-22 uses also the same tactic. One F-22 plays AWACS role (and would be vulnerable with radar on) and the others go in stealth mode using the data link. Take into account that the F-22 fleet will be outnumbered in each hypothetical conflict. Of course this is just speculation from my part..:icon_supe

Experiment: - Put a lighted candle in your microwave oven and turn it on. Result: You have just created Plasma Stealth Technology. Please take note: I am not responsible if the experiment goes wrong and you get hurt or your wife also could kill you after the experiment. Anyhow, don’t try this at home. The theory: Apparently the flame, which is, of course plasma, absorbs the microwaves, and becomes self-sustaining, absorbing the microwave energy, and actually spreading. It may be that the Russian plasma generator works the same way. Plasma is ionized gas, which means that it's atoms have so much kinetic energy that valence electrons have been freed through atomic-level collisions. I suppose a radio signal encountering a plasma stream would easily be subject to dispersion. The electromagnetic radio wave encountering the plasma would become highly energized and change directions. This would cause it not to be reflected back to the radar station, and thus the radar station would have no knowledge of the aircraft's presence. It could be possible (and this is complete speculation on my part) that plasma could also entrap and dissipate the energy of the radio wave. This is what radar-absorbent materials currently do, like "IronBall," which is the nickname for the radar-absorbent paint used on planes like the F-22. They use ferro-magnetic (permanently magnetized) materials to try bounce the signal around until it dies, so that it can't reflect back to the radar station. Having a plasma stream do this would increase stealthiness without sacrificing aerodynamics and it may be more weight-effective." The system developed by the Russians is also based on electromagnetic wave-plasma interactions, but in a very different way. Russian stealth plasma device creates a plasma field around an aircraft. This field partially consumes electromagnetic energy of a hostile radar or causes it to bend around the aircraft, reducing the aircraft RCS by up to 100 times. Sounds fantastic? Not really: effects of dissipation and bending of electromagnetic signals in presence of plasma field have been observed for decades. If there is anything new about the system developed by the Russians it certainly is not the theoretical part but technical aspects of the plasma generator. Keldysh Research Center claims to have developed, built and tested a plasma shield generator that weighs only 100 kg. :rolleyes:

First of all talking with a little sarcasm (telling a little lie to get the truth) is my way to get truth out of people. The way Goon answered to my suggestion made me believe that he actually made these kills without AWACS and because he is skilled. 5 kills with 0 losses are a pretty nice achievement with the Su-27 and he (Goon) must be indeed a skilled pilot. Last weekend I could not achieve more than 1 kill and land once with the Su27. I got my 50 points score but became a little reckless and had less success later. Anyway I don’t give up on the Su-27 and like I have said before I can make occasionally kills on F-15C’s in 1 on 1 situation. But anyhow, it is funny that Mr. USA of the local forum at this time accuses people to be without skills, without knowing the identity (call sign) of these people.

Nice Goon, Playing on your own server! With or without AWACS/CGI, that is the question. Of course if I am playing on my personal server with AWACS via lua script and everything on my other AWACS PC then things go easy too. BTW, I noticed an F-15C pilot with 4 losses and a ping of 396

We can easily detect a cheat like you describe. Just count the missile launches between take-off and landing or crash in the briefing. BTW, I am happy to hear that this is some kind of a language bug and Mr. Taipan is clean. Later on in the evening he was using again real 120’ s:beer:

That guy got warnings from 3 people including me that something was wrong but would not listen. He just keeps making kills while others were saying that his missiles were not appearing in the briefing. The save bug was corrected before 1.11 and these missiles were not showing up! Thus I consider this as a cheat! I also realize that you can change names easy.

New scandal on =RAF=Dedicated about 15 minutes ago. 169th_Taipan or somebody (flying F-15C for Blue) using his name was cheating with stealth missiles (with no warning, and missiles don’t show up in briefing)

I don’t understand why he was using R-27EM (EM cheat on Su-27) because in 1.11 EM has the same range as ER. It is anyway a faster missile in the 1.11 encyclopedia but I can’t say that I ever noticed advantage with EM’s on the su-33. The AIM54 is useless like R-27ER is also in 1.11.

Hi Jinker, Can you do something for me? Start my mission and take-off with the Su-27 (click Fly) Next to your airfield you find the city NOVOROSSIJSK; Just do a couple of low fly-over the city @ about 100p altitude. Use 1600x1200 together with your famous 120 FPS-above city mod and take a couple of screenies like me with about the same zoom and FPS counter on. mission: http://users.skynet.be/VandenHaute/locon/Russia_Nato_sweep_su27_easyII_AWACS_III.mis screenshots: http://users.skynet.be/VandenHaute/locon/ScreenShot_011.jpg http://users.skynet.be/VandenHaute/locon/ScreenShot_012.jpg http://users.skynet.be/VandenHaute/locon/ScreenShot_013.jpg The thing is I got decent 50-70 FPS but my OC was not doing much going over cities. Tell me the magic trick X3dFlyer :biggrin:

Please explain me what do you mean with flawed TWS? I suppose you know why TWS is flawed compared with LRS, but what make you think that RWS is flawed in FC 1.11 versus Real Life? Can you maybe give an example?

That was one hell of a costly spam record supported by AWACS :icon_kidr

Face it: in version 1.02 it was a problem to get a free slot for the Su-27 online. Now in version 1.11 all the slots for the Mig-29s and F-15C are in use and mostly Su-27 slots are still open. (Together with the score table proof that balance is broken) @Pilotasso, All this talk against the AWACS support idea for the Su27 is kind of hypocrite. The idea was just to restore the balance again not improving our tactics. I still can occasionally score a kill F-15C with the Su but I have the impression that I am fighting with a long-bow against a rifle. Anyway I pick the mig29s next time. Problem solved...

Oops I mean R-73 Archer (not adder). You even have not seen my mistake there :biggrin:

I am surprised that an ED tester did not know this stuff :icon_wink German Mig-29 pilots demonstrated the adder advantage during Red flag exercises in the US.

Bad example … Noobs involved :biggrin:

What do you mean in other conflicts? Maybe you consider Iraq and yugo-war as an equal scientific test case. Please stop …

If the best pilot will win put him in a mig-21. Su’s can take better advantage of AWACS because they need to stay out of range of shorter AIM-120 range and keep lock while f-poling and more importantly the Su pilot does not have to guess the range. For the F-15C pilot it is the opposite. Because the ideal range for AIM-120 launch is anyway inside ECM burn through range. Of course F-15C pilot get also advantage with AIM-7. BTW in 1990 (lomac’s simulation period) Russian datalink was superior vs western datalink and AIM-120 was B (not C version) and of course R-73 was far more effective than AIM-9. It was recently AIM-9X that changed that situation.