ShuRugal

It has been my experience that this is the opposite of true. While most squads fly with TS, the majority of individual pilots don't bother. This results in some rather frustrating encounters online when trying to sort jammers or organize runway clearance.

They already have, gotta use 3rd-party commo tools to be effective.

that makes sense.

according to a quick Google, the AIM-7 and the R-77 both have a 200mm diameter.

Incorrect. At any TAS below Mach 1.0, the sounds of the aircraft will move ahead of the aircraft. At very high subsonic speed, it won't move -much- ahead of the aircraft, but when measured from a point close to the path of travel (as opposed to several hundred meters away from it, as at an airshow) the sound will reach the observer before the aircraft does, if only by a few fractions of a second.

can you not hear the oscilations and harmonics? sounds like someone playing with the DJ's distortion pedal.

Shouldn't the R-77 have a lower drag coefficient when outside of the transsonic region? I thought that was the point of the grid-fin? Of course, in transsonic, those things turn into great big saucepans due to wave-drag blocking up the grids...

So, it seems that the audio engine really does not like doppler-shifting the sounds from a plane approaching at trans-sonic speeds:

If all you want to do is spoof your bandit into thinking you've launched, FLOOD mode is great for that (or will be once they fix it again). But, generally speaking, it's better to just go ahead and shoot. If he's good enough to evade a live -120C shot in good parameters, he's good enough to know better than to hit eject when the RWR starts screaming. If he's not good enough to know better than to yank the stick out of the floor, your 120 will kill him.

I suspect that the reason for being able to achieve such speed is that damage from drag is not modeled. IRL, the engine would flame out or the intake would melt. Low down it is not possible to reach max speed, IRL or in DCS, because drag force is greater than available thrust. In aircraft that have enough thrust to reach mach 2 low down (mig 25 is a good example) doing so destroys the compressor stage of the engine fairly quickly.

Ah, I was under the impression that until reaching terminal guidance, an ARH could be guided as SARH, if launched in STT instead of TWS. Also, doesn't the AIM-120 (and other missiles) use a molten-salt battery? Would it even be possible to power the radar without the motor burning? What you are referring to is a mad-dog launch. In this mode, the missile has no target info at all, and picks up the first thing it sees after leaving the rail.

I solve this problem by selecting R73 when in TWS and i'm not ready to shoot. I only switch to my ERs when I'm ready to shoot.

For me, i have this problem in reverse. In the F-15, I cannot use the radar because I don't know where my vertical radar LoS is. In the flanker, I always know what altitude I am aiming at relative to my own, and I have a good idea of my altitude span at any given range. The HUD cue which shows the vertical LoS AND FoV of the radar in relation to the HUD LoS/FoV is, for me, a lifesaver. If I spot something visually that is too far to pick up in vertical scan (IE: contrail, missile trail/splash) I can instantly find it on radar by pointing my HUD at it and adjusting radar vertical to align with HUD. Similarly, If I lock a target that is far below me, I can point my nose at him, align my antenna to my nose, and have a much easier time picking him back up if he breaks lock by notching.

#1 should not be possible. The AIM-9 can do this because it looks for actively radiating targets. The AIM-120 (and all other radar-guided missiles) look for the reflection of the launching aircraft's radar illumination signal. This requires the launching AC radar to be in guidance mode, the target to be locked by the launching AC, and the missile to be tuned to the frequency and code of the guiding radar. It is my understand (based on a few informative posts made by GGTharos in the recent budy-guiding thread) that the last step is performed when the pilot commands the missile to launch. For #2, radar in game is largely a set of scripted states. There is (currently) no actual simulation of radar signals. The RWR, consequently, behaves oddly. FLOOD mode should trigger the RWR of every aircraft illuminated by it either as a STT lock or as a missile-guidance lock. As Codefox said, it used to behave this way.

Obvious troll is obvious. Plz I can has status quo? Kthxbye.

Short of introducing a script whereby pressing "release weapons" in an F15 causes all airborne Su-27s to eject their engines, the situation cannot be made worse.

In that case, how about you leave off telling us poor flanker pilots how much we are gonna hate life when the fruits of your research are finally realised, and instead implement the fixes you keep telling us we don't want and let us judge the results for ourselves?

This. Unless you don't mind getting blasted out of the sky on a regular basis, don't jump feet-first into 104th, it's arguably the most brutally aggressive A2A public server. Not at all new-pilot friendly, barely even veteran-friendly.

I can't speak as to the rest of the denizens of these forums, but I know that I am getting rather tired of reading this same condescending remark from you every time there is a thread about the absolute rubbish state of the R-27. I, personally, could care less how magical the 120C would become if it were modeled the way you want it. I say "go for it", really. Give the 120C it's Wiki-ganda specs, and the R-27 family the same. From where I sit, the 120C won't be notably better than it is now, and I'll get my teeth back in the Flanker. I am confident enough in my piloting ability to say that, with an R-27ER performing at its published capability, I would be able to survive the majority of 1v1 engagements with F15s while maintaining a reasonable chance of a kill. If you are so confident in the 120, then why do you feel the need to drop into every conversation about the R-27 and remind us how superior you are?

The problem I have with the ER in its current state is that it is sufficiently easy to spoof that any launch outside of 15km does not require a significant shift in offensive posture to ensure survival, and a launch outside 20km can be ignored long enough to get a pair of 120s to pitbull state. Yes, it is still a dangerous missile, and a completely clueless target will be downed more often than not. However, the fact that an aware pilot can safely ignore a -27 long enough to get his 120 where he wants it is resulting in absurdity in online tactics.

Or turn off hover and allow the chopper to drift with the wind while aiming upwind at launch.

Erm, the only two pictures showing IRIAF livery were the ones with the Hawk on the pylons (crazy bastards...) The rest all show USN livery, except the one with the HARM, which is viewed from too close up to see any identifying marks.

Wow, that is fantastically silly.

Fair enough, no offense taken. As to why ED would do this: It may be a fairly small change, but it is one that is easy to make (so easy, that there is even a thread around here somewhere detailing how to do it as a user mod). It would take a developer only an hour or two to go through and give all the shark switches discrete on/off binding options, in addition to the existing toggle binds. It gives users with sticks featuring momentary toggles, such as the X52 and X55, the option to bind switches in a way that allows full confidence of flipping a switch and knowing where it will be set without having to remember where it had been set.

I'm not convinced that the quick reference shown on the HUD is the only information that the real thing can give its pilot. It makes much more sense for the HDD to offer a picture like the F-15, with detailed information about target range, aspect, speed, and altitude, or like the Su-27, showing detail TWS picture combined with GCI/AWACS picture.