Breakshot

Guys, please, it is easily possible to fix the SARH tracking at non notch gate aspects even now. Please look at this thread that demonstrates the problem in full clarity and also a solution posted by RAGNAROK - a simple .lua tweak that makes SARH missiles not so CM prone at correct aspect/angles. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=155529 Until proper full fidelity missile tracking is designed this could be a simple patch that ED should take up! I just don't get it how it has not been incorporated since that discussion a while ago... Problem on these boards (English ones) is that all beta testers seem to be F15 fanboys, who have not much care/clue on how broken some things in the Flanker have been for years! Fixing them would benefit all of the DCS MP community. PS: for those who keep claiming there is no problem, just watch the top video TACVIEW and please tell it again otherwise...

Yes they can... but not 100% of the time like modeled in DCS, hell at least a 50/50 chance would make people react to a heater launch, not just fly straight and depend on purely releasing flares. Exactly what I'm trying to say in my earlier post. But at least in the meantime, the "dice" values can be tweaked to better represent tracking. What we have now is Death Ray on one end of the coin, and a complete Dud on the other...

Yes of course. But I think my point still stands. The current state of SARH modeling is very flawed. More so than other missile types as the launch platform is the added variable. The R27 is a complete POS, almost a non threat to any half competent pilot. It was not like this in FC1... Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

The fundamental flaw in missile tracking in DCS is simple. It primarily relates to CM rejection. The model is a simple .lua scripted probability of yes/no odds of success or failure under certain predetermined conditions (okay I might be oversimplifying this, but it is basically correct). It works almost identically for all missile types, regardless of RAD or IR, or seeker type. Which means, for active missile like an Aim-120 because the probability odds are set very high, they are basically a death ray from under 10km, unless notched perfectly (that being a predetermined condition for low tracking odds). Which is all fine and seems relatively legit. Ranges do not, and should not in theory affect tracking odds as it is an active missile that will only home in terminally within pitbull range ~8km. So same thing happens every time. 8km missile starts tracking, rejects chaff... or reacquires if needed = end result, hits target unless kinematically defeated. However, there is a major issue for SARH as they basically follow the ARH rejection model but with piss poor odds in the .lua script, which is totally flawed! Let me explain an example: From long ranges, SARH should be much more prone to misguiding due to chaff/ground clutter affecting the launching radar platform (remember its a SARH missile so thats the most important factor) holding a stable lock, radar returns being poor to missile seeker due to range, poorer M-Link(not even modelled) etc. However, from a point-blank NEZ shot in say a perfect lookup situation, an ER should be a death sentence as long as lock is maintained by launching platform, NO CHAFF should have any effect as the missile should never "see" it unless radar lock somehow drops and chases chaff (extremely unlikely), thus PK should be close to perfect.... but in DCS its not, it just rolls the same dice with shitty odds through .lua script = missile goes for chaff like its retarded. The target can just fly level and pop chaff and dodge the missile. IR missiles follow same logic, and are also terrible with flare rejection. 100% odds of spoofing one if preemptive flares are used. Sometimes idling isn't even needed. Just fly level, and drop a few flares, and you're sorted. All this means for Su-27 driver, just one thing... the only truly reliable PK weapon within parameters, is.... gun. Too 'laser' good in fact that it's harder to use than the spray and pray F15 gun that blankets and hits stuff :)

It looks great, all works as expected! Thanks

Nice, thanks for the tip! Could you also make one with the effect removed completely? Is that possible? My .dds skills are non existent, so I have no clue what you mean by those numbers. It would be nice to have a "clean" version, like it was before the patch... Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

You can see the overall effect is better, apart from HUD when inverted. Note also the screenshots with HUD filter on, vs Off. When its on, it causes complete blurring of HUD like looking through fog... :megalol: Is it possible to just remove the glow effect entirely and have it as it was pre-patch?

Which one of the files controls the HUD filter? I see that your mod removes the dark shade of the filter... So when you raise it, nothing happens apart from a blank glass texture coming up... Everything else looks better, apart from HUD still going blank when flying inverted with the sun behind you, but thats something that raising the HUD filter should fix once it works correctly...

Well... the flanker was fine till last friday... Since the late 90s :lol: There has got to be a way to make this flyable...

Yes indeed. But removing that opacity layer should help resolve the issue. This effect is very poorly represented in DCS, best just to get rid of it completely... Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

Ok, just tested with the Mod patch above. It is marginally better, but as you can see the effect is still overwhelming. Also the HUD filter is not working at all... :helpsmilie: You have to test with the sun behind you to see the effect.

Great job pal! Looks really good. Will check it out shortly Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

Using the older cockpit zip files causes missing / corrupt textures. Perhaps someone with textures knowledge can make a Mod to the new files so we can fix this for good if ED won't do it in due time... I'm sure it is doable Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

I fly 15 all the time, its fine. This is a completely different matter on 27, the effect is just broken...

The glare has always been in the flanker... done very well, up until now, unlike the Darth Vader mask on F15 with constant lighting easy mode. LOL The effect is now however is totally botched. Doesnt take a scientist to figure it out. And obviously not shadows related... but thanks for asking. Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk

OK, so the current patch brought some cockpit changes to the Flanker. The instrument glass is a nice addition, however it causes a complete whiteout glare at certain sun angles. :doh: All instruments including MFD and HUD become completely blanked with a mat white texture, thus unreadable, the HUD filter (whats the point of having it?) also causes the HUD to become invisible rather than fixing the glare (what it is intended for) in those conditions. I believe the effect is completely overdone and unrealistic: Watch the above vid for reference. I hope this issue is fixed in next patch as it is a HUGE handicap to a Flanker pilot who would be suddenly completely blinded by the sun at angles. The HUD filter also needs a rework...

Just some comments from the 51st side: The event went pretty smooth apart from not much brief for the aggressor side.... and a little last minute setup. :) But... the biggest issue, was the "god view" observer mode. It simply is a lame and arcadish way to simulate GCI support. We as a squad made a conscious decision not to fly if this is employed in the future, as we strongly feel it is against the spirit of simulation and takes away a lot from a fun event like this... I sincerely hope RF (and 104th public server too) moves to better GCI implementation and instead employs LOATC, where the coverage is realistic, access is passworded to prevent blatant cheating, and based on proper ground radar data + no missiles are visible (thats just beyond ridiculous, IMO). Our two cents! S! PS: if god view is on, you might as well allow all exports as it is totally pointless to maintain any integrity... :doh:

Correct! However once any maneuvers are employed by the target, the difference is almost doubled kinematically, due to 27R basically being modelled as a "flying brick" drag wise. The only thing that keeps ER on par is the extended burn time pushing it to M4.5

The effective practical range of 27R vs a hard maneuvering target is <8km Seems Aim-7 has slightly better chaff rejection as compared to 27 series of missiles. Conclusion: 27ER is much on Par with Aim-7M with one having slightly more legs, vs the other better tracking and PK % @Ironhand: Could you run a comparison between 530D and Aim 7M?

Drop by on our TS, Id be willing to wager BFM on any 51st pilot vs you, you can pick your opponent and AC. But yes, your forum BFM is at elite level as usual... :megalol:

Thanks Mustang! You know its funny but repair did not actually replace these files back to stock! Ran a number of times... But this seemed to have worked. Cheers!

Since the last few patches I have this odd issue on the ground that relates specifically to the hardened dugouts. Basically they are overlapping on everything... :doh: Screens attached. I'm using the current OB. Repared and clean... Anyone experienced this issue? NVIDIA drivers just updated... problem still persists.

Exciting final match! Good luck to both squads! Remember, it's a best of 5 rounds in the final. :joystick:

^^ thanks for putting those up Maverick. Looks great for a quick review while not on PC. Cheers Sent from mobile Android via Tapatalk

How about you guys consider Thursday or Friday for the 104th SF match? There are still lots of matches to go after that round, so leaving it till Sunday might not be the best idea... Sent from mobile Android via Tapatalk