Spad

Yes i know.... But what you are not grasping is the simple fact that AMRAAM is autonomous. Once it has left the rail it is on its own. FAir enough it may still need updating etc but it does this itself. It has inertial guidance. Sparrow does not thats why it needs cosntant information feeding to it. AMRAAM is Fire and FOrget because once it off the rail it needs no more imput from the pilot adn if it needs to update its info it will get that info itself via data link.....in other words once its in the air u can put your attention somewhere else.....

Can anyone help please? We are having problems when we are running a server. Every 5 to 10 seconds lag or a glitch takes place. WE have check to make shure there is nothing interfering with the connection but we cant rid it.... Anyone run into anything similar?

You put that.... THat is inacurate because you do not have to maintain a direct lock because you are engaging it vie track while scan so the radar has the info of the target but is not locked onto it. Its trackin it but not directly feed the misile the info. The AMRAAM was designed to be used in conjunction with Track While Scan. So once the missile has left the rail it no longer needs any more imput from the pilot or needs to be guided to the target by keeping a constant lock it. Its gets any information it needs automatically itself so it can coreect its flight path etc. So it is Fire and forget. Fair enough you still have to be in air to air mode but come on, the likelyhood of immediately switchin from a2a to a2g is very remote at best. If you still had to maintain a lock onto the specific target, like while in range while scan, then it isnt a fire and forget weapon because u are using the sytems to point it at the that target. Your points are valed but like i said, once its left the rail its left to its own systems. wen it needs mid range guidance it gets it itself. So it is autonomous and hence fire and forget.

I am not disputing that. But the missile uses its own inertial guidance systems to get it in the vaccinity of its target before engaging its own terminal guidance systmes. It only gets mid course information updates if it needs them. It does not require constant target illuminarion by the launch aircraft. Hense fire and forget. It is not like a Sparrow that in Semi Active Radar Homing where it needs constant information to engage the taget. AMRAAM does not. Its has its own guidance systems and uses its autopilot. It takes itself there and if during its flight it decides its needs updating it will get that info via datalink not direct command guidance from the launch aircraft.... In other words, the missile gets the information itself. It doesn't require the pilot or the aircraft to give it that info. Its autonomous.....

Thats max ranging the missile and that is all to do with energy. The closer you launch a missile the chance of it hitting goes up substantially. At optimum range its is still fire and forget. If it wasn't fire and forget and needed constant updating from the launch aircraft it would be classed as a SARH and not ARH. Also, It says "The autopilot CAN receive mid-course updates from the aircraft via a data link" it does not say or mean "The autopilot HAS TO receive mid-course updates from the aircraft via a data link"..... This basically mean if it needs to update it will and if doesn't need to it wont.

Where do you get your information from.... You need to read more my friend. AMRAAM is true fire and forget.... It takes its information from the Radar to programme its own autopilot system to put the target into a basket for its own terminal guidance systems to engage the target. IE. ITs own radar goes active at a certtain point and before this does not need any other imput from the aircraft. BUT...it CAN, doesn't mean it has to, also update its own inertial guidance by obtaining information from the launch aircraft via datalink. That why its is called ARH Active Radar Homing instead of SARH Semi Arctive Radar Homing wich AIM-7 Sparrow is.... READ THIS: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html

Well Raytheon who manufacture the AIM-120 say its a smokeless motor and compaired to the Sparrow and Sidewinder it is virtually smokeless. The idea is so u dont have a clue of the missiles approach. Unlike Sidewinder/Sparrow/Skyflash smoke plume wich give u a pretty good indication of the missiles approach. And its not necessarily the motor that is smoking you see. Its a damn good bet its condensation.....The missiles are fired in cold air and the higher you get the colder the air becomes.....So you will get some condensation. You may say "why don't the engines of the sircraft smoke then"....because the motor on the missile has a higher burn temprature... "The AIM-120 has four moving fins that provide directional control (located at the rear of the missile, and four fixed wings that provide longitudinal stability to the missile in flight (located half-way down the missile body). The AIM-120 has a solid rocket propellant missile motor. The rocket motor is as highly advanced as the guidance systems on the AIM-120, utilising a smokeless motor system, and uses a hydroxyl terminated, polybutadiene propellant that gives the missile a superb boost-sustain capability on longrange engagements." And thats from there Operation's Guide. Source of quote:http://perso.orange.fr/f22oma/Download/Pratique/OG-AIM120.pdf#search=%22amraam%20smokeless%20motor%22

The AIM-120 has a smokeless motor dude!! Walmis I aint slaggin yer dude..... You are a damn site more clever than me...its just theres already a aim120 in both lomac n f4....sorry if i pee'd you off, wasn't my intention. Sometimes i need to reel my neck in n shut me gob......:doh:

I quote "The AMRAAM P3I (Pre-Planned Product Improvement) program led to the AIM-120C, first delivered in 1996. The major new feature of the basic AIM-120C (P3I Phase 1) are the clipped wings and fins. Although this feature was introduced to allow carriage in the internal weapons bays of the F/A-22 Raptor, the -120C can also be used from other AMRAAM-capable aircraft" And if you read what I put you'll find that i did not deny that it could be carried by other aircraft. All I meant was why don't you do something more relavent. There's a very good AMRAAM in the game. So why not do something like a Python or ASRAAM. Something tha isn't already in the game....

Err... Why are you doing a clipped wing AIM-120? That missile is for the F/A-22A Raptor. Possibly the F-35 Lightning II aswell..... Fair enough it can be fired by all aircraft that are amraam capable. Just seems a waste of time when u could put your talents to something else......and u HAVE SOME TALENT!!!

According to my source...World Air Power Journal Volume 28....states that the Su-27S or T-10S was a pre-series Flanker B. The main differences appear to be all structural. STOP THE PRESS:thumbup: Upon furhter reading the T-10S went on to be the SU-27 (T-10S) Standard series Flanker B.It went through several sturctural and systmes modifications. But as for the P version. The website you quoted (dman fine website tho and its been bookmarked) seems to be pointing that the P version was just stripped down Flanker. My source says it was as i stated earlier. A long ranged trial version. I qoute "Despite the Su-27's enormous internal fuel load, Sukhoi continued to the extend the endurance and range of the aircraft. One of the earliest attempts was to fit a retractable inflight-refueleing probe to two Su-27's, one a single seater, which became the Su-27P, and one a two-seater,which became the Su-27PU" World Air Power Journal Vol29. Also the Su-27PD did not have a refueling probe although it did have all armament and systems removed. Also the Su-27PD was actually converted from a standard Su-27 and not the Su-27P prototype. The Su-27PD was mainly used by Anatoly Kvotchur in the Test Pilots Display team.

Just a querry.... THe SU-27P was a long range prototype without any armamnet. The P model had a massive internal fuel capacity. They even did a 15hr enudrance flight and 2 also made flights from Moscow to the Pacific coast. In the end these aircraft were allocated to the test pilots teams and no orders were placed for the P model. The versions in the game, according to my research by compairing the planes in game and readding the books in my library, are actually SU-27 FLanker B's not P's.

Tis a shame really because LOMAC is missing a really good Strike/Interdiction aircraft. Like I said the Hog n Frog are fun to fly but they are battlefield interdiction and cloase air support not full interdiction strike aircraft. Plus I also miss flying SEAD. That was fun in Flanker 2. Going head to head with air defences :) Yeah they maybe concentrating on Helos in the form of the Ka-50 Hokum A.....but remember there's also the Ka-52 Hokum B 2 seater :thumbup:

I haven't got a clue hehehehe Well I used to fly DID's Tornado and also Jane's F-15. They both had back seats in them. What they did was have a wizzo's station but also duplicate most of the systems into the front seat, so you could use either and still fly and fight the aircraft. Possibly even have it open for multiplayer too. Jane's did it in Longbow 2. That was fearsome. Flying as Pilot and Gunner!!! :joystick:

Just a quick querry. I am a ground pounder by nature but am slowly learning air to air. I noticed there is an Su-30 Mod, but I would like to know is.....Will all the weapons systems be available to the Su-30 that are avialiable to it in the real world or will it just default to the weapons available to the Su27/33? Also why cant the Eagle Dynamic guys do an Su-32 and Su-30 for LOMAC? Fair enought the A10 and Su25 are fun to fly but I like to be able to slam the throttles open and scarper when fighters show up!! :thumbup: Thaks guys Spad :pilotfly:

An RAF Typhoon F2 locked an F22 at 80miles for a missile shot!