A.S

here, more things to draw a picture (F-35) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbnWg4v6iHk&feature=related Sukhoi anti-stealth Radar test the IRBIS :shifty::harhar::unsure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qKaiOu0gvU Secrets of Russian Anti-stealth Technology / Part 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhFqIZX9yfE&feature=related

gear retraction will be removed Flaps is a thing we have to think about...regarding manuals....there is no flaps under specific condidtions in real.....anyway...i let this to GG and Yoda. Airbrakes .....well in real F-15 you wont be able to use them above 12deg AoA at all.....kinda....but that didnt worked out very well under lockon environment... so this is also something we could think about...... ECM...well ....personally ..thats maybe the best part in LRM .... :smilewink: Gents these kind of contributions are somethings we can work with....but not ....doomsday prophecies :P

...would you please please read the LRM.pdf and see SOMEONE´s idea of realism ..or at least what lrm actually does. then please add your OWN idea of realism. Bro ..honestly ..reading the rest of you post....i think you dont understand at all what has been done and thats the reason why you post things what are totally irrelavant. You dragging lrm to AI and tactics...and missions totally away from what it actually is.....you really dont know what LRM is...do you? http://www.f.kth.se/~kjolhede/LRMrc5.pdf please read it...understand the idea and the concept of it, comparing it with the exploit video above posted...THEN ...please ....im fully open ears to hear your suggestions. PS: Question: How many of those 53 people who voted for or against LRM do REALLY understand what they have voted for?

.. i think what he is trying to say is that both jets were designed on the same concept....first the wing ( the fuselage ) and then the rest. ..its a known concept to design the jet around its aerodynamical structure and performance in first line.....its not always like that in jet-design depending on the purpose and priority of a design. i think he is pointing to this in comparsion...in the meaning of the whole sentense he is saying there......not the final jets.

I understand what you saying, but i think this "tone" is excatly what we dont need as creative critics and it is morelikly an interpretation of those who cant stay objective. OF course we want this MOD to be discussed, analysed and so on....but on a base we can work with.... like this is good cuz....this is not good cuz....this could be dont better here and there cuz.. Things like .."it will split the community" to light and hardcore flyers ??? :huh: cmon Actually there is nothing what you have to learn additionaly in order to use it..... everything will stay the same...you still can fly how you did all the time before..... except you wont see weird situations where u cant understand why someone dodged all your missiles with nose on you down to merge :) And its absolutly not a MUST....its a progress ...a choice...NOTHING TO FEAR folks !!!

I posted post 243-245 to heat and inspire this discussion here. I copy pasted infos here like everyone else :smilewink: to add some material to the topic. That the author in post 245 is talking bout 2D-TVC for Su-37 and not 3D may be explainable by the date of his statement, where Su-37 was still in 2D status....however... i am more astonished that the other contents in these posts have been overseen so easy without reply :music_whistling: you buy this so easy ? without ...."hold on a second?" :lookaround:

Problem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0488djMDBU Solution: LRM period!!! geeez why you guys making a such huge "oh my god the world will end" discussion bout this all. The game/sim whatever you wanna call it will not change. Everything stays the same except fixing these above shown problems and few nice features like IFF for F-15 and TWS eleveation. Everyone who is not seeing this, is not seeing or understanding what this is for at all and most probably arguing out of fear or ignorance. IT WILL NOT CHANGE THE WORLD EITHER THE COMMUNITY what B...Sh.. conspiracy is this??? It fixes few major problems of the game itself in order to make sure, everyone can enjoy it more ...and i mean EVERYONE. I cant understand why some fear the word REALISM so much -- you dont have to visit a combat school in order to fly with LRM. You should fear the current status (exploit video) Do you understand?

EXCATLY:thumbup:

Hehe ..now thats COOL T ruly ..isnt it .....:harhar:

someone who can jump in a server (like 169th for example with hills and even awacs)...ignore almost every missile shot on him ...and find and knockout everything what passes his way without even turnin on his radar once... you might say..wtf=? ..... well i can do excatly this....but not cuz im very inventive...cuz i have seen so many things meanwhile to understand what is possible and what might have been used b4. but i wont and i hate this lame kind of playing (for what) and you dont have to be very smart to analyse someones approach in his flight looking tacview or track ..how he is thinking or flying ..if you know these things First there was a publishing from yoda (exploit video) whats wrong Now he made something what fixes it. Would you prefer that these things keep in secret .....only for own usage and might be also a reason not to participate in squad vs squad matches cuz they cant trust anyone....cuz they know how things can be done. there are quiete alot things going around....discoverd and given around from this and that squadron to that squadron....things here what you can change...things there you could use.... etc etc etc and honestly ..if i would just speak bout all what i ve collected over time from others and would publish this... NOONE would have trust OR fun flying lockon anymore.....but thats not the right thing to do. The right thing is to make sure ..that these things just dont work. you might say...exploit is not an exploit as such if both fly under same conditions and can use it or are forced to deal with same issue .. ok ..thats a fair question, but then we dont have to fly BVR as such..then we just open a new thread as "Lockon game tricks" and end up on pages like this http://www.gamecheats.eu/ ...and we say...hey, its just a game. So the choice is: approaching the sim in the most professional way we can or letting it go as .."its just a game" who cares ..lets have fun. choice is yours......but guess what gets boring faster? defining exploiter is really not easy..and i tell you why....some are smart, knowing these things..sharing them "pssst but dont tell anybody"...and using it intentionally..... some dont even know that they exploit the game here and there cuz they dont know better.... therefore its not fair to accuse anybody...but thing are off...we all know it.....we all know how to use them (dont we ,) ...now its time to think bout it honestly. as yoda posted before: Nevertheless after many years online Lo bvr turned into not who was using proper tactics or methods of engagement, but rather who knew the most about the game code and could exploit it. That is the core that LRM attempts to change. The person who reads most theory and exploits his opponents weaknesses (rather than exploiting unforseen weaknesses in the game code) wins. That is also how you can bring this knowledge with you to the next gen flight sims that will undoubtedly require more realistic tactics and approaches to engagements

date !! of quote may be the reason The Su-37 engine nozzles swivelled only vertically (2D vectoring). Lyulka-Saturn further developed the vectoring nozzle which resulted in the AL-31FP thrust vector control engines capable of moving in both vertical and horizontal axes (3D vectoring). The AL-31FP engine was offered to foreign customers on more advanced developments of the Su-30MK such as the Su-30MKI of the Indian Air Force and as an option for customized versions of the earlier Su-35 'Super' Flanker. The Su-37's life ended when T10M-11 (serial 711) was lost in a crash on flying a ferry flight in Russia. The aircraft was not fitted with the TVC engines at the time of the crash. No other Su-27Ms have been converted to Su-37 specifications, nor has the Su-37 design entered production. The Su-37 was never an official designation recognized by the Russian Air Force. The crash of 711 effectively means the end of the Su-37 as we have known since 1996. The possibility remains that the designation Su-37 will be re-used in the future for other Flanker derivatives. Reportedly, localized Su-35 (Su-27BM) airframes for the Russian Air Force will re-use the Su-37 designation. source: http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-37/su-37.htm lets stay on facts and topic ,) ..picture alone wont explain it without the "picture"

i never feared changes..... the only thing what will be always a constant ..is chance.....but ignorance is deadly. what is the point in getting stuck... ? there was a saying for pilots: the day you stop trying to get better....thats the day you stop being good... same for sims i guess :smilewink:

they did :) export.lua is OFF on server ..( no tacview or similar possible for clients) my mentioning bout anti-cheat tool was a push on yodas shoulders and a hint for the rest ,)

accel F-18 is the worst FM i have ever seen and flown...but there are still good models out there and FSX is great tool used from its good site. ....just the screen is shaking or bouncing up down (lockon) doesnt make the flight model realistic :PPPP fsx needs a good hand (tweaks etc etc etc..mods...etc etc..) then its really a good self-teaching tool....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRZOILgESW0 and cuz it looks so sweet the boomm the Boom pic :lol:

yoda (unleashing the devils. hihi ) ...that idea to improve that mod to an anticheat-tool ( oh yess this is directed to the guys who fight vs "oh Enemies-look like a B-52 bombers" visually without using radars and over miles) is more and more making me smile :music_whistling: PS: nope ...i dont explain what im talking bout....but many know ! tumm ti tumm ...la laa :poster_oops::hehe:

im not the author Mugatu...but why? :ermm: BTW: good link bout RADAR principles http://www.radartutorial.eu/18.explanations/ex09.en.html

and here one more ANOTHER drop Quote: "..Guys lemme set the record straight here. I have several friends in the aerospace industry and know some guys who fly for the U.S. Navy. I can tell you almost for sure that the F-22 will dominate the SU-37 or any of its variants so far in any kind of combat for several reasons. The main reason why the USAF chose the YF-22 over the YF-23 was because of its superior manueverability. In fact at first, the air-force originally wasn't so concerned about agility in its next-gen fighter as much as it was stealth. However that changed with the collapse of the soviet-union and the realization that future air battles would be fought in very populated environments which would require visual identification, and hence dogfighting (indeed this contributed to the retirement of the F-14, a fighter designed to carry the long range phoenix missle, which never saw combat due to these circumstances). The F-22 was designed for dogfighting. Anyone thinking that agility had to be comprimised for stealth is incorrect. In the past, stealth airframes had to be constantly modified manually and tested to acheive the best windtunnel/RCS results. Now however, new computer technology and algorithms have allowed designers to create an almost perfect platform before even going to the prototype stage. This is like reducing decades of research and testing to just a few years. So before I explain all the resons why the F-22 will dominate in WVR combat, lemme talk about its BVR combat. While the F-22 does posess a very powerfull radar, it wasn't really designed to use it. The F-22 is to be integrated into an entire defense network, including AWACS reports, as part of its primary mission. Using its radar is a last resort, as it will give away the Raptors position, so its designed to seemlessly incorporate information from other scorces to get a clear battlefield picture. Even in the event of stealth being comprimised, the F-22 posesses supercruise, so it can still fire missles from a longer range because they will leave the aircraft with a higher velocity than conventional fighters. It has already proven this in tests, in fact the USAF even slightly delayed the development of its newest longer range AIM-120 because the F-22 can launch the current model almost as far as the planned upgrade launched with "regular" aircraft. In WVR combat the stakes are hardly fair. The F-22 carries all its weapons internally so the only effect on the airframe is weight. Its sleek profile means that its not affected by aerodymamic drag typical of missles/pylons or other obtrusions, and because its payload is closer to the center of gravity, it can roll faster. In a guns only engaugement, the F-22 possesses superior agility in all but the slowest speed of the fight envelope. This is due to the fact the Raptor has +/-5 degree more thrust vectoring angle capability (+/- 15 degree for the SU-37, +/- 20 for the F-22). This might not seem like much, but it really counts at high sub-sonic speeds. The SU-37 does possess front canards, but these only really take full effect when your down in the weeds, and no self-respecting pilot would let himself be dragged down that slow. In fact the only technology on the SU-37 worth nothing is its backward facing radar. Firing missles behind you would almost make agility irrelevent, however, there is speculation as to how well this system actually works. Also to all those who think the US is behind the russians in thrust vectoring, think again. The USAF already converted all their "standard" fighters into thrust vectoring monsters (F-16 VISTA, F-15 ACTIVE, F-18 HARV) in the mid 80's, and they even developed dedicated thrust vectoring experimental planes (X-31). It wasn't untill 1996 that the first flight of the SU-37 took place, which of course was just a thrust-vectored SU-27/33. And yes, I've seen the videos of both SU-37's and F-22's. And yes, the F-22's seemed very lame compared to the double cobra-pulling, back flipping, almost unbelievable antics pulled by the SU-37 pilots. But consider this, the Russian government's main goal is to export the SU-37 and not really use it for itself, so of course they will show exactly everythig its capable of in hopes of selling it. The US has made it clear that it has no plans of exporting the F-22 in the near future. No footage of any modern US fighter showing its true capabilities has ever been shown to the public becuase of plainly obvious reasons. Also, the SU-37 only has 2D thrust vectoring. The only Russan fighter built with 3D is the Mig-29 OVT, and it puts too much stress on the airframe to be a feasable, reliable combat platform. The Russans themselves have acknowledged this fact as well..."

another drop... "...Reguarding this "our plane is best" fight here, ok, the F-22 has it's good point's like the Eurofighter, this is primary a long range interceptor. reguarding manuverbility, even with it's thrust vector engine, it will have some serious problems in a Gun vs Gun dogfight with several planes. F-22 vs Raphale = F-22 easy win, both long range and close combat. F-22 vs Eurofighter = slightly in Eurofigher favour on long range, Close range is close to even. F-22 vs JAS 39 Grippen N = Long range = favour og F-22, close combat close even match. F-22 vs MIG29 OVT - Long range = favour of the F-22, close combat, close to evenly matched, but I belive that the MIG29 OVT will come up on top this only due to previuos planes made by composite in the US army, have a tendancy to break appart, F117 has done this on 3-4 occations, but most likly, the wing design will be the turning point in favour of the MIG29. F-22 vs SU-37 (Flanker F) - Long range, close win for the F-22, close combat = total win of the SU-37, this due to the front carnards, that gives the SU-37 both lower speed for takeoff and turning, higher angle of attack, and let's not forget the wing's on this plane, this plane only need as little as 60 km/h to turn it's general direction while flying. Both the MIG29 and SU-37 have actually the same design on the wing, the wing has been developet first, during extensive testing, actually, no other wing has been tested as thoroughly as the original desing wing for the MIG29/SU-27 series, ans the wing was also the fitst thing that was designed, all the other parts was added later..." Source: who cares....you make your mind :P

....drops on a hot stone Quote: Current radars (in order of performance): 1. F-22's APG-77 2. Eurofighter's CAPTOR 3. Su-35's Irbis-E Although performance margin is very small. 2/3 can see an F-22 at ~90km (F-22's 0.001m2 RCS). Personally I think although the F-22 is the best atm, for its price it's not really worth it, since you could get 3-4 Su-35's/2 Eurofighter's per F-22. Although I guess the F-22 may be handy while flying low against IR guided missiles (reduced IR signature). Source: :alien::shifty: ..who cares ,) further ..... Irbis can see 0.01m^2 at 90km, - according to published data. Frontal RCS for the F-22 was described as being "marble sized", and math concludes that is from 0.0001m^2 to 0.0014m^2.....global security.com states 0.0001m^2..... However, when the F-117 was shot down in Allied Force, 1999, LM stated- "Even a standard turning maneuver could increase the aircraft's radar cross section by a factor of 100 or more". And that's why RCS isn't so simple, detectability is dependant on where it's viewed from and the frequency the radar is operating at Move away from direct frontal - even by a few degrees - and that will shoot up. That RCS is quoted for funding - and hence is almost certainly the minimum RCS the aircraft returns under absolute optimal conditions (wavelength and azimuthal angle).

South Korea has already ordered 61 F-15K's, which are essentially a very updated version of Boeing's F-15E. But they are not satisfied with that, and as more advanced fighter aircraft begin flying in nearby nations, Korea has become interested in the F-35. In order to compete with Lockheed's offering, Boeing has knocked the cobwebs off a 1990's concept for an F-15 without vertical tail fins, with AESA radar and thrust vectoring. The concept is said to be considerably stealthier than a standard F-15 and much less expensive than an F-35 Seems like Boeing recently offered a stealthier, more advanced F-18 to the USAF as an option against the F-35. It didn't work there and I doubt the tailess F-15 will ever be sold to the Koreans, but it's still an intriguing concept. Source: http://www.aviationnow.com/search/AvnowSearchResult.do?reference=xml/awst_xml/2008/07/07/AW_07_07_2008_p32-63963.xml&query=%22broadband+stealth%22 :punk:

NICE ONE :thumbup:

..just a guess..further questions about this may be pointed to ED please.

..it will hurt ....but not the gameplay or the community :megalol::chair: I guess some are missing the point with "what data and for what reason you used them"? Point is eliminating and reducing existing possibilities to exploit the game (too much used from few cuz of lack of skills, and even not intentionally made....it screws up the gameplay) All we try is to make that whole fight in its kind more consistent!

Lock, shoot, keep lock and kill :pilotfly: ER has a very good range and is very maneuverable...so play it out. Its a nice missiles to set up the fight up down to NOZ (no escape zone). You problem might be using it while keeping lock and staying defensive against inbounds....well thats your part. :smilewink: