marcos

AI always launches AMRAAMs from outside range and AGM-84Es always overshoot vehicle targets.

I loaded GBU-16s on the two wing pylons. None were visible but they seemed to then drop from the fuselage pylons that had different weapons. Tornado Dodgy Drop.trk

Or Saudia Arabia, hence F-15SA. In fairness, there is no stealth fighter that can carry all that stuff at once. The ordnance is fairly decent. AIM-9X, AMRAAM D, SLAM-ER, AARGM and the Mk82/84s may well be GBU-31/38 JDAMs. The ones on the left seem to have a diamond-back range extension kit. SDBs. It's a good load.

What range are you considering as merge because IRST works out to well beyond the range of a sidewinder, which figures since an AIM-9M seeker is like a really small, crappy IRST.

Hell I can't remember who said what but some certainly did. At least one of them was a moderator.

Upgraded to 1.2.3. Now it seems to generate successful hits at 4.5km, however, there's some odd bore-sight jumping between aircraft, not sure if that's a feature of the missile. or not. Also the map icons are now showing crappy symbols for aircraft that don't show direction and sometimes the tool tip for the menu buttons at the top appear off screen. All in all the map is worse.

F-15SA load-out F-15SA load 1 x AGM-88, 2 x AIM-9X, 4 x AIM-120, 1 x AGM-84, 9 x MK-82, MK-84 2 x 8 x GBU-39

Loaded up Typhoon display

CAPTOR-E http://www.eurofighter.com/fileadmin/web_data/Content_Images/captor/CAPTOR-E_02-2013.pdf

COD Pripyat?

I think if you read my later posts I've acknowledged that. It's the people on forums claiming to have spoke to pilot friends who are liars. It's well known that the Typhoons cheated. They have a special advanced jamming system that switches off the F-22 OBOGS. Occasionally they get drunk back at base and do it for a laugh, even when they're not engaging F-22s.

No BUT yeah BUT, the Raptor will merge from behind, de-cloak and kill doze Tiffies dead. :lol:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-us-navy-next-generation-jammer-proceeds-but-f-35-integration-deferred-indefinitely-371742/

Okay. Cheers.

Hmmm negative 1.2.7570. So why isn't the auto updater doing anything?

PN? Hmm. Just tried the auto updater, didn't do anything, so I must have the latest version already.

Target was moving across path at 3km (ish) and 400kph(?). It was coming it to land. I fired from 2000ft, it was at 1000ft (ish). I think the missile turned to move with the MiG-25 but then the MiG slowed down, as it was landing, and the missile over-turned and lost track maybe. My best guess anyway. Yes it's 1.2.2. Can't be sure it's the very latest load but recent enough.

See diagram. The warhead is only a very small part of the AMRAAM. Sure the electronics may be smaller, that's why I have it at less <80km rather than <40km. I think I heard that it has MWR as well as 'normal radar', but to date I've not seen any evidence of an IR seeker. It may well be that there are 2 versions as with the MICA.

Google 'Raptor salad' and 'Raptor kill markings'.:) It was denied for a long time that any such training dogfight had ever taken place and of course 'everyone' (many of whom are on this very forum) claimed they knew an F-22 pilot who'd told them so. It's probably not the USAF pilots who are liars in reality, we have our very own Pinocchios on point.

The lag is definitely a problem but the frequency shift of the sound and the time at which it arrives at different sensors could be used to triangulate it and map a path that the aircraft has taken and its speed and predict where it might be now, then use other sensors in the predicted location. It could be useful to map attack corridors being used by the enemy if nothing else. It's probably not useful as a standalone system but as an input to a more advanced system, it's useful. If its sensitive enough, it may also be able to detect the sound being transmitted via the ground, i.e. shock wave hits the ground 5 miles below aircraft then travels at 8-10km/s through the earth. I prefer the idea of passive radar though. If you have all sorts of mobile devices and satellite comms bouncing EM around the atmosphere and you know where they've come from, you can detect disturbances in their travel. It's like having lots of high power, multi-frequency radars dotted around everywhere.

Won't be a problem. G-force is such that they are usually all short-arsed Pinocchios.

Well if we've learnt one thing from the Luftwaffe Typhoon-Raptor scandal it's that USAF pilots are born liars.:lol:

Okay my 3rd AIM-9 misses. Explanations? Game error, genuine missile failure? It seems to try turn fast after a slowish moving aircraft then it loses momentum and falls on its ass. AIM-9 Fail.trk

An Su-27 documentary said it did. It's somewhere in one the 4 parts of this documentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kk9UxB7eLE

Radar can now be passive and in countries perforated with EM radiation of all kinds they can be very effective. IRST and other optical systems are also showing very huge increases in performance. A ground-based IR system that's actually going to get a chance to look at the hot end of the aircraft without being killed could also be very useful. Your sound theory has merit and it's actually based on an old method to an extent (used at the start of WWII). Not sure if it could detect subsonic stuff very well though. ESM also has merits. The best bet is probably a combination of all the above with data fusion algorithms to weed out noise and focus on areas of interest. If you can pick out a suspicious area and switch to very narrow beam, even a radar will work quite well.