lunaticfringe

Bad blowers = fire. No need to blame the wiring. That engine program has been screwed from the word "Go", do not collect 200 rubles...

The system fan speed monitor should be a setting in the BIOS, but you've got to post first to alter it. For example, the dual Vortex 14s I run on a Megahalems cooler spin at less than 150RPM during post, and the default setting looks for the stock Intel cooler speed at over 400RPM. Thus, the setting must be changed, otherwise there's always a POST warning. But the long tone is definitely the GPU power.

No, it's telling you what piece of sky you need to be looking in to *find* him. You don't go flying on a vector against a target you don't have detected. In STT you can be pointing 1/6th of the horizon away from the bastard and still get him bugged- thus minimizing rate of closure, and expanding the amount of time one has to get the acquisition. BVR is the same as WVR: you don't point at people until you're ready to kill them.

Just a bump- over two thirds of the way with eight days to go!

Not at 32 AoA.

You do understand that you are comparing two entirely different airframes, both with differing control systems (full FBW vs. a limited compensation system), drag and turn performance, and overall stability, correct?

Not only is it the notch, but that is a huge amount of ground return he's presenting to the weapon. At the point he went perpendicular, he was on a few hundred feet off the ground. The net effect is like filling a letter sized page with 50% gray, and a half inch square in that field somewhere with 49.5% gray, and asking a viewer to find the difference in less than one second. Not going to happen.

The weight imbalance is real. Further, it is not simply weight, but flow dynamics and drag. There's this installation of hardware you may have heard of, called the M61A1. The aircraft exhibits much of this same tendency in real life, based on both the weight, and the interference of airflow from the barrel outlet and vent design.

If it's as poorly represented as the Russian's, I'll pass. The F-15 needs three things, specifically, more than the AWACS datalink, and in combination they would bypass it entirely: 1. the post-RAM area zoom for accurate sort. 2. discrete bar scan control. 3. actual AWACS frag logic. That is, the ability for a mission designer to designate sectors of airspace coverage to specific groups, and only send threat calls to the appropriate group (unless there's overlap or an emergency). Maneuvering to hide from the F-15s radar is going to hide from AWACS it's normal operational standoff range, so asking as an aid is not useful. The blind zones it will have will be *longer* in relative "depth" against the terrain than yours will, so it's not an honest argument. Nor is flying low, given the sacrifice in missile performance and detection range. If he's hiding behind something, you're not going to get a lock on him till he comes out. Then you're both working the same shot profile. That's the benefit of working on high- he's got to come up to meet you to generate range on his weapon, meaning two things are going to happen: 1. You're going to have the longer stick, and 2. You're going to get a popup call when he sticks his nose out. The reply to this isn't to have datalink from AWACS, because if you're looking at your scope, the indicator on the tactical display may not get your attention. The call from AWACS will. And if you know your radar cold, you're going to convert the BRAA call into a track in a matter of seconds, rather than looking down, looking up, and looking back down to make sure you're looking at the right airspace. You can skip number three, and let players deal with over-compensating responsibilities at the group level. But one and two would level the playing field against the datalink just fine. .

Datalink in the F-15 has existed since the 80s. It is simply not modeled yet.

It does, however the implementation of it isn't necessarily known to ED. I can give you the method for RAM (Raid Assessment Mode), but the follow on, I haven't the diagrams for. And RAM wasn't used after the late 80s.

Jealous? Of what? Significantly higher induced drag and an average 80% higher wing loading? If I wanted to fly a brick, I'd strap on a slatted Phantom. At least then I'd have someone along for the ride that I could complain about how bad life sucked to. Survival is based on working smarter, not harder. And my brainpower is spent analyzing and memorizing EMs and relative performance, rather than bad ergonomics and system limitations. While I'm executing tactics with proficiency, you're stuck needing to remember to hack a stopwatch to calculate missile fly-out. All that supposed brainpower post-Soviet drivers have sure look pretty splashed across the landscape like a wet stain...

I always laugh when the definitive is used as to what ED is going to do with the F-15C with regards to future systems modelling. You don't put the money into making the cockpit clickable if you don't intend to use it. And it *is* clickable. The animations are there- they simply have not been activated yet or tied to in-game functions. Thus, it is only a matter of when. Maybe this year, may be next, may be 2016, 2017, or 2018. But it is part of the plan.

Which means you'll be pulling the handles all day from catching ordnance. When the laws of physics actually get to catch up to the Flanker at combat weight, the level of complaining is going to be *awesome*...

What's fascinating is that I sincerely doubt, in the heat of a bounce, that anyone could tell the difference between the Georgian mountains against those of the Yalu region. But hey, there's always the QF-86 role in the Nellis ranges.

Military-grade simulators do not model every system. They may, depending on the particular simulator's purpose, model the "effects" of the system in question, but not the actual physical/electronic actions behind it. One doesn't need to model the turbine actuation of a bleed-air driven electrical generator to specify that in specific combat-damaged or random failure circumstances that the loss of power is going to do particular things. Seriously- you're not rendering the full Navier-Stokes equations a thousand times per second? Is this a game or a simulator?

1. "Turning on" jammer doesn't actually do squat, given that (last time I saw confirmation on its functionality) it took, what, fifteen seconds for it to actually "do" something post-activation. Unless the jammer is activated well prior to the shot taking place (a good 10 miles of flight time), and the missile was shot outside of current parameters, or from a massive altitude perch with the accordant room to make the intercept, the weapon will be inside of burn-through before the resulting effect matters. 2. As to what the weapon is going to do in that situation in RL, while I know a number of folks who actually know the answer to that question, it's not for public consumption. Based on what I do know about AMRAAM's functionality with a lost lock after going active, it's going to go MADDOG and run it's most recent intercept geometry, remaining active and looking for something to blow up. This stems from the knowledge that said function is a software solution to a tactical-skill-time problem. It exists because of concern for mis-sort in flight and element tactics at the pre-engagement phase, essentially giving the chance for missiles with overlapping responsibility the opportunity to engage targets in the same general vicinity if their original directed opponent blows up in front of them. Thus, when your garden variety AIM-120 loses what it was looking for, it continues the hunt. That said, any dynamic of support prior to weapon active (that is, first timeout) is *likely* going to hinge on the quality of data stemming from the shooter. Since we don't know the full details of what that update link carries, you're not actually going to be able to model it. Thus, I can confidently buy into a model allowing the weapon to go active and hunt along the intercept corridor. But just going dumb? That's not the design methodology.

Just a head's up- we are close to 60% with 17 days to go, so it's looking pretty good.

Mine. Thus I have no concern taking the hit on a lower run. :)

Because it's Teespring, it does *zero* search capability. It's all on the seller, and those wanting the shirt, to promote. If it doesn't make 50 by the deadline, I will lower the required buy to a number that we'll have made to complete (minimum is 20). This does cut profit for the artist, but I'm more interested in just having the shirt done.

Just a bump/status update. Less than two days in to the 21 day campaign, and we're already over a third of the way to the target (18 out of 50).

You want to make a bet? :lol: That it currently is not modeled in DCS is a matter for DCS:F-15C as a complete module, rather than the FC offshoot. It will come in due course.

"If you can't afford to compete, change the designation, increase the house organ volume, add a couple of widgets. And pray."

Not true, logically. If he's already prepped to send something of commiserate range at you, he's also smart enough to manage the poles to avoid a real round coming his way while getting his shot off. These things do not function in a vacuum. And your prospective "non-shooter" now has a problem- lay odds in closing to take what may be a shot that will never come, sucking on a BVR weapon that he will likely never pick up visually, or pull a split-S, unload, and live to fight another day? He gets out. Otherwise, the guy with the BVR weapon is going to know real quick that something is up based on the response, and be ready for it. The only time a pilot is going to employ SIM mode (which exactly what is being discussed here) on a radar to scare an opponent is due to ROE. You are letting an opponent who is in an aggressive stance that has not fired that you are well in position to kill him with the shift in information available to his RWR, and that if he doesn't get his act together, you will do just that. I have spoken with a number of pilots who, based on specific circumstances, have done just that with opposing aircraft in multiple corners of the world. And every one of them will tell you- if they were permitted to lob a live weapon, they'd have done that instead. ROE isn't a factor here; this is a weapons hot environment, thus you get out when you're winchester. If you're forced to press a bad situation and close without the pertinent stick, it's because either you screwed up, or someone above your paygrade screwed up for you. But don't think for one second that you're being smart, coy, sly, or fooling anybody.

Thank you very much, Gene!