Cmptohocah

I don't see this being an issue in practical sense. Unless the target is on some sort of autopilot and it does not change course/speed/altitude, the 120 that lost its DL will just fly into empty space, as far as the target is concerned. I mean it will fly to the intercept point sure, but the target won't be there.

Ah, I see. The diameter is not the same on the E version.

How can you tell? I am just curious, 'cause I thought that the ERs are longer and in the video the missile seems to go all the way up, almost touching the main landing gear assembly. The second one behind it, seems pretty close too.

Maybe it's for the ground crew not to get confused Imagine they hook up a regular old R-27 and the pilot goes out full of confidence, just to realize that the max range is 25km

Found it! Time stamp 10:37 One can see that the masked numbers are represented as three asterisk characters (***), so my guess would be that it's beyond 100km

I saw it on one of the Su variants deployed in Syria. It's the "Combat Approved" series which can be found on YT and there you can clearly see a mark saying "R-27ER2" and when the journalist asked about the range, the answer was that it's classified. Looking through the videos now, trying to find it.

Unless I am badly mistaken, Russian air force is using a version 2 of the R-27ER, now days in Syria, and from what it seems the missile range is classified.

For a fast pace dog fight like the scissors maneuver, I would recommend switching to a "fixed net" reticle. Sure you will loose the fancy target tracking, but at least you will have a definite idea where your bullets will go. One trick in case your HUD is showing the funnel: with no extra Gs being applied, the center of your cannon is just bellow that number "20" found in the upper-middle part of the HUD.

Coefficient of lift (Cl) is a value without units. In normal (subsonic) airflow it only depends on the angle of attack. You can think of this coefficient as wings potential do produce lift. Airspeed is the one that "quantifies" this potential. So for 0 airspeed it does not matter what is the value of AoA, as the lift produced will be 0. On the other hand for a constant speed the lift will increase as the angle of attack increases until the AoA reaches its critical value. This is the maximum AoA at which maximum Cl is experienced. Above that angle there is no lift, regardless of the airspeed - this is a stall condition and we all know that in this kind of condition there is no lift.

Technically speaking, if you can keep the AoA the same as the speed drops the [turn] rate will increase as the lift coeficient is not dependent on speed.

DDR's 29's were export versions and to my knowledge the engines were tuned down (de-rated) to increase service life.

- how does absense of FBW decresase turn performance? - airspeed loss can't be a measure of turn performance, altough I see what you mean in the practical sense. By turn performance I mean turn rate & turn radius - does this mean that Su-27 has higher lift at same critical angle of attack as 29, or that it can have higher critical AoA?

Actually in a WVR combat, where one is trying to get the "nose" on the hostile and send out an R-73 as soon as possible, turn rate means everything. One will cover more degrees of turn per unit of time and thus have the first shot. In this kind of situation turn radii don't really play a role.

If it happens in MP, I would not give it much thought: DCS has some issues in MP.

I guess I didn't explain correctly, what I actually meant. Since it was mentioned that the intricacies of the entire radar-chaff system, by radar I mean launching aircraft's, are difficult to model and current effects in DCS on them are non existent, would it make sense to model the effect chaff would have on the fore mentioned radar? For example: closure rate of the target is small enough to cause some potential issues with the target track. Target releases chaff and for some predefined time period the radar has difficulties tracking the original target. More chaff released, more "snapping" happens - radar alternates between the real target and the chaff. Would that be acceptable approximation of what happens in RL? Some die roll would simulate a bit of randomness, so not all of the released chaff would cause tracking issues.

Would it make any sense to implement something simple like: If target closure below some value and chaff is there, roll die and then snap radar to fake target for x amount of seconds? After that repeat.

Everyone here is discussing chaff effects on the AIM-120's radar, but what about its effects on the launching platform's radar? Think we are missing an important aspect here. There is virtually 0 effect on it in DCS and yet we have a 7 page disscussion on the effect it has on the AMRAAM.

Oh I see. So it can actually pin point the emissions source in both horizontal and vertical planes and basically blasts the strobe cone in that direction. Yeah, that would make sense I guess.

When some one locks me in a single target track, while I have my ECM on (jammer) and out side the burn through, my RWR reports it. My question: how is this achieved by the targeting radar? It does not have any other information other the azimuth, so how can it pin-point the track strobe at me?

All I can say is: if you think that's bad, have a look at the R-27.

I never understood why do ARH have disadvantage over SARH in a fur-ball. I mean can't the aircraft's radar switch from one target to another? If not, what prevents it from doing so as compared to ARH? Disclaimer: I know DCS treats each target as a perfect dot, but would this apply IRL?

My DCS is working fine now, so my bet is one of the previous patches was causing it.

It's not modeled at all in DCS. As someone posted above, the R-27 behaves as a radar-guided IR missile. It's a point-based guidance where the missile just goes for a point that the simulator designated as a target. Radars do the same thing. It's a binary state where each target is a point (or not). Chaff work exactly the same, in DCS, as kind of flares for SARH missiles. When it comes to ranges, I think people don't take into account that, in real life, radar's resolution drops with distance hence the need for some sort of homing (terminal guidance). In DCS this is not the case. It's again, you guessed it, binary: radar sees perfectly defined points as targets, regardless of the distance. Chaff has no effect on the radar, the same way flares have no effect on EOS or missile IR sensors while they are on the rails. You would never see target designator jump from the target to flares and back.

Maybe a stupid question, but what would happen if an 120 was shot at my 6 and I dump all the chaff I have. Would it present a tracking issue? Would the chaff also influence the fuse?

+1