Cmptohocah

Nice video, but also a little bit of propaganda. It suggests that Eeagle's radar can't be notched, which is not true as described by real F-15 pilots.

As you can see from the screenshot, when moving the head from side-to-side the HUD indications overlay the support structure. They should not be visible there.

My bad, I probably did not read your post carefully Missile should have mid-course guidance for the 80% of the total flight, after which it should home in using its seeker. I have no idea how much of this happens in DCS though.

I think he meant to say that in RL ER get's mid-course guidance via M-link, and ET does not, which is true. As per RL practise, you would fire the ET first as there is possibilty of the IR seeker switching to the ER's heat signature. Nope, they used some simulator to get the data which has the ER's range shorter of that from the hand-written diagram. Not much, but still shorter.

From DCS Forum:

Not true, at least when it comes to Soviet missiles. They have specific set of parameters for defining max range which I can't remember now, but definitely not "as high" and "as fast" as possible. I think for the Alamo it was 900km/h and 1100km/h respectfully at 10.000m.

You are absolutely right: in-game R-77 is basically an "extended-range, active radar homing R-73" and you will have great satisfaction if you use it as such. Anything else will leave you very disappointed. I usually use it within 16km distance, fire a couple and then get the hell out of there After an incident I had in MP with 4 R-73s missing a non maneuvering and non countermeasures dispensing target from a distance of 8-5km, I have decided to use the Adders in stead

What is "PH"?

I could do the modeling, provided you can offer me detailed drawings on which I can model it.

This is a thing and it's not a bug: IR missiles are "dump" and fly towards what ever they deem fit as a target.

Su-27SK is limited to 8G - mind you this is only for M < .85. Higher speeds and different loadouts decrease this even further. In 8+ years that I am flying the Flanker in DCS, I broke the wings once or twice and I yank that thing really hard. If you are pulling 10 or more Gs, you need to revize your flying strategy. Problem we have is that currently overstress damage is binary: all or nothing. We should habe progressive systems failures, airframe bending , panels flyng off etc.

Care to elaborate? 'E' is both heavier, slower and can pull less G than the 'C'.

Yup, this is what I was asking.

A little bit off topic, but does it produce any indication in TWS (SNP2) mode?

From what I know, Su-27 is limited to 8G, but that's for the export version - not sure if there is any differenece though.

On the slide named 0055.jpg, for example, you can see that they have used Vpr (IAS) for their performance data.

No idea to be honest. I just know from the manual that one is used as receiver and the other as a transmitter. I am not sure what capabilities of the ECM suite on MiG are, but the ECM on the Flanker has at least four or five different modes.

On Su-27, one of the pods is used for receiving and the other one for transmiting.

Is the missile guiding by itself or is it being guided by the SA-2 system? If latter is the case, than it should not be very difficult to tell the AGL since the entire system sits at ground zero. Ok, so maybe I took the wrong approach here - in theory it's possible, sure. Do you know any A2A missile that has this sort of capability?

Altitude and height above the ground are two different things. Altitude is just a pressure measurement and has nothing to do with the terrain unless you are over the sea in which case "ground zero" is well defined, as the sea surface. You can test this out by flying on Caucausus map and setting visibility to near zero. Then fly by checking your baro altimeter only: chances are you will hit terrain at some point due to mountains. Once it's active it has its antena pointing at the target so unless it has a radar-altimeter there is no way to tell its height above the ground. INS tells you your position relative to some reference point but this also does not provide you with your height above the ground. It would need to get the ground level info from the launching aircraft or from its own RA, or have a map with topological features which it would read from, or a combination of the above.

I have never seen any aircraft manual that uses TAS as a reference for performance. It makes sense to be used in engagements as it describes the geography better, but when it comes to performance IAS/Mach is the thing to look for. I will sift through the docs again, but I am almost certain that they are talking about indicated airspeed.

That's all fine, but how would it know what "negative altitudes" are? To know which ones are "negative" as you said, it would have to know where the zero is. How would it know this? If the launching aircraft is in "low altitude environment" or the missile?

How would the missile know it's heading into the ground?

Data in the acceleration table is valid for: Slide 0011.jpg, paragraph 10.

Found here that Su-27 should accelerate from 600km/h to 1100km/h in 15s at 1000m. Slide name is 0012.jpg. From this test it looks like our DCS version is 3.3 seconds slower: