Cmptohocah

I would just ignore @DD_Fenrir if I were you. He likes to throw a grenade and see what happens. What this causes is that a lot of people get caught up in this vortex of useless insults and the main topic gets lost. I agree, most of the red airplanes are neglected, but let's be fair: that's nothing new if you are flying red. We had that for years now. I actually see this as a problem for the blue side, since they are used now to fight against non-jamming targets - they will have to adjust once the jamming starts working for all airplanes. True, but they are not considered "blue" planes in most of MP engagements, so I never mentioned them, but good point.

The reason is that F-15C is a Flaming Cliffs airplane, so the following is true to all FC3 fighters in respect to radar jamming: they can be jammed by other (FC3 and non-FC3) aircraft they can jam only other FC3 aircraft It's basically a "I am affected by other's ECM, but others aren't by mine" kind of a thing. Why is this the case? Well, that's another topic, which I would rather not get into.

This was also described in the MiG-29A (export version) manual and was also utilized by the airforce pilots of the, back then, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Here is a MiG-29 pilot talking about this procedure (in serbian language): But I guess it's easier to come to the forum and say "yeah that's not possible/practical and it didn't happen".

It is very important feature in case one of the platforms does not have an operational radar. Also it can be used as a tactical improvement where the forward platform launches the SARH and can turn away, while the rear platform provides guidance. Saying that "there's no evidence that this is used anywhere as a serious tactic" is not really a valid argument, as this does not mean that it's not being used nor that it can't be used.

+1

Probably went unnoticed, but posts like this exist to raise awareness.

The Su-27 is more than capable of going up against the AMRAAM even in the current setup. Only issue is that the AIM-120 currently has so much better aerodynamics/guidance that it seams nearly impossible to win in this scenario. One thing that a real Su-27 can do, and the FC one can't, is a cooperative attack. This means that one platform is providing the guidance and the other one is launching the SARH missiles.

With the current setup is quite simple: "Taxi, takeoff, fire some missiles, get shot down, repeat."

Wow, the more I discover real capabilities of the Su-27 the more I realize how much its miss-represented it is in DCS. I always wondered how come it can be called an "air superiority" fighter, but it makes more and more sense. It was basically Soviet Union's answer to the F-15. Also, it seems that the Soviets put the focus on the integrated battlefield way back in the early development. GCI sending info, aircraft-to-aircraft sending info, SAM to aircraft/GCI sending info.

You can find these two range definitions on the page 193. of the Su-27SK manual. It's depicted as point numbered 34 on the HUD scheme (ДРмакс1, ДРмакс2 and ДРмин). Not really relevant to the topic, but I just realized it: apart from the "A" attack label there are two maneuvering symbols "Г↑", "Г↓" (Gorka) and an afterburner symbol "Ф". I know that a "Gorka" is steep climb/descent maneuver, but I wonder what does it depict here?

I must say that I have experienced the same thing my self. What I usually do, is after the HMS fails, I switch back to search mode and if there is nothing there either I switch then to vertical scan. Bore-sight mode fails to lock the target the same way as the HMS. I don't know if there was some change or not, but I am having huge issues picking up targets that are close and in front of me. In TacView you can usually see me flying straight (scan mode), then couple of aileron rolls (vertical scan mode) and then a "Split-S" (nothing found, save my own ass).

The reference I found says: "When firing two missiles (not in a salvo) it is recommended to fire the first one at DRmax1 and the second one at DRmax2. When firing salvo it is recommended to fire at DRMax2." [section 5, page 152] If I am not mistaken, DRmax1 is the RMax value and DRmax2 is the no-escape zone. Also, I don't really speak Russian, but many words are similar to my native language.

I don't think it would be fun to sneeze into an oxygen mask, or God forbid throw up in it :D But jokes aside, yeah I mean of course they must have used some sort of margin. I think it comes down to what "non-maneuvering" target actually means. I see your point, we are missing this "margin" part.

As @Fri13 mentioned, it would not be practical to determine anything other than a max range for a non-maneuvering target. Also, MiG-29s manual makes sense in that regard, 'cause if the target does not change its flight path it will grant you a kill with minimum possible risk to your self. In RL RWRs are not super dependeable target location devices like in DCS, so if the target has not picked up the launch it might get splashed. Our RWRs are just to good. They see and know everything and never make a mistake. Not to mention ECM.

My problem is that is not tracking the missile per se, although as you have mentioned it's highly questionable, but that it's switching from the original target it acquired to a missile that is outside its FOV. In particular in the second scenario, what magic is used to find my incoming missile? It lofts high as it's trying to gain on me, I presume, and then it climbs down almost vertically to an incoming missile. Same thing, in the first scenario. Goes for the target but intercepts something else that is not even in it's FOV. Or does AIM-120B track and search for new targets simultaneously? This is not unrealistic, this is a joke. The DCS manual should be updated saying: "When facing an opponent, make sure you fire at least 3 AIM-120s: 1 for the opponent, and 2 for the opponents incoming missiles - just in case."

Looks like the AMRAAM got a new role as a search and destroy weapon not only for aircraft but for missiles too. Scenario #1: 1. AIM-120B is fired at a distance of around 25.5km from the target and soon after the launching platform (F/A-18) breaks TWS [fig. 1-1]. The AMRAAM initially goes towards me [fig. 1-2], but then at some point it decides that my ET is a juicier target [fig. 1-3]. It successfully tracks and destroys my R-27ET [fig. 1-4]: "Splash one." Fig. 1-1 Fig. 1-2 Fig. 1-3 Fig. 1-4 Scenario #2: Very similar to the previous case where the F/A-18 turns away very soon after AIM-120B get fired, but this time there is a larger height difference and the AMRAAM goes for a loft. Then it "zooms" down to my R-77.

I appreciate a very detail and informative explanation, I learned some new things, but I never mentioned chaff.

Great work @BlackPixxel!!! Red community owes you one.

All missiles utilizing pulse-doppler radar will loose track once the relative speed of the target is bellow the minimum value required for a valid lock. It's just physics. This is called a "notch".

Did another test at 900km/h TAS and the missile max effective range in DCS is identical to the one marked on the graph above (solid lines). I could not verify the dashed ones, but I assume they fit the chart also. I have done test at 1, 5 and 10km altitude. Turns out that my initial assumption of 0.8M was wrong.

@GGTharos @FoxAlfa, if you guys were referring to this graph here --> Then the speed of both the target and the fighter is 1100km/h (dashed line) for the max distance of 65km.

I understand, but the entire point of my post is that it fails to reach the target in DCS completely. Having said that, I do need to repeat the test with the quoted 900 and 1100km/h values, for the launching platform and the target, respectfully. Wether the lift is too low for the current speed at this distance, or the drag coefficient is too high, or any combination of those, I can't really tell.

How come it says nothing? It says: "Dear Flanker driver, if you have a target at this distance and this altitude (assuming that your speed and the target's speed are X and Y the weather conditions are windless and the temperature is standard for this altitude), rest assured that you will get a LA and most probably hit the target, provided it does not maneuver. We did some tests and research and have decided that this is the maximum distance at which we are happy with the results." I don't know what is inside the "black box" and if the ER can hit something at 200km (exaggeration) or not, but it really doesn't mater. Someone took all the different parameters into account and decided that they are happy with the missile performance at X distance and provided the pilot with this value. What does "1/10" "7/10" mean? Fired to kill ratio? Conditions are: X speed of the launching platform Y speed of the target (constant) pressure altitude no-wind, constant OAT no-maneuvering The missile needs to reach the target and explode, at least in DCS as the missiles are contact-based. At what ever speed is needed to support the weight of an R-27ER that has its fuel burned out, in case of current guidance in DCS it's a straight and level flight at 1G, to reach (touch in DCS) the target and deliver the payload. Cool, so I will use those speeds to re-do the test. Thanks to both you and @GGTharos.

Funny that we have to mod something that is in MiG-29's flight operations manual, described as: "capable of being read even under direct sunlight"

For me the max range is the maximum distance that missile will hit (under certain conditions as mentioned) without the target maneuvering. Where did you get 900km/h and 1100km/h values from? No matter what the CFD says, if the manual states that this is the max range, someone surely did research and testing, before they wrote it there. It's just the question of the speeds at this point.