Cmptohocah

Yes, more payloads and different engine outputs are planned in the future :pilotfly: These are just sets of data used. Basically measurements from 2 different tests (flights).

When it comes to tandem flying, your leads wings are your artificial horizon. Basically the wingman tries to match the lead's bank angle.

I have just noticed that for some reason my R-73 was navigating and hit an on coming AIM120-C that finished its booster phase of flight long time before the impact. Unless I am badly mistaking, this is a major bug in R-73's tracking. I see (and please correct me if I am wrong) no reason/way how can an IR missile confuse a flying cylinder to a fighter jet. I am providing the video of the incident as an attachment. Please note that last few seconds of the video are in slow-motion for better view.

Hello all, I've done some flight performance testing for MiG-29S in DCS (2.5.4) and decided to share the results. In this round I am presenting charts that describe: sustained turn performance (turn rates & turn radii) instantaneous turn performance (turn rates) 1a. Sustained Turn Performance - turn rate vs indicated air speed: 1b. Sustained Turn Performance - turn radius vs indicated airspeed: 2: Instantaneous Turn Performance - turn rate vs indicated airspeed *** notes: sustained turn rate - aircraft heading change, in degrees per second, with no energy loss/gain (constant airspeed and altitude) in a turn More results to come in the future.

I use experience mostly. One thing I would like to mention, if in any case you need a fixed reference pointer for the guns in a fight it's right below the "20". This is where the bullets will go if there is no G being pulled, ie. 1G.

So how about F-117A (nighthawk) getting shot down by Neva SAM produced in 1961? We all know that F-117 was a stealth bomber. Was the processing power at play there too or....?

I am sure that people that think this never shot an R-27 in their life - well, pretty sure :D

Not to stray too much from the topic, but half of the MiGs that took off in 99' didn't have operational RWRs.

What is the range of the EOS laser in RL? 8-10km if that?

I haven't tested the AIM-7, but once R-27 starts chasing chaff that's it - it's a lost missile. Would be ok if this happened in the homing phase, but more often than not it starts flying towards the chaff of the rail at 30+ km, so it's basically a dud.

I am not an R-27 expert, but any reason why this should happen? R-27 is guided via M-link during 80% (please correct me if I am wrong) of it's intercept path and then uses it's seeker for terminal guidance. I am sure once the M-link phase is done it starts looking for the target being illuminated by launching radar. Now if it gets fooled by the chaff and then that chaff disperses, why shouldn't it start looking for the next illuminated thing?

Yeah I would say give the R-27/ER an option to reacquire the target after the chaff disperses, at least this would give it some chance of hitting the target after CM.

My point exactly: what is the point in having better range when the missile doesn't fly towards the target? Even 200km range on R-27 wouldn't help. Then when I mention that the R-27 guidance is a piece of crap (the missile starts self homing at 30km chasing chaff and then going ballistic) I get told of that I don't know how to fly and am using wrong tactics. This is what is causing all the frustrations and of course people will take 6 x ERs, because that's how many you need to bring down an opponent at BVR (little exaggeration perhaps but you get the point) - unless you are engaging a tanker :)

Wait and see when they fix R-27 guidance (if ever), then nobody will even mention R-77 anymore. On every Su-27 discussion I hear the word 'realism' mentioned a lot, and yet R-27 guides like a hand thrown rock - so much for realism, but hey I guess we are already used to this.

Yeah, I think that R-27 should do the same as it has "M-link", but GGTharos made it clear in his post that this is not simulated due to technological advantage of AIM-120 being implemented in game.

I've noticed this interesting behavior of AIM-120 the other day: As I flanked it and pumped chaff out, it was kind of switching between chaff and my Su-27. It had sort of "here is chaff, here is the plane, here is another chaff, oh here is the plane again" behavior, as it was trying to stay on my Su-27 but kept getting interrupted by addition of the chaff only to turn back towards me after the chaff dispersed. I was just wondering: does AIM-120 (in active homing mode) have any sort of search pattern movement by it's antenna after loosing the original lock on the target, or does it just go back to it's neutral position and wait for some other target (chaff/airplane) to get into it's radar cone? This brings me to R-27: shouldn't the R-27 do the same when faced with chaff? The only difference here is the source of radiation, right? Or am I missing something? Cheers.

Some rules of thumb when flying Russian jets: Mig-29: has a pretty weak radar, therefore would be advisable to fly it low (generally not above 1.500m Above Ground Level - AGL) in order to be able to dodge incoming missiles. ARH and SARH always tend to fly to an intercept point with their target, so if you dive and make that point below surface the missile will crash into the ground. Su-27: has a more powerful radar than Mig-29, so you can fly it between 3km and 7km altitude, so you can enjoy greater firing distance with the R-27ER.

Here you go: https://youtu.be/7HOLONP0Td4?t=2m2s I've timed the 180 deg roll and it took around 2 sec, which makes it around 90 deg/sec roll and this is not assuming the pilot was doing max-roll rate. So it's at least 90 deg/sec. I have no idea what the IAS was but I am guessing it was between 500 and 700km/h as these speeds (to my knowledge) are most commonly used for these kind of maneuvers.

Now that is what I am talking about! Thank you karambiatos!

Please don't get me wrong, but how is the "M-link" modeled then if the R-27 starts picking up reflections with it's own seeker at 40km out? Is it like the "M-link" goes until 40km or it's like there are chances that it will either follow the link instructions or start tracking on it's own? It's probably a bug of some sort right, I mean missile locking on to chaff right off the rail is there probably to compensate for the simple CM model. Reason why I am asking this question is that AIM-120 seems to follow this "first link guidance, then self home in" principle quite nicely. Is there a possibility of AIM-120 fired in STT mode, to experience same "lock-on" to chaff at 40km behavior? Then again I am guessing that it doesn't start tracking any returns until it's own radar kicks in.

So how come ER/R sometimes go ballistic when the opponent releases chaff and the radar lock is maintained through out? Chaff should influence it only after SARH's own seeker gets activated and not during the "M-link" phase, right? Please correct me if I am wrong.

Yeah I was referring to readability not functionality. :thumbup:

Yeah I probably didn't make it clear but you are on the right track. I see no reason that Russian jets would have almost unreadable RWR (with exception of Su-27) after numerous ED updates. If some one could give me a viable reason why this should happen I would be more than happy. So either make all of them readable or not readable - why favor one side over the other?

This is not modeled in FC, right?

Dear developers, I have one request: Please make western a/c (F-15 and A-10) have the same crappy RWR like the Russian planes have, or please fix the Russian ones. There is absolutely no point in me having to replace the crappy textures after each update, so for the sake of consistency please honor my request. It's not that hard, I can even send you the corrected textures. Please checkout the screenshot bellow. :thumbup: I realize that money comes from selling the NATO planes, but there are some of us that like flying the Russian aircraft. Thank you in advance.