thawall

This! I had the exact same thought some days ago.

In my opinion scaling should only process aircraft, which are at the outer limit of visual range and would therefore be currently rendered "smaller" than a pixel. By making these sub-pixel planes at least 2 or 3 full pixels large, their contrast would vastly improve. This effect would just counteract the deficites of our monitors (which is the purpose of all of this) and for nearer distances everything could stay the same. Additionally I think all the low poly LODs should be reworked to address the already reported issues of aircraft disappearing all of a sudden from various angles (even at closer distances). Also the material and colors of the LODs should be reworked. AFAIK they don't currently reflect the selected paintjob of the aircraft, so it may happen to be a dull green LOD for an otherwise brightly colored plane. I don't think, the engine needs major rewrites to accomplish this. It just needs a combination of the right tweaks.

Look here: http://theaviationist.com/2015/03/01/iriaf-f-14s-overhauled/ Seems like the modernization program will keep them flying until 2030. Just google F-14AM. The new paint schema: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran---Air/Grumman-F-14AM-Tomcat/2239264/L/

Just make it so, that each command for the rio can be mapped to any key. I have plenty of buttons available on my HOTAS, which i can reuse in combination with a modifier to issue commands. What I *don't* want, is having to move my hands of the stick and throttle all the time.

Hi! I'm looking for an affordable Cougar Throttle, optionally including also the Stick, for a mod project. As such, I'm also interested in broken ones, if the mechanics are still ok. If you got something like that lying around, drop me a PM. Thanks, Thawall

Damn!! Made me want the Viper in DCS even more ;-)

The F-14 will be uber with the Phoenix alone. No need for unrealistic AMRAAM loadouts. Also, its not only the pylons... The Tomcats radar could not handle them and would have needed some updates.

No suprise there... Or was there a rumor regarding a chopper that I missed?

Enjoyed the vid! Thx for sharing!

Thanks for posting the articles. Very informative! (Already sent you +rep for your previous post on IRST, so it won't let me do it again for this one...)

Thanks for the clarification. PIRATE seems to be able to handle about 200 targets simultaniously, although constant tracking seems to reduce the number quite a bit. Also for fast maneuvering targets it might be required to use STT mode at some point. But as you said, there are likely more fighters involved, also friendlies, which means target information from PIRATE could also be shared via data link, after targets have been sorted. Never the less, I see your point and read the articles you posted concerning LPI radar. If it works both systems would still be a very good complement. Do have links to additional material? Other than that, we still don't know, how radar performes against enemy stealth fighters, meaning the radars detection range might also be very short. If ECM and target spoofing is used, it might be rather useless.

Stealth Capability debate I fully agree and never said anything else (I do not fully agree on the last two sentences though). Thx for the vid btw! Concerning ranges, there are different reports. Here is an overview including the sources: http://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuroFIRST_PIRATE#Reichweite 50-90 km frontal aspect subsonic flight and 54-98km for mach 1.7 seem to be the most realistic guesstimates. Coming back to the original topic of stealth capability: even 50-60km detection range against a stealth plane make IRST a serious tool (if the weather conditions allow it). With future improvements even more so. Edit to clarify on your last 2 sentences: I don't think, PIRATE can be used to replace the radar and I agree it should be used complementary and when apropriate. But under 'identification' I understand that I can identify, probably the type of the plane and if it is hostile. And why would it be lacking against a fast manouvering target? I mean the tracking capability seems really good. Edit 2: What is the official/assumed range that a F-22 can detect another stealth plane eg. a F-35 using their radar? I would guess, that it would be not much more than 50km also.

Stealth Capability debate @Invader ZIM: Thx for posting all the detailed data and facts! I don't think, that you can compare 80s IRST like OLS-27 of the Su-27 with PIRATE, because the latter is much more sophisticated. The jump in technology is probably comparable to the improvements from 80s radar systems to AESA. For example, the software suite for PIRATE will automatically detect false positives and disregard them. Furthermore IR paint will not work against PIRATE, because it is not only looking for heat signatures but also for "holes" in the background clutter. To keep invisible, a plane would have return the same signature as the background clutter itself. The system is built with countermeasures in mind and meant to defeat them. EDIT: also, PIRATE will represent its information usually not in form of FLIR video, but similiar to a radar screen. Have a look at this: @Blaze: I'm no expert and granted, I simplified it greatly. If you have any documents/articles on modern AESA radar systems you can share I'd appriciate it. My common sense suggests that if I use radar to scan a target/area, I would need at least so much energy that the signal can travel the distance that I want to cover (e.g. 40 miles) including all the way back, after it reflected of a surface. If the target has radar absorbing coating (stealth features) I might need even more energy to get enough information in the reflected signal back. So by this logic, and correct me if I'm wrong, I would assume, that a modern RWS suite could detect my signals at about 80 miles. I might be able to trick older RWS by jumping frequencies or not painting all the time but that would only mean that RWS tech would have some catching up to do. Sadly for us, developments in this sector are highly classified (at least I didn't find much up to date information on the topic), which means we can only speculate.

Absolutely.

Look, I'm not saying, that radar is useless or that IRST is the ultimate tool. Any fighter will require both, especially for multi role mission profiles. But this discussion is about stealth capability and IRST is going to to play an important role in future combat against stealth planes. PIRATE and other modern sensors, show that it is already possible and this capability will be improved upon. The T-50 has likely also a better sensor than the Su-35. Also, similar to radar, the exact operational ranges are a well guarded secret, so 35km can be assumed to be a lower estimate. Never the less, PIRATE shows, that at least in clear weather conditions, ranges similar to radar detection ranges are possible (~100km for super sonic fighters from frontal aspect). Also in a modern avionics suite radar and IRST can be used together (called "sensor fusion" in the EF), to search and track targets. So the systems complement each other increasing the chance of detection (although also increasing the chance of being detected). As we are discussing stealth here: radar by it self can never be "stealthy", because it is an active sensor, sending out and receiving signals. You can vary the frequency all you want and narrow the beam, but in the end, when you lock the target, it will know. And searching targets with a narrow beam won't be very effective. Some months ago I read an interesting article, where it was stated, that it is no problem to track and intercept signals, even if the frequency changes several times per second. So it basically only a question of when this functionality will be integrated into modern radar warning receivers. Utimately it will come down to tactics and who can play its advantages best. But in my opinion, stealth is a necessary improvement for some mission profiles, but not an "I win button" and can be defeated. Best combo in my opinion would be lower number of more expensive multirole stealth jets (such as the F-22), which includes a modern IRST sensor to complement its radar and SEAD capabiltiy for A2/AD missions. Combine this with a higher number of less expensive non-stealth jets with serious A2A and dogfight capabilities (e.g. EF, Rafal), high sortie rates and A2G capabilities and you have a winning team.