TAW_Blaze

I've seen so many ERs hit me after the platform has been blown to hell that I'm starting to believe this is all magic. :D I remember the good old days where you had to manually follow the target in TWS otherwise it would lose the bug when it went outside elevation limits. The funniest part is that almost none of the Eagle drivers knew about this.. :D

You should put DCS on the SSD, damn the cost. The difference it makes in loading is incredible. Besides, the wear is not significant. I'm running a 850 EVO too I think and I'm around ~ 1 TB over a year ( or more I can't recall when I bought it). Set up temporary stuff and environment to a normal HDD, hell I even linked my user directory to the HDD (although that was a bit of a bitch to do) and that should reduce the amount of load. Installing random stuff to the HDD and only putting the important and power hungry stuff on the SSD can also help.

I think he meant that after launch you stay in HPRF and only use MPRF if the target is getting near the beam or cold. Could be an interesting theory to test..

Yep, but maybe it's only possible to tweak the notch multiplier? I don't know, I'm in the dark with modding in DCS.

That sounds like some nice anti-realism. :D @Ragnarok: don't take this the wrong way, I just meant it as a harmless joke.

So having no proof would invalidate one theory but validate another? It could just as easily be that idle and preemptive flaring aircraft would be immune to IR as long as it keeps flying against non imaging IR. Especially true if the opponent is trained to NOT fire in these conditions :megalol:

That doesn't mean anything, you could easily have preemptive flares and the seeker would go for them. Non imaging versions won't be able to tell the difference if this is a plane they're stuck at or a flare.

Surely it matters whether you're showing a massive tailpipe with direct view into the engines or another surface with the fraction of the temperature. We're not talking about missiles with with imaging IR heads, but rather some 20+ year old trash cans considered "modern".

Pretty much spot on. Blocking your exhaust by flying at the missile makes or breaks your survival against IR. Anything near beam aspect or past is certain death unless you're already idle and flaring at the point of launch. Sometimes even then it's rolling a dice.. Whether this behaviour is realistic or not is a different debate. But masking your exhaust surely matters a ton even in real life.

I get that and I'd say I made peace with how things are a long time ago, I'm merely curious whether something can be done to alter how chaff affects the guidance based on aspect. Is there a way alter the aspect based diceroll mechanism without borking the general rng? If you could put a high multiplier on high aspect then you could reduce the amount of head on bs chaff dodged while still keeping it effective around the beam. I guess what I'm trying to ask is, where does the chaff related value in the lua file come in? Is this the end result, or some part, what exactly? Are there other stuff that can be tweaked, or this is the only one?

What? Okay, it totally seemed like from this thread that it doesn't. Is it not possible to tweak the behaviour based on aspect?

Until a more in depth solution is available a band-aid could be made by adding another multiplier on top of the flat value that depends on relative aspect. That way you could still implement a scenario where near the notch chaff is more effective and tune this table to whatever you want to achieve. The issue I see to implement this is that it would have to be redesigned to be a real time calculation (since instead of a fixed value now you have to use a table based on angles too, although getting the data itself is pretty easy from aspect and target heading). @GG: has there been any attempt to do something like this? In my opinion this would provide significant benefit to missile modeling at the expense of minimal effort. If not, could you please somehow forward this idea to Chizh?

Sure, but you don't fix missiles based on desired pK.. :D

This is where you're wrong. Fly MP, record tracks, review them with tacview. Flying against AI will generally end up teaching you the wrong things. @Tek: In my opinion looking at missile performance from pK perspective is silly because it's a very poor measure of it.

I dug up some old threads I posted in earlier that are worth a read and should give you an idea. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=136029 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=132872 A bit longer, but also worth to read: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=124439 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=100117

That was some good fun! Special thanks to the 51st and SF for joining. Also, props to our cadets for surviving (well, border crossing aside.. :D)

Pretty sure that's 7 seconds unless they changed it recently :)

You coming back? :yay:

IMO ASM is only more work while you learn it. Anything beyond that it'll be second nature and at that point it doesn't matter from operation perspective. On the other hand it's a massive advantage when it comes to available tools if you have the full system behind, like you said.

Great, then we might aswell rename it to Eurofighter World. :D

I predict there will be 2 server scenarios: 1) EF banned, people fly their normal stuff 2) EF not banned, everyone flies the EF. This seems rather pointless. I cannot comprehend the point of releasing such a module to the game at this point. It's like the P-51 where it will have no opponent for the next 5 years after it's release.

To a point they look pretty even and then later on the 7 seems much better. Is that because the R has shorter burn time? Looking at the video that's the only thing that would explain such a sharp dropoff.

It would affect in the sense that people would probably be forced to remember to throw bags away before pulling 10 G maneuvers. In hindsight of last red flag, no offense, but I kind of facepalmed how many people merged with bags on despite those being most certainly completely empty, and then continue to fight for multiple minutes that way. I had a short go in SP and I was not able to produce more than 12G sustained in transsonic turns. Every now and then in vertical maneuvers at the apex of the turn it would spike to 14G but only for a moment (tbh whether that spike is real or not is hard to say, would have to dig into deep stuff). In nose high reversals if you pull 12G you will GLOC and fly into space so it's not a commendable maneuver. I'd also love to see those 12G barrel rolls tested against ER (preferably both with chaff and without), but the scenario is not easily reproducable without mutliplayer. I've known for a long time the 7 has a weakness against stuff like that especially when shot from rear aspect. IMO the complaint is a bit double edged that a bagged 15 can do this or that, because yes it might be ridiculous to pull 14G like that, but at the same time the extra weight and drag is so taxing in performance you should seriously question yourself if you ever lose a fight like that.

From everything I've seen it's only possible to achieve anything far beyond 10 G is a loaded barrel roll which is borderline worthless in any combat scenario. IIRC even in a steep dive turn you will not be able to reach so much Gs (not to mention this will both black you out and the excess speed will also destroy your turn radius). If you go nose up you will run out of speed before you could reach so much unless you were flying in so fast it literally won't matter because you will have orbital turn radius (and you still won't reach 10+).

After a short look it looked like from the first shots about 2x as many ERs missed in case chaff was involved and all hell broke loose once you got around beam aspect and continued with rear aspect shots. In my opinion this makes sense, however the amount of missiles going dumb is a bit questionable in some cases.