Stuge

104th vs SF will likely take place Sunday 17.00 Zulu. Not confirmed yet but working on it.

We have 'Muricans on our team and some of them are working during the week so thinking of them it would be reasonable to start our matches only from 17.00 Zulu onwards. And only on Saturdays/Sundays.

The Tacview file link is not working!

Proud of Team Tiger - the hard week's work paid off! Every single pilot made a great contribution!! Also happy to be fighting tough opponents on Team Fishbed, it was definitely not a piece of cake... And thank you Hook for great organizing and commentary with great personality I watched some of the Twitch broadcast afterwards and you are a talent :)

Sure, I'll take the captainship if it is given :)

Maybe, I haven't flown that much single lately.. I did notice that the AI has learned to notch amraams actually :D

This speed advantage can be used by near perfect launch timings and snaking + diving maneuvers but it is still a knife edge affair...

CALLSIGN: 104th_Stuge TEAM: F-5 team as primary choice, Mig-21 as secondary if F-5 team is taken COC & RULES REVIEW: YES EMAIL SENT: YES

My point was maybe that the AI has big problems regarding realism to begin with, even without going into their tactical decisions, so coding a new AI is probably an absolutely huge chunk of work that is unlikely to be on top of ED's priority list...

I think you're on the right track Prototypebay. The AI has been DCS's weakpoint forever. Let Eagle Dynamics know when you have created a new advanced working AI logic, I'm sure you would be compensated very well indeed.. good luck with the programming!! :):)

Currently the way to go with Flanker against Eagle is stealth and/or numbers. Learn to use vertical scan in IR mode effectively, and use terrain masking, lure them close, and attack with surprise and fury, and you can score lots of kills.

104th Phoenix will join the party :) Initial roster: Stuge - F-15C Ironmike - F-15C Knight - F-15C Cobra - F-15C Spade - F-15C Presing - Mig-29S Deboman - Mig-29S

How do you know AWACS is going to be available for both sides of the conflict for the entire time? Or enough fighters to fly in proper wings? Maybe there can be a necessity to use "guerrilla tactics" in air combat also... land on highway airbases, single ship hit and run, hide in mountains where possible etc.. I think the proper way to go is that people who want more realistic missions should design and host more realistic missions, not ask others to ;)

I can't believe the amount of complaining here... this is a great stunt, bravo!!! On a side note, last I checked this is mostly useless in dogfight since flight is definitely very unstable at high AoA and loss of control is likely. The Flanker on the other hand.... now that is a beauty to fly without any computers interfering with control inputs <3

I don't get the argument about "unrealistic tactics". Tactics develop over time in response to the battlefield dynamics, whatever they may be. This applies both in game and in real life. There haven't been extensive wars with modern jets, definitely not between equally powerful forces, only minor skirmishes. The way I see is that many advocated real world tactics and procedures are sort of idealized, because they haven't been thoroughly battle tested. It's easy to say this and that is the best real world tactic but it has not really been battle tested! I guarantee that once you pit thousands of 4th generation jets against each other in a decade lasting war... many funky tactics that no one could have thought of before will arise. Just a simple example.. if I remember correctly it became standard for Soviet La-5 pilots to always fly with their canopies open, to make emergency bailout possible in high speeds. This was completely against procedure. These things will come up as a conflict prolongs and pilots will get creative and find the most effective ways to deal with the enemy. People will think outside of the box under pressure. In air-quake and other online practice a pilot learns the most effective tactics through trial and error - so the tactics that get cultivated in the process can be very effective indeed - and they would certainly apply in a real life situation if the real life situation were identical to the simulation ;)

Yeah, I have to admit that after the spread was added to DCS the effectiveness of the F-15 gun went significantly up at typical ranges, with the cost losing the laser-like accuracy of longer shots :) Some spread was also added to the Russian gun. But in the good old days a Flanker could snipe another Flanker's engine from 1,5 km :):):) And the engines were actually the Flanker's main weak point back in the days, thus it was wise to aim gun shots specifically at them.

Yes, this is smart as long as the target does waste the energy... when he's slow he will be easier to shoot. However, an Eagle can keep up speeds of 600+ kts while dodging all your gun shots, all without bleeding speed. With Flanker is very difficult to defend guns due to the slower responses I mentioned, its large size, and the risk of breakage during hard evasive maneuvers, and lower thrust which makes it harder to keep up the speed. Keep in mind that roll response time(tied to rotational acceleration) and maximum roll rate are two different entities.. high roll rate is less helpful if it takes precious time to achieve it.

For me it's useless now. At slow speed direct control is better while at high speed using W will result in broken wings..

Well since you asked I tested it quickly from 600 km/h (any faster breaks the wings). With direct control the Flanker seems to pretty much match the Eagle's response time in pitch. However, considering the subject matter (shooting highly evasive, high speed targets) direct control is out of question since using it at high speeds such as 600+ kts (1100+ km/h) is extremely unstable and will result in suicide unless you have replaced your regular brain with custom built fly by wire computer for the purpose :)

This is not what I mean. I am talking about response time - the time between control input and the maneuver that results. To prove my point I just did a quick test on positive pitch response time for both aircraft. Straight and level, sea level (low altitude), 700 km/h (380 kts). Both aircraft very lightweight with no stores. Flanker's direct control mode was not used in this test. Decelerated time to 1/32 and measured with a stopwatch the time in seconds from pulling the stick all the way back until the moment the aircraft hits angle of attack of 20, while hitting approximately 9 G. This would indicate when the aircraft has reached maximum performance turn from straight and level flight. Results: The Eagle took about 25 seconds while the Flanker took a whopping 80 seconds!!! In real time this can be converted to less than 1 second for Eagle while it is almost 3 seconds for the Flanker!!! No amount of pilot skill can make up for such a big difference in response time, period. The fast response time is a huge benefit when gunning for extremely evasive targets that hopefully for their sake change their maneuvering direction every 1 second or less in unpredictable ways. Response time in roll is also slower in Flanker, but I'll leave the extent of it for someone else to test ;)

:):):) You're welcome :):):) Naw, the Flanker pipper is good, it is pinpoint accurate. Eagle pipper on the other hand, last I checked, leads too little at longer ranges. Perhaps the effect of air resistance on the 20mm round is underestimated in the calculations, however I've heard they changed it recently so I don't know what the situation is currently. Pipper jumpiness depends on target jumpiness and internet connection quality :) And the pipper logic is the same in both Eagle and Flanker.

You're right Darkfire. Flanker gun is extremely accurate all the way until 1,5 km range (where the pipper disappears), even at very high speed tailchases (600-700 kts indicated). It would be accurate even further away if the gunsight would support this. All you need is for the target to fly in a stable manner for enough seconds so you can take precise aim, fire, and let the bullets catch. Meanwhile, Eagle's 20mm rounds both have a wider spread to begin with and in high speed tailchases lose speed so much that they never reach a target beyond a particular range, last I tested it was ~0,75 km which means its effective range in this case is only half of the Flanker's. One interesting consequence of the Eagle cannon's large spread and extreme rate of fire, combined with the rapidly decreasing speed of rounds, is that in a head-on confrontation you can open fire early with a ~2 second burst to create a very thick shotgun shot -like "cloud" of bullets for the target to fly through. Unless the oncoming target evades, he will fly through the cloud and is likely to get hit. This technique is aided by the Eagle's gunsight not being range limited.

Eagle is more responsive (reacts faster to control input) and has less rotational inertia also. Aiming with Eagle is quick and intuitive, while aiming with Flanker is clumsier and needs more practice to damp out unwanted movements. When you spend hours and hours shooting highly evasive targets you will understand the difference ;)

Are you sure this is still the case? I've managed to score "stealth" ET kills against AI head-on, they wouldn't flare if the shot was from far enough distance(so that the missile has stopped smoking when it was closer to the target).

Yes, having strong Kung Fu is very important!