Flyout

This is a radar operation cyclogram, the receiver is locked during transmission, it has nothing to do with the SPO.

This document does not apply to the MiG-29. It is a general description of the device.

You're distorting the facts. There are pilots who report poor performance of the radar. And official documents confirm that SPO information cannot be used when the radar is on.

You're wrong. It's not mentioned there. There's a reference to a blanking feature in the 2011 document about the SPO-15. However, it has nothing to do with the MiG-29 aircraft; it's a general description of the device's capabilities. It's worth clarifying here. Not all capabilities are always and everywhere utilized. Recall the R-27R missiles. The manufacturer's description of the missile states that it supports a reduced target illumination frequency to enable a salvo launch of two missiles at two different targets. But the devil is in the details. Mikoyan and Sukhoi Design Bureaus didn't implement support for this feature in their MiG-29 and Su-27 aircraft. As a result, the missile can be used in a salvo against two targets, but the aircraft don't support this. The same is true here. The SPO supports blanking, but for some reason, the aircraft developers didn't implement it.

You don't speak Russian, but I do. It says there that the information can't be trusted. Quite clearly and unambiguously. Since these are Soviet aircraft, the original manuals in Russian take precedence over all others. And yes, it clearly states that you cannot use the SPO when the radar or jammer is turned on.

This SPO-15 manual isn't specific to any particular aircraft. It describes the equipment's capabilities in general. However, specific implementations of the station varied across both design bureaus and aircraft types. What's written here doesn't directly apply to the MiG-29.

I disagree. The F-15 outperforms the MiG-29 in every way, from its radar to its flight characteristics. Which is fine, since they're different classes of aircraft.

Why are you trying to shut me up? I claim that the SPO in ED is modeled correctly, and you're wrong. I'm basing my analysis on numerous Soviet combat manuals. It's just that you don't seem to have this information.

So you simply don't have this document. It's Chapter 6. Use of Individual Electronic Warfare Equipment. It's for aircraft 9-13.

The combat manual for 9-12 does not state anywhere that the SPO-15 can be operated with the radar turned on.

I have a Su-27 combat manual. It says you can't trust the SPO indication when the radar is on. Yes, it shows something, but the number of false treats makes it impossible to understand the real situation.

It's strange they didn't see it. This limitation is documented in Russian manuals. And this is not a failure, it is a feature of the device’s operation.

The R-27ER missiles appeared on the MiG-29 only with later firmware versions of the WS computer (BZPP-4 in Russian). This was in the late 1980s, when the F-16C/D Block 40/42 already existed. The early MiG-29s of 1983 had no countermeasures at all and no R-27ER. So, in DСS we have an aircraft no earlier than 1988. Here is early 9-12. Notice fins below vertical stabilizers and lack of countermeasures dispensers.

ED correctly modeled the SPO. The Russian combat manuals state that the SPO cannot be used with the radar on. This isn't the lack of maintenance, but a feature of this device.

Twenty-five years have passed, and pilots, like everyone else, are prone to forgetfulness and mistakes. Facts about the MiG-29 are found only in the original Russian-language documentation for the USSR/Russian Air Force.

I have not found a source where the operation of SPO together with radar is permitted.

I don't think so. If chaff were considered useless, the soviet combat manuals of the 1980-90s wouldn't have had such extensive sections devoted to chaff countermeasures tactics, both from aircraft dispensers and with special chaff rockets.

The "gorka" command is generally understood to mean a hi-rate change in flight altitude, usually upward. However, in the context of the MiG-29 manual, it can also mean downward. These are safety maneuvers to reduce the risk of collision with a target or target debris.

Раритет первых серий. С гребнями под килями и без блоков выброса ловушек.

347

Overall, I agree with you, except for the missiles. The missiles in DCS are the best in any simulator. I've been following their development for many years. Also, ED guys wrote that the MiG-29 radar is completely based on the new physics and is currently the best in the simulator. Give it a try. We also got the completely new SPO, implemented as closely as possible to the original, and now I hope all future developments will be just as good.

I agree. That's why the first batch of MiG-29s didn't have countermeasures dispensers at all. They did later, but they were only intended for flares. The threat from radar missiles was likely considered insignificant.

You're mistaken. The combat manual for the 9-13 aircraft (as you know, a later version than the 9-12) states the following in Russian: When the radar is switched on, it is impossible to use the information from the SPO-15 due to its erroneous and chaotic nature. And this isn't the only source of information prohibiting the use of SPO when the radar is switched on.

The ALR-45 has a more advanced design with a digital processor, a digital threat library and more accurate threat positioning than SPO-15. Can you name another, more realistic one? Just without the F-16.

Sorry, but DСS is a realistic simulator, not a flight game with balanced forces. Yes, Soviet RWR systems have always lagged behind American ones. That's reality.