p1t1o

IIRC in normal operation, the search radar "hands off" the contact to the track radar on individual TELARs. So the radar on the TELAR is responsible for guidance during the entire missile flight, ergo, its range is sufficient for max-range engagements. Destroying the search radar should suppress a complex's ability to detect targets, the tracking radars not being designed to search large volumes, but once spotted you are vulnerable out to max range.

100% would purchase. It is my all-time favorite airframe.

Well I mean, it definitely IS relevant, because if the Russian MoD give it the green light but nobody wants to pay for it, then it would be a financial mistake for ED to go through with it. I would say that demand for the module is a critical factor in whether or not it gets made, regardless of any other hurdles there may be. (And just to register my interest - the Su-27 is my all-time favorite airframe and would pay full price for a high-fidelity module without hesitation.) PS: you may be making assumptions about what "permissions" are necessary. Have you not seen that little notice in the loading screen? To paraphrase - "Something something none of the manufacturers or other brand holders of equipment featured endorse this product in any way something something"

Yes I think that is true, of course it will trim the other axes too though, which you might not want/need to do. Also it is often useful to have it deactivated at certain times, in fact I probably only have it on when flying in a straight line or hovering. Thats the one!

In theory, if the launching aircraft maintains a lock, it will continuously update an AMRAAM with the target position, so when a chaff is rejected, the missile can still locate the target. Not sure if the datalink is simmed though.

I've been learning the Ka-50 again recently, and stop me if I say something already covered but: The heading hold fnction does not necesserily turn you to your desired point of navigation. Activating heading hold, holds you on the heading you are on when activated, you need to actively tell it you want to navigate to a chosen nav point, I think something something flight director? Anyhoo, generally when flying the Ka-50, it is useful to have the heading hold on a hotas function, as blipping it on and off is quite useful to get stable control over the machine. I find it much easier to execute turns without it on, but find it hard to stabilise without, so I blip it on and off quite regularly.

Agreed, thats not what I thought I was doing though!

That might go quite far to explaining why I thought the missile had such a short range! All those 8-10nm shots have been at the "max Pk" mark where you get he TIR indication, I didnt realise this was already within the DLZ. That was definitely skewing my opinions! This whole time...

Question: Are you saying that you can take the shot before the "double rings"/"TIR" HUD notification? Because so far I always wait and shoot on that cue. You can take my previous shot descriptions as firing at that mark.

Ah ok, all those figures are in nm then, so not quite as bad as first described. I dunno why I thought it was km...still, 10nm is not amazing. I'll test a high vs high altitude engagement when I get a chance. Agreed that the Su and MiG are better in close, weapons wise at least, but I have had far more luck with Magics than 530s, though I still need more practice. I dunno though, a strong height differential should give your missiles a good kinematic advantage, though perhaps newer missiles get more benefit with coast/dive trajectories (does the AMRAAM do this in DCS? It should. I havnt got the F15.) the 530 just dives straight towards the target.

So here's what happened with my shiny new knowledge last night: In my scenario, 3 frogfoot targets are at roughly 6kft. Following advice, I go high and fast to maximise missile kinetics, so I can shoot without getting an R-60 in the face. Looking from 24kft to 6kft, I actually didnt lose my locks this time, however, it was a challenge finding the targets and could only detect the at about 20km. (Yes, I was scanning the radar in elevation, no, not too fast.) Oh an I got the struck-through "PSIC" HUD message whilst attempting to STT for a short while, able to STT about halfway between detection at roughly 20km and firing cue at roughly 10km. This is with a 19kft height differential and closing at around 700kts. So height and speed didnt extend the range that much, but at least I am WAY out of the way of any short-range return fire, though by the time the first missile has reached the target, I am merged, so I bug out to use the second one. I noticed that my lock dropped a short while after launching, I optimistically thought I had scored a kill, but on TacView analysis, it was spoofed by chaff. So I lost the lock, but at least that wasn't what trashed the shot. On bugging out, I lose track of them, unable to re-acquire on the radar, calling for bogey dopes instead. I eventually catch up to them, get another lock at around 17km, firing at around 10km again, and again, spoofed by chaff. *** So, the range on this missile is never going to be that great, but at least you can get a shot off, and it keeps the enemy occupied until you get in close. Staying out of the furball and relying on the Super 530s would appear to be *not* a very effective thing to do if you actually want to score kills/deny airspace with the Mirage. *** Luckily it seem I have not forgotten ALL of my ACM, as I managed to pull off this sweet barrel roll to tuck in behind one of the targets (it was super sweet) that presented himself and splashed him with 8 30mm rounds in a single burst (yeah, I was surprised too!). Another was taken out with my pair of Magics at point-blank range (one missed). Having said that, TacView revealed 2 R-60 shots that just missed me, that I never knew about! I wasn't even dumping flares. Did I mention that I left my canopy open on takeoff, so all of this was done in the fresh air? There was no noticeable effect on aerodynamics or drag, and my pilot stayed conscious the whole time, it was just noisy (except at >Mach1). I DO think I was able to hear one of those R-60s blast past me, though I didnt realise what it was at the time :) Weeeeellllll....it doesnt malfunction, if used correctly, I'll go that far :)

Oh yeah, I was referring in that context to modern equipment. Though with "2000" in the name I always see the Mirage as more modern than it really is! To be honest its pretty snazzy for an airframe that first flew in the 70's!

It seems theoretically possible to defeat notching, modern radars would have access to information regarding where the ground is expected to be, amongst more complex filters, so I wonder if they could reject returns on that basis. But modern radars are all classified so we won't know for a while I guess. I'll try some more testing with the radar, apparently I have been using the 530 way too low anyway. I have trouble with track files though, most of the time in my track replays, the aircraft wanders off the taxiway and attempts to takeoff on the grass...

Yeah, Im getting the picture that if I update my tactics, I'll see better performance from the 530. Though I do have lock problems. I can have a lock on a friendly C-130 (set to not respond to any threats) within 10nm, flying at my altitude and not maneuvering or notching me, and the lock will drop randomly, before or after launch. It seems 50:50 whether I maintain a lock long enough for a missile to reach the target. Ah. Shame, nvm. *edit* PS: with modern radars, can notching still break a lock? Its seems silly that in modern aircraft, they wouldnt update the velocity filter to that tactic, its not like you stop reflecting radar. I was of the impression that "notching" was still used as a kinematic thing rather than a break-lock thing.

Not sure, in this case, what the difference between "interceptor" and "air superiority fighter" would be. The role is defined more by the weapons. In fact the F-15 was concieved as an interceptor also. But already gone were the days of "pure" interceptors. However - Indeed, my tactics are rudimentary at the moment, though Im not trying to engage from BVR-like ranges, Im just trying to survive, and these missiles are more a hindrance than anything else. Im asking more from a perspective of - is this missile known to be simulated accurately? If it sounds like I am a poor pilot attempting to blame his instruments...you'd be right, but Im just making sure :)

This missile sucks! How come it has such a short range? Its not as bad at altitude, but at 6-10kft Im getting R-60's in the face. Most of this is my dire situational awareness and lack of ACM skills - Im improving but I havnt played seriously since LOMAC and have forgotten a lot. But the range of the M530 is killing me! Literally! I feel like I should start using them as a backup for the Magic II's... (Combine that with the M2000's habit of dropping a lock for no discernible reason...but that is another matter.) PS: I found a source (ok, it was just the wiki page...) that mentions Indian M-2000C's being capable of using the R-73, that'd be a nice addition :) ***UPDATE 22/5/2017*** YOU CAN FIRE THIS MISSILE BEFORE THE "TIR" HUD CUE! This cue appears at Max Pk NOT max range. If you fire at max Pk, it will be around the 8-10nm range, when in fact you can fire outwards of 18-20nm if used correctly.

Are you really going to be reading tiny labels in the middle of combat though? I found learning the startup sequence with the russian cockpit was a great way to familiarise and learn the layout of the controls - chucks guides are great for this as they include diagrams of where all the relevant controls are. But the english cockpit does help :) https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=135765

Did someone up there suggest that the Soviets played down the capabilities of a system? FWIW, that doesn't sound very Soviet.

Yes to this! Even just a "show/hide unowned modules" checkbox would do the trick. Its a small thing, but its pretty low hanging fruit in terms of UI presentation.

His right aileron is going crazy! Left one not doing much. Must be picking up some wash off the Herc.

Well I mean, their size and smaller plume aren't an assumption! But if MAWS can reliably detect them then so be it. Thanks for the other explanation that makes sense too :)

Not for nothing, but shoulder-launched missiles are very small compared to most other munitions, it makes sense that their exhaust will be less visible to MWS sensors, perhaps even below detection threshold. I've heard anecdotally, that common wisdom IRL is to continuously eject flares whenever below MANPAD engagement altitude, when MANPADS are suspected to be present.

Thanks man :thumbup:

Does anything about release quantity or geometry matter? By "geometry" I mean, where the chaff is released in reference to where the missile is and where my aircraft is, ie: does the chaff need to be in between my craft and the missile?

So what are the current mechanics for chaff effectiveness? I presume a missile in flight may, under certain circumstances (what circumstances?) switch target to a chaff bundle from your aircraft? Does it make it harder to get a lock on you? Does it appear on/interfere with your scope when an opponent is dropping it? Does it interfere with detection? Is it effective against things like Shilkas? Or are they just assumed to switch to optical tracking? Is it worth dropping as a precaution, before anything launches at you? How much should I drop at a time? Thanks!