Force_Feedback

What, an Igla-V? ;)

It's my fullest intention, and yes they are, what we could define as xenophobic, I don't think it's bad though, a matter of cultural differnces and the way life was for a long time (antisemmitism is widely accepted for instance, and when I say here something about Jews, be it negative or positive, it's all like 'how dare you?'). Cultural differnces, I don't judge Russians (and Ukrainians for the same matter) by that. Although officially such things don't exist, it surely is widespread, in all generations. Even though the more educated youngsters know that it's a silly and stupid thing. And don't get me started on what Moscow is fed to think about Georgians. But, as always with propaganda, there are a few people that realise that they are being manipulated. I believe the same thing is at play during this incident, showing your average Russian that nobody messes with your homeland, maybe to shield Georgian businesses. Until you see he footage of millions of baootles of Georgian wines being smahed by highway pavement rollers, you may think Russia has nothig against Georgia, and Georgia is making it all up. Well, it's not the case.

Why the F would Russia fire a Kh-58 at a Georgian installation on Georgias territory? This indeed smells like foul play. The Russians may hate Georgians, Asians (Chinese) and others deeply, but this doesn't justify the political agenda. No way a Su-24 would legitimally launch anything while intruding foreign airspace. People may think otherwise, and they do, but the government is not stupid, even if they have their own imperialistic/geopolitical agendas, they simply would not risk such incidents. Smells like an unauthorised launch or some navigational error and jettisoning of the missile. BTW, there is a pic showing the warhead being 'deactivated', gives a nice impression on what really happens on impact. The Kh-58 reemmbers the last location where the radiation came from (simply put), so if the radar remained stationary, the missile would at least fly to the vicinity of the installation.

Argh, ECM blinking is cheating, plain and simple. Using an aimbot in an online shooter roughly equals it. If you think that's ok, then ECM blink away, mod your F-15 into the USS Enterprise-E and start shooting quantum torpedoes, because THAT is as realistic as ECM blinking and both are based on fiction.

So, what missile was it, kh-25, kh-58m?

FAB-500+FAB100+FAB100=FAB700 :P fab

No I'm not, Ka-50 bumber 25 during the Rubezh 2004 carried 2 Vikhrs on each standard Vikhr launcher, together with 2 80mm rocket pods on the inner pylons.

now they fired a missile? wth, and it didn't explode too? smells like bad journalism here

Starting on realism eh? Well, then give us the ability to change the number of Vikhrs (and the corresponding decrease in weight) per pylon, as is done in real life. In 2004, for 'Rubezh 2004' exercise, the mighty Ka-50 bort 25 carried 2x2 Vikhrs on the standard pylons. On another occasion, a Ka-52 carried 4x4 Vikhrs. So, as you're using 'operational realism', we should have that too in Black Shark...

Wonder if they were allowed to use the EOS for ranging? Maybe they made all the kills with the horizontal ladder, or whatever the name of that 'fit wingspan, hit there' thingy is.

Flyby, are you part of the 99th Skywolves? If so, when did they get together? And if so, Force_Feedback sends you a big Hi how's the squad? Stealth systems can be 'hacked' by using radar receivers placed apart from the transmitter, that's how the Ukrainian Kolchuga ESM system works (700km detection range for H=20km targets), it detects all the RF emissions (working electric systems, datalink transmitters, moving parts creating oscillations) from a stealth aircraft, while remaining passive the wole time. This, datalinked to a good SAM system/airborne interceptor makes it possible to detect stealth aircraft at great ranges. Unlike the Chech VERA this system has a maximum detection range of 800km, giving ample time to detect stealth technology based intrudors, be it the F-22 or a hypothetical black program aircraft like the Aurora. I remember the US got seriousely pissed a few years ago when Ukraine tried selling an export version of the system to Iraq. Not that they would have any advantage with it, since most of their SAMs were either inoperational or seriousely outdated. But that international 'incident' was, IMHO, a clear statement that the system indeed works as advertised. Again, the Mig-35 is not meant for battling stealth aircraft, but for your 'day to day' insurgent busting, so it doesn't even need supermaneuvrability or forward looking itelligent EOS (IEOS) systems. Unless you're naive enough to think those missile warning systems are made for A-A missiles :P

Here comes the defense with 'they show what their planes can do with aerobatics, but not real world combat maneuvers, like the F-16 and F-15 do' Hint, learn Russian and listen to what the pilots that fly demo routines have to say about their maneuvers, they say such maneuvers are also used in A-A combat, but others, which are probably more impressive are not shown during demonstration flights. So this excuse saying the 'teen' fighters are holding back during airshows while the Russians push their planes to the limit is specatum tauri (bullshit). The F-16, even the mightly B.60 never got operational avionics on par with the F-22 at least (F-35's are more advanced), this is why the Mig-35 is considered to be 'the shit' multirole wise. They should've kept the Mig-29M2 designation though, as it's still the Mig-29, be it with more internal fuel, better engines and modern avionics. Mig-29++ is what the -35 should be called. The ones that sell the -35 call it a '4++ generation plane'; 4th gen airframe, with 5th gen avionics. Still, the F-35 with HMD and synthetic aided vision (augmented reality was the right term, right?) will be 'the shit' avionics wise though. Its ass will be whooped by a Mig-35 in close combat, but I doubt that's going to matter with all those high of-bore missiles these days. Which brings our discussion back to square one: first look, first shot, first kill. And now datalinking comes into play, AWACS, ground based radars, you name it, will be the decisive factor in such (future) battles. Now somebody should invent a fighter based datalinking-hacking software. Yes I've been watching Battlestar Galactica too much :P

Probably did the same with the number of 'engine failures', I still remember how hard I laughed when they said it like 3 times in a week on the news, morons couldn't think of some better excuse. This uber mig-29 can be a good asset for the IAF, what bother me more is that the now desperate US military industry now thinks about offering the F-35 to them. Yaay, we pay our taxes for that damn thing and Israel and maybe India are going to get it for free, with no development costs involved. That's almost like selling low quantities of hyper modern nuclear warheads to China saying, here you go, friend, have these, we put billions in it, but you can buy it for the shelf price and reverse engineer it. So: Mig-35 MRCA ftw!!!

Rolling starts? you mean those where you remain sticking to the ground ala lomac, but in all directions? FS-2004/X really have 'rolling' starts, not shuffling starts, but my computer gives me this 20 fps slideshow with 64x64 textures ://

Not matter how good the system is, dodging a couple of A-A missiles will be hard, be it an AMRAAM or a modified Hawk, it may dodge 3 of them, but then the fourth will go boom. But then again, this plane is made for multirole, not air superiority, don't expect it to be some mini AWACS, it's just a great asset for strike and SEAD missions, shooting down an occasional Mirage-2000 or Gripen. Not to start aerial WWIII, that's the F-22's speciality.

You probably already checked this out, but, to be safe, it may be your firewall blocking some packets, even if you 'allow' lock on to pass. This nasty treat of my firewall along with a vague router NAS caused my hosting ambitions to disappear for good, even though my internet connection is up to it (100mb). I don't fly online anymore, I miss the days of good old gunzo fights and get tired of people spamming 4 ARH missiles at you, even if you're on their side :/

Yeah, but we still aren't able to direct a missile using its OWN seeker, not angular coordinates given by the EOS or radar systems. In real life it is possible, and it is how the helmet mounted sight is used. There is no such mode in lomac :(

My fridge is also invisible in the IR band, nut when you look from the back... or the top ;) Unless the M1A1 runs on a zero point module, it will be warm somewhere, same applies to a F-22, F-302 and the USS Enterprise-E, with warp coils, giving off heat. It's not a stalth beater, but when a normal radar can see the F-22 under 20 km, then it has some advantage, not that it's going to matter. But then again, the Mig-35 is not neant to fight F-22s, its meant to fight separatists with rich arab fundraisers, buying them tanks and other hardware from oil money. That's where the Mig-35 comes in handy. Nobody will touch your precious F-22, now lets all hope that nobody will issue the F-22 to shoot down other airfroces on non US soil (but that surely will happen :/).

It's impossible, when you turn of the radar and EOS you can't lock any targets with heatseekers, not even with the R-73 :(

3-4 weeks max Who's talking about n00bz now :P Hahahaha McNab, nice :megalol:

I'm totally not impressed with EECH2, a modded EECH1 is really better, no matter of opintion, you rally get more than with EECH2. The FMs are the same in part 2, that was a big disappointment, also, the fps sucks compared to 1. So, you have to pay money, get the same package with new, unoptimised textures, arcade avoinics (at least they tried making them look realistic in the modded EECH1), exactly the same damage model. All in all I would call part deux vaporware, all they did was changing the sking and adding voice recognition support, wowee, 15% of your CPU for something that only works properly in Star Trek. Pressing ALT-J is still faster than screaming 'eject' into your headset, only to have it interpreted as 'chaff'. Comparing EECH to BS is indeed like comparing F4 to MS FS-X, but for its age EECH is adequate. I don't like it because of the choppy FMs (with and without 'Advanced FM functions), so I'd rather wait for BS and keep flying the T-Frog in the meantime. EECH2 is really what you can call a rip-off, a product designed to get a cash boost fast, without changing anything over the last version. And I'm nat talking Windows 95 ->98 here, I'm talking loman skin swaps here :( imagine getting 'Flaming Cliffs 2' with the same models, but desert themed skins, would you be happy?

Am I the only one that thinks 'Oh crap, that's gonna hurt my future pc'? It looks very nice indeed, but I'd rather have more advanced flight models than eye candy. This doesn't mean that I need low poly Falcon 4 models, this means that either the surroundings have to be optimised, or that their detail level should be slightly lower than that of the flying objects.

My mind works in mysterious ways, kind of like the one of Philip J Fry (Futurama, Bender, see the link?)

Are you kidding? It was made by a bureau which specialises in space based systems, and approached this OLS with the same operational requirements. I's more reliable than your average piece of avionics or other subsystems of the fighter.

Ook the wonders of low quality and trick photography, the two Thunderbirds F-16 flying 'tail to tail' comes to mind. D'oh