Force_Feedback

They should fix the anti tank guided missiles, add them to a few tanks for example (barrel launched missiles for the T-80) and add more vehicles with missiles (I think they did that for BS, with Western IVCs and HMMVs). Also they should add the Khrizantema system so the virtual enemy can run and cry like girls after their tank batallion got wasted by 4 Khrizantema vehicles :P

Unless you're a n00b pilot, and face it, you will be, almost everybody will. Plus, there are no blindfolded checkrides with the instructor claiming that you peeked through the blindfold. But yeah, why wear down the batteries in your mouse if you can use CTRL+ALT+SHIFT+Num4 to engage the cooling fan to your left :P Wonder if rotor damage can be partial, ie a chunck of the blade missing, creating vibrations and stuff.

Add that to a Cessna, and it's deadly too.

Errm, AFAIK Russian women are way nicer than your Scottish sheep, no matter how soft the wool. But, all ended well, and all the roofs are still there, as are the sheep.

In a certain mode, yes (continious track), but the N-001 has this TWS-like function that will range the supported target every 5 seconds, and if fired in that mode (more than 15km out, otherwise it won't let you), then the missile guidance command will be interrupted and the missile will fly on INS only until the predefined 'active' position. Active as in that the launcher's radar will illuminate the target for missile guidance.

И на К-36Л не покатались.

I was talking about the radar-weapon control, that system does not immediately illuminate the target (only tracks it), only when the missile is in range (for the seeker to 'see' the refelcted radar beam) the launcher's radar will start to illuminate the target. Makes no sense to give away your launch when the missile seeker itself is out of range, that may be how it works on the Su-27. However it's still debated wether the 'delay' is of any significance, it may very well be like 3 seconds after launch (until the missile is clear of the launcher). The point is that the launcher will only start illuminating while the missile is already near the target, and not from T=0.

Not entirely sure, but maybe Chizh can chime in ;) I read some discussions about the R-27ER being only INS guided until it reaches a predefined intercept point, after which the launcher's radar (Su-27) starts sending guidance commands. The biggest riddle is WHEN it will start sending commands, it could very well be 1 second after leaving the rail to quote someone, or 30 seconds later. The thing is, ED are researching the matter, that's a good thing.

Thank you for answering :) Nice vid, again. Wee, blue-Airworlf-like pits.

Couple of questions: at ~02:04, is that a signalling flare? I know the Ka-50, mi-24 and mi-8 use them for emergencys/broken radio/radio silence. The blue-ish cokcpit lighting, is that standard, or some Premiere effect? 02:51, thanks for adding that dam, the question is, can we destroy it? Thank you ED for adding people. Can we have Jihadists too, I want to piss them off by circling around them in the Ka-50, while their 5.45mm BB guns can't penetrate my 12.7mm RUSSIAN rated ballistic glass, so no whiny .50cal, .50cal+ :P And finally, f*** Operation Flashpoint with its arcade FM, BS rules, and thank you GA for making the video. (you know I'm a purist, and not fancy effects, but this is nicely done, and not overdone)

Listen, saying a missile is in service because a plane carries a live version of it is silly. Hajduk is right, most pictures of the Su-27 feature mock-up ordnance because most flights are training flights (Russia hasn't invaded a country with a real airforce yet), on training flights it is preferable to not being blown up if some technical glitch should occur. Also the 'plane bin laden jihadist' paranoia is far and far less than that in the US and some allied countries like Holland, the UK (lol, fluid limits, tards). So comparing the operational needs in peacetime should be done with that in mind, they are not going to shoot down planes every 15 minutes or shoot some third world country airforce. Ok, that settled, why would they ever fly with live missiles? You can get some certainty on the 'liveness' of a R-27 if you look at the base of the fins, if there are rivets connecting an L-shaped metal strip, that is holding the fins. Then it's a model missile. Real R-27s are more aerodynamic and don't have anything sticking out near the guidance canards or the back fins. Also keep in mind that some parts of the R-27 are made in Ukraine, so Russia has now at least 15 year old 'airframes'. Now I know they probably made some deals for new engines. I know Ukraine is offering an active version of the R-27E for export since last year. Knowing the half-*ssed way things are probably done there, I'd say those are your R-27EAs from the 1990-ies, with the same, 'old' design. Also remember that the R-27 is not very reliable, it is the Aim-7M (actually the R-24 is) of the Soviet Union, be it with longer range, but longer range to hit nothing is still useless. Also, information the the R-27P is very scarse, most Su-27 airforce pilots don't even know that it exists, and yet here we go, people saying the R-27P is ineffective and all other kinds of bullcrap. Yes those missiles are/were in service, but only in small numbers. And there is not much reliable (ie, not 'export made') information on them. So having these moddled in some kind of sim is just like having the aim-120D-C99-2347823-1324723 or whatever, impossible. Let ED fix the R-27ER first, in real life the thing just can't lock onto a target while fired 70km out, therefor it it first guided in INS only until it reaches an intercept point, after which it actually starts homing onto the reflected radiation.

Was it that their average second class pilot flew like 50-60 hours per year, as opposed to 20 in the early nineties, so it is getting better, and some day the pilots will reach an adequate level in terms of training. I would rather say invest in training programmes, both static simulators as dynamic ones in the form of Yak-130s. I'd like to see a Mi-8/24 doing a rolling start from such runway.

Don't think so, according to the pics that is :P a few choppers and a Yak-18 did land there though :p

We should have the R-27(E)P missiles though, for AWACS blasting.

You know all those Finnish pics of Hornets landing on prepared roads? Well, the Su-27 tries that :P Nah, they're not retarded to land on something that narrow, but those Su-27s can kick up dust and dirt. From one of the best sites out there, pilot.strizhi.info http://pilot.strizhi.info/photos/v/wing+2007/day3/?g2_page=2 One of the best Su-27 photos ever, nice dynamics, and lots of dust.

I get 3-400, not that crappy, although 12mbyte/sec would have been better.

h4x, aimbots, wallh4x everwhere!!! Be vigilant! :D

Are those black spheres on the tusks (IR) missile plume detectors?

Did Romania receive the Su-25A, or the Su-25K? And is the uprated engine on the Su-25T really moddled? Oh, can we have engine fires on the Su-25A fixed? They are unextinguishable, even when shutting down both engines, the fire comes back, and yes I cut the throttle. Kind of stupid to blow up when your engine is not getting fuel. P.S., finally, add the R-77 on the outward pylons of the Mig-29S, as per real life.

Some add ons in MSFS have this feature, pretty handy IMHO, on the other hand, you're not ferrying passengers in lomac, so comfort and coordinated turns are not that important. It's a good idea, as long as we can have both the string and a pit sans string. Would hanging a G-string over the pitot tube on the Su-25 be of any help?

Sharks love some good SEALs. Ok, before you start flaming me and calling me names, that pic was edited.

Check your options menu, if 'apply global' is green, then it will default to your own difficulty settings (with unlimited weapons off).

Can we have a pink G-string tied to the nose of a Ka-50?

No shark soup for this guy.

Probably free falcon or whatever, the 20 year old Su-47/S-37 has internal weapon bays, but it's a tech demonstrator.