Force_Feedback

The operation time is limited by the amount of coolant (distilled water) used in each pod. Ok, I uploaded the two electronics manuals, the ECM system is discussed from 'RTE_SU27SK_kn6_ch8_173_00__001.tif.jpg' to 'RTE_SU27SK_kn6_ch8_173_01__031.tif.jpg' it features a pic of the pod, the cooling element and the panel on the right side just below the RWR panel, aka the ECM control panel :P http://rapidshare.com/files/23788276/Su-27SK_electronics_manual.rar.html

It's the L-203iE (E for export) system, aka the Gardenia, Sorbytsiya is the L-205, and its successor has something with S in it, the point is, the pods are the same as for the Sorbytsiya (judging from the illustration) and are also carried on the outward hardpoints. The pods are just that, pods, what's inside is what counts the most. Although I can imagine Sorbytsiya pods have some other cone sections, which are radar transparent to allow jamming outside the pod structure :P The Chinese flankers have this system (I guess), and the pods look very similar to Sorbitsya, they are 4.1 meters long and have a diameter of 35cm, dunno how big Sorbitsiya is. I might as well translate all the modes, and give you all the full ECM manual translation, well, I'll upload the original version to some free hosting site (like rapidshare, but without lame time delays, need pointers). HOTAS programming IS lame, in a real car/aircraft you can't flip 3 switches with 2 hands in 0.002 seconds either...

Will the FMs be 'realistic'? aka, not some F4 mod that is being marketed as something 'revolutionary'?

Okay, I translated the part about blinking/shimmering whatever. So no 'blinking' after all, it's designed to link multiple jammers, now THAT is what we certianly will never get in 'lomac 2' :P Hope that answers some questions, the translation is rusty, but heck, it's either that or lots of extra words with no additional meaning.

I did squad flying 2 something years ago, well I didn't like it, nobody would show up and such, and also we had this 'black sea' operation concept, where we would have a semi-dynamic campaign, but it was too tough for most pcs to handle, so it went down the drain fast.

I seriousely disagree with the HOTAS mumble jumble, especially concerning ECM ops, off-line no problem, blink at 20000 Hz, Fly the F-117 with 50 AMRAAMs, I don't care and do it myself (not the hotas programming). But online, where everyone can choose the blinking rate they like, no, that's wrong and equals something like auto fire for an in-game semi-automatic weapon. Usually this form of manipulating is called hacking or cheating, as other players have other modes of operation (be it a gun, ECM or fishing rod) compared to the cheaters, hence it's forbidden. And don't pull everything out of context, the anual clearly states that it's blinking 'for flight in pairs' it doesn't state 'blinking as fast and often as you like, to fly in your exported Su-27S somewhere high, and get advantages online' :/ And the 'real' vanilla ECM mode can't be replicated because we don't have ecm against missile seekers OR ECM against search/track radars. And the mode we DO have, high frequency noise, already 'blinks' so assigning HOTAS to do some additional 'blinking' is wrong. Well, ED has the manual as well, it's not that it's something new, been around the net since 2002 or something, it's hard to find (the electronics manual, not the flight manual) but ED has it. They decide what to do with it.

Yet it explicitly states that it's for flight in pairs

It's not directly clear wether it's blinking between two jamming. It says 'for flying in pairs' Wait, I'll read further on... Nothing that I can see directly, don't feel like reading all the specs right now. But, since Sorbytsiya can jam for 4, guess it's predecessor can jam for 2??? <-- mumble jumble speculation

It's the more advanced UB version, with improved combat capibility, blah blah BTW, the 1990-ies mig-29K (912) had an impressive cockpit, 2 mfds, AoA indicator that went up to 35 degrees (good thing manoeuvrability wise). Maybe that KUB was the Indian one, maybe it's some future indigenous IR missile?

BIG D'oh!!! It's not the Sorbytsiya, it's the older Gardenia ECM system, it is housed in the same pods, but heck, what's in them counts... Oh well, at least we know how the Mig-29S jammer should be :P

Okay, I googled the first bit of the translation (sure, I'm lazy) http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/archive/index.php?t-37388.html I also took the liberty to translate the jammer modes Setting 1 - Complex jamming of radars and missile seekers Setting 2,3,4 and 5 - Different specific modes of jamming, ensuring optimal jamming of predefined enemy interception systems [ie, presets for different enemy radars] Setting 6 - Blinking jamming signals (During flights in pairs) Setting 7 - Doppler noise distortions Setting 8 - High frequency noise Setting 9 - 'Antipod' type of jamming (llumination of underlying surface, may be used at altitudes of 50-500 m) Further on the manual says: In the first stage, when a radar is detected, there are two types of jamming, predefined before flight. One: for impulse radars and the other, for continious and quasi-continiously transmitting radars. At the second stage a cyclycal distortion is formed, first for a duration of 3 seconds the channels for range and speed, then, in 8 seconds a second set of signals is added, jamming angular coordinates. The total duration of the jamming cycle is 11 seconds. 'Programma' mode [Program mode] I hate these litteral translations, makes everything hard to read and understand :( To sum it up, the jammer will start jamming when somebody locks up the su-27, after that it continiousely transmits 4 jamming cycles until a missile guidance signal is detected, the 2 last of those 4 cycles is to counter missile seeker heads. [Okay, translating, trying to keep it understandible :/] *[ ] meant comments by me, ( ) are manual featured. If the signal from the irradiating radar ceases for a short time (3.5 s), then the system continues repeating the current jamming profile [which is preprogrammed on the ground]. If the time of the illumination pause exceeds 3.5 s, then the system returns to the jamming of search and track radars. As the manual continues it explains what frequency ranges all the subsystems use and transmit in, and explains how they all work, all stuff with lots of numbers and microseconds. Oh well, not bad for an almost 17 year old manual. PS the 4.1 m long container weighs 60kg, without all the crap on the inside.

Nearly not realistic enough, I took time to read through the export su-27 electronics section manual that covered the jammer, the thing has lots of crap inside and like 10 different operating modes with submodes, really confusing. Strange that such manuals are public, ok, it doesn't tell the precise operating frequencies, but still, China is in a lot of trouble if they haven't upgraded those thingies :P

Actually either the radar or the EOS system can designate a target for a missile to lock on to, tracking via missile is only done when a system is not available for target designation (some fluke/nose of the aircraft is gone). That's why the R-73M2 can only be fired from 60 degrees off bore max. The missile itself can see 75 degrees, but since either the EOS or radar can't look that far off, you're limited to 60 degrees (the limits of the vanilla EOS ball). There is an override mode that will use the missile itself as means of tracking, but it lacks any range finding, so you'll have to guess wether it will hit. BTW, the R-73 in the Su-27/mig-29 should growl too, when used in override mode with a HMS (a mode we lack in lock on). Hope this clears up the confusion about off-bore targeting and the R-73.

^In Soviet times..... They were also fatalities during the K-36 testing, at least one 'tester' died in a K-36 test blast in the late seventies :( Some Mk-10s getting blasted, see how little altitude they gain? That's what kills crews in all those Tornadoes that eject at tree top level with moderate sink rates :/ Same still applies to the Mk.16, but since it's so light and smart, it compensates that way, but still a K-36 gives you something like 110 ft at ~695 kts TAS 190 m alt. above sea level, the Mk.16 seems to get up to 30-50 ft max. However at 730kts the K-36 ejectee has only 35ft to prepare for his/her PLF :/. But, here comes the whine all western military analysts use, since the chute deployment and the parachute itself is different, you can't really compare both seats... Also, MB Mk.10/14/16 seats deploy the main chute while the ejectee is still strapped in, the K-36 deploys the chute and releases the crewmember simultaneousely, so a 'chute depoyment' with the K-36DM series 2 means crewmember is hanging under a parachute, and a chute with Mb/ACESII seats means there is still a seat to account for. I'm talking fractions of a second here, but time matters with these devices :P And don't think riding an ejection seat is not stressful, the speed of build up and duration of forces matter. The only 'Jolly, do I fancy an ejector seat ride!' seat out there is the Sks-94(M1/M2), but it's basically a catapult and a long pole, nonetheless, it weighs less than 23kg (16-17 for the M2) and gives you a full chute in 0.17 seconds, that is better than the ACES II :P. The 30k $ price tag is more than worth it to save lives in aerobatic planes IMHO.

No, it's not the R-74, I want to know what it is. I suspect misinformation (some kitbashed R-73 model), or it's some ultra unstable control scheme. This was probably asked before, but I can't find anything on Google about this :( It's probably either the K-30, Izdeliye 300 or K-MD some next-gen IR missile with FPA seeker not to become available until 2013, but then again, I might be wrong, as it looks to be a heavily modified R-73

Wasn't the R-74 the R-73 with longer burn motor and 90 deg off bore designator, the one with a 'bulge' in the front transparency? This may be a glimpse of the 'next-gen' replacement of the R-73, but more likely some early idea released as a diversion.

This mig-29K model has a strange missile mounted on it, seems like a bigger R-73 with extra fins (the one of the outer left pylon). Any ideas on wether this is some new Russian IR missile, or a modeling error by the model maker? Or could this be intentional disinformation? http://media.bharat-rakshak.com/aero/v/Display_Stalls/Foreign_Vendor/P1020500.jpg.html http://media.bharat-rakshak.com/aero/v/Display_Stalls/Foreign_Vendor/P1020502.jpg.html http://media.bharat-rakshak.com/aero/v/Display_Stalls/mig29k.jpg.html

Holy shit, this is BIG, better get all the info together before it's covered up, oh, and make a call to Fox Mulder. With telekinesis our grey friends (we come in peace and all the shit, while trying to convert humanity) will have a massive advantage over all of us, well, except maybe for me and the inhabitants of Jamaica, but what the hell. The point is nobody got hurt too much in the process, that's what counts, although it does contradict the concept of war, but I don't care, killing people is always bad, even if they themselves hold no values for human beings. Pass the bong to the right (yes I always f-up the rotation and proud of it)...

C&C 3 with Grace Park and Tricia Helfer :chair: I said that b/c they raped C&C right with Generals, and now they have Warhammered it 40000 times, and now it sucks.

Because it's mobile, and can have basic search/tracking equipment deployed in 5 minutes, while receiving datalink info from other radars/IRST? Please leave lock-on out of real life discussions, lock on doesn't emulate tactics and battlefield set-ups. Also there are things such as jammers and decoy emitters, so it's not like in lomac 'hey, I see a radiation source, it's spot-on, I launch my kh-58 and it hits the thing within 10m'. And if some F-22s decide to penetrate that 'S-300 line' (which will never happen in RL, a 'line' arrangement of ADS), I guess that would result in some 'poplar trees' appearing in the Russian taiga, and it gets more depressing from there on.

Don't know about jettisoning fuel and stores, but with the Su-27 (mig-29 perhaps too, forgot about that one), when attempting a dead stick landing, or when the brake systems have failed, the procedure is to jettison the canopy when on approach. It's never explained in the manuals WHY it needt to be done, but I suspect it has something to do with the 75 km/h 'zero'-zero ejection procedures. So, if the shit hits the fan during the roll, the pilot still can egress safely, and not get ejected into a big piece of plexiglass with sharp corners.

I do have seemingly random problems while burning DVDs, I have the latest firmware and such, but still, some DVDs get messed up, while others turn out good. The thing is, when I disable the Starfroce drivers through the device manager all DVDs seem to end up fine. I haven't done it often enough to conclude something, but it is a strange fluke.

Fly very, very low, under 5 meters, use alt hold, pop-up, fire your rockets/bombs pray the CIWS went dead. You also can set up a lonely Vinnie, make it hostile, and come in for a landing in your su-33, just remember that Mr Phalanx doesn't like you.

Just use the Kh-15 ;)

Ever seen a M-2000 video? Well, the Typhoon is better, and no frickin F-16 can even get it in the front hemisphere. The Rafale is good too, but has two tiny little weak engines more suitable for a supersonic trainer than a multirole aircraft. The thing with manoeuvrability is that with the current missile technology there is little need for it, however, a more agile carrier will get a lock and a shot faster than some plane that depends on 'energy management'