Teknetinium

I would like to take the opportunity informing dedicated Su-27 pilots that 51st PVO is looking for Pilots. Apply at Cadet Application Desk: http://forum.51st.org/ http://www.51st.org/

<51>Teknetinium - MIG-15

I hope ED find the time eventually, would be a shame since the model has so great PFM.

Thx for sharing the process, very interesting.

We all thought that Data-link for Su-27 would be developed for SP and Client to client when Chiz announced it in a interview. I wish ED best luck in all projects so we can get to Su-27S/SM development as fast as possible. So far Im finding Su-27s air-dynamic in DCS by far the most enjoyable, would be a shame if we did not get Su-27 in full fidelity:(

As i know Chiz gave us a reply that Su-27 data-link in MP will only be implemented when ED make Su-27 in full fidelity. Lets hope F-18 gets done so Su-27 can get some attention. keep up the good work ED, your Su-27 fanboys/girls are waiting.

51st pilots have been doing it for over a year now, SARH is not tracking better when I change PRF. The main issue is chaff resistance. Or that SARH reacts to chaff when it is not in its field of view, No matter PRF. Aim-7 is not doing better when guided by F-15.

When we have F-14 flying more people will use SARH missiles and the outcry will not only be done by so called Su-27 fanboys.

That modern IR missiles missed or had malfunction is not a justification for pilots in DCS not have to go idle as in previous versions. It ads to dynamic that if you want to have a 100% chance to survive against a modern IR missiles you need to be idle to cool down the heatblure. Removing that dynamic from the most modern IR missiles is a little bit over the top, we are not talking R-60s on Mig-21. I would assume Su-27 NIIP N001 radar output, processing power and rejection of countermeasures from 8-5km is better then AIM-120B and C combined. The main issue for SARH missiles is that they miss from head on situations or when there is no chaff in their scanning path. This leads to that MP players don't respect a SARH or a IR lunch. That is not realistic if we want to simulate RL. We need to take in to account how MP pilots will react to a missile after 3 years of evading them. If missiles don't pose a threat MP community starts to exploit that and tactics get less important then payload.

I want it :)

I believe M-link could be used to guide ET-27 in opponents face. Jokes a side, It is great with all the info and technicality's but the bottom line is that missile guiding is not as well modeled as it was before. Modern Heaters can be spoofed with full afterburner where you dont need to go idle, MP community who fly online and events dont respect a heater lunch or SARH lunch. I dont agree that AIM-120B/C would have better tracking from 8km then ER-27, neither would it be better in rejecting countermeasures from that range, that is my opinion based on logic. So the underlying problem is not that we dont have all systems in a missile modeled, rather then that SARH and Modern HEATERS eat countermeasures to easy compare to ACTIVE missiles.

In order to get realistic reaction from pilots is only possible if missile pose a danger. I dont see a problem in Su-27 using R-77 in order to get some reaction from pilots. Other option could be to fly 80s. The best solution would be if ED could make SARH and modern heaters more respected by pilot that are defending them.

Compared Er-27PK to Aim-120Pk in 104th Server stats, That gave me a general Idea.

Lets get strait to the point: 1. since there is no info on how good missile are tracking a educational guise has to be made. And the educational guise can change with more info getting up to the surface or with technical advancements with in the simulator engine it self. It has been proven with new versions in DCS. This gives room to make changes to missiles tracking in order to get closer to reality. 2. I agree that Pk should be for SARH missiles around 30%, as it is now in SP. The issue is in MP because of different reasons as ping or anything els brings the PK down to 17% or 20%. This shots are taken from no escape zone as 15km-10km-7km. If we could get PK to 30% in MP as it is in SP a lot of SARH problems would be solved. 3. in older versions Heater as aim-9 or R-73 were not that easy to spoof by countermeasures, you had to go idle and pop flares, if you had power on heaters would hit. This is not the case right now where a full after-burning aircraft pops some flares and the missile miss, 4. All this combined with SARH + heaters are much less reliable compare to actives makes tactics really hard to employ. from 7km Aim-120 is posing a deadly threat while heaters and SARH missiles pose no threat if countermeasures are employed. This was not the case in older versions of DCS and was much more realistic from tactical point of view. I hope ED can address some of this concerns in order to get more realistic reaction from pilots when SARH or a Heater is lunched.

Su-27S, Su-27SM, SU-34, Su-33, Su-35, Su-30, Su-30M Any of them would give a big profit and please many virtual pilots out there. Mig-29K, Mig-23x, Mig-25/Mig-31 Su-25M, Su-24x Mi-24x, Just my wet dream :)

I hope ED implement the safe system for lateral-Gs soon. In RL Su-27 have a safe-system as for the G-limits. Broke my tailfins by using rudders to hard in order to get a faster roll. Hard to catch you self in stressed situation.

Hold the radar button when you are pointed at you target, then release it. If pipper becomes as big as aircraft's wingspan you aim at means there's a good return. ground clutter block your radar to get a good return.

the proper enemy is Mig-23 an Mig-27. But Im sure there were situations where Mig-21 Bis was involved. Great news, cant wait to get my hands on this lovely aircraft. Would like the Fighter version as well. Lets hope leatherneck dose two versions as for the F-14, I would not mind if you had to pay for different version.

Nice adition to CA, need to test it.

By the way I need to correct my self, ED has stated that missiles are in the works.

"If you're flying US (not UK) aircraft and fire an aim9 you must assume the pK to be 5%. the data suggests the Aim9 has been downgraded between the Falklands conflict and Desert Storm. it's the only data we have to go on, assuming better performance would be guessing games. Ill say it again: pK on its own means nothing. Please try to understand." Rage.

Ridiculous!!! Sams in Vietnam had better tracking, Dont ED missile developers think that what is shown i the acmi track will not be exploited in events and championships :) Can ED missile developers show me tactics I should use to counter what is shown in Ragnaroks acmi-track? Or at least confirm that R/ER-27 are broken. Su-27 squads are on our knees for three years already, we can not adapt any further when there is no respect for a missile lunch, plz help us!!!

LOL, That' s dramatic, and no go for MP environment, you speed was not slower then 240km/h. IR missiles don't have any flare-filter as well they go for first flare you pop.

Its clear that missiles need to track better, or Su-27 will be forced to fly only Aim-7 vs R-27 or aim-120C vs R-77. Why not make missiles track as in FC2? SATAC 2013 was a good example that ER-27 were useless then, it is almost 2016 and there is no response from ED rather then just downgrading missiles every patch. I really hope as well that SU-27 and MIG-29 pilots get some love we deserve. Dedicated Air 2 Air squads are on their knees :) If any ED missile developers are interested, I can send the tracks from SATAC 2013, you to analyse how air 2 air tactics looked FC2 compare to late FC3. The change is to dramatic if you ask me.