Teknetinium

Im not fighting Im just saying that F-22 and T-50 has same design approach. And that this aircrafts are too small to make speeds of MIG-31 or Blackbird. Smaller wheel spins faster than the big one, as faster it spins as bigger load on construction, I don't need internet to understand that. I don't agree with you that missile will solve all the problems. It seems I was right, because missile don't track as good as they were FC1.

LOL, Then you should know that spinning of the engine blades is one of the biggest problems to overcome when aiming for hight speeds whit jet-engines.

You can see clearly that F-22 just can't reach Mig-31 speed because of engines blades can not spin that fast without self destruct. What Im saying is that maneuverability is a big factor, if you could only rely on missiles, we would have aircrafts that had same design approach as Blackbirds and Mig-31. We don't know F-35 top speed nithere, It doesn't make it the fastest aicraft in the world because it can supercruise. Pilotasso you and GG have since FC1 been saying that missiles should be even more effective and hit target even more than they did in FC1. If we are believing that ED are doing something right with the missiles simulation which points to opposite opinion then yours since FC1. And trust me there is a lot you and me don't know about how effective jammers are today. They might blink them, or use macros :)

As missiles get better so do countermeasures. You never know what jamming capabilities your opponent will have in future. F-22 have same design approach where speed is compromised for maneuverability. Which indicates that we can not be 100% sure that the missile will do the job. Its harder to make countermeasures against unguided bullets i assume ;) Worth mention that Jammers in FC1 felt more unbrodictible compared to now. I would say it felt more realistic when you could encounter different management on jammers when we could turn them on and off as fast as we liked. You could actually recognize pilots by the way they used jammers. Great time whit a lot whining on that it was unrealistic that some used macros. Now everyone get used to the jammer so it doesn't play its role as it should compare to how it was in FC1. Both Active and semi-active were affected. ER-27 was for obvious reasons suffering more by FC1 jammers, never the less it would be better keeping that old jammer which gave bigger variation on jammes usage.

Fair enough then, that Aim-120C and ER-27 reach unmunovuring target at the same time from 25 km, where the missile take same trajectory. I guess there are some disputes on the ranges in FC3 1.2.5 update 3?

I see, i thought that ER-27 was faster.Like You are saying probably hard to really tell. Maybe it could be faster at higher altitude?

Witch missile is faster ER-27 or Aim-120C5?

We all do have same problems, Servers are very unstable, very hard to know which factors causing the problem.

LOL, we could lunch ER-27 and almost extend while supporting our missile like real man do:)

Don't worry by then Ill fight you in EF-2000.

I fly P-51 more than I fly Su-27S whit all its buggs.

GG that what you will have when we get F-18C, :megalol:

GG which camp are you in? Let me put it this way, If information was available would you like to fight against Mig-21 or Su-27SM3 in your F-15E? I'm talking about DCS not realife. I'm supporting real data, but I don't support aircrafts from different timeframes to compete. If you fight Su-27 from 86 it would be great if you could play by same rules where F-15 should be based on same year. Don't make it political by saying Su-27 never had updates anyway so it doesn't matter we can fight it with F-22 since US have it. That would be in RL but I do not support that for a simulator. I believe most people want aircrafts that can match each other. GG this is a simulator not a real war where you always want your oponen to be weaker. Nato and russian fighter pilots show great respect to their opponents, since there is a lot of aspects that are not aware of.

GG and lunaticfringe I see your point, but when you are talking about total air superiority you need to bring in F-22 or F-35 into the theatre. And if you believe that we should fight F-35 /F-22 in starfighters and Mig-21s thats fine. But In reality you would face a EF-2000 or Su-35. You are talking about the advantages F-15 had when Su-27 and Mig-29 was still in development. With time Su-27 and Mig-29 have steadily outdated F-15 by getting similar missiles and systems while having edge in WVR, F-15 just could not change the aerodynamics. Back then F-15A was like F-22 is today but Russians responded by making Su-27. It seems the story is repeating itself while this time T-50 have even bigger time frame between F-22 then Su-27 had to F-15. Unfortunately F-22 glory days will be over as well when we have comparable aircraft. Today there a plenty comparable aircrafts to F-15E, but not to F-22/F-35. That where the advantage is. Don't mix up F-22 with F-15E. If we have Su-27 and F-15 from same generation I believe it is a fair fight, same as finished t-50 would be against F-22. GG if you want to fight as it would be in RL the ods are on your side. 2xF-15 vs 1xSu-27S, 2xF-22 vs 1xSu-35, 7 carriers vs 1, Should we start count nukes as well. If we play by your claims, F-15 would be outnumbered by Mig-21s whit retired pilots in them. Thats not how I would measure pilots or aircraft capabilities where F-15 would probably score 5 to 1. GG who is willing to get killed 5 times before getting the chance to score a kill. Even Teknetinium is not that stubborn :)

I respect your opinion but I dont shere it whit you, Like you are saying Russian airforce would have a diffrent approche where no one can for sure say if it would end up in BVR or in WVR.

Don't agree. There is plenty aircraft that could stand against each other in a fair fight. Su-30MKI vs F-15E Su-34 vs F-15E Su-27M3 vs F-15E Su-35 vs F-15E/F-35 Su-27S vs F-15C from same timeframe are perfectly comperable as well. Su-27S+ER-27 vs F-15C+ Aim-120B.

It becomes more relevant to play by same rules when we have F-35 in SATAC championship vs Su-27 from 80s. In my opinion that is not playing by same rules, becomes like ka-50 vs UH-1. I would argue about Aim-120C as well which would face R-77 combined with ERs. Aim-120B would face ERs if we look at timeframe when this missiles went in service. That is my opinion If we want to play by same rules. Since ED are not keeping any timeframe we as users have to set it ourselves.

Ka-50 systems are not easy to find, like ABRIS, but ED made it possible. I thought that ED could cooperate with another partner that could provide information for DCS Su-27SM. I believe that was the case with Ka-50 and A-10C. I'm more than happy to get any fighter to DCS level until that fighter have something equal to fight. I would not want that in RL but since it is a simulator I rather fight F-15s in my Su-27 then Mig-21. I will continue to scream on till the day we fight by same rules.

I'm a real beginner in P-51 and I have managed to shoot Dora down. Need some patience and more flying I guise.

Witch missile is faster AIM-120C or ER-27? On the net i can only find that ER-27 is a faster missile.

Agree when we talk about DCS level. For FC3 level everything is possible since F-35 announcement.

If ER-27 is a faster missile why do Aim-120C hit not maneuvering target befor ER dose? You can see from the test me and Rage made that both ER-27 and AIM-120C are taking same trajectory but Aim-120C reaching the target a second before ER-27 dose. Is that not wrong? Everywhere I look points to that ER-27 is faster and have bigger legs. Volks calculations indicate that as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-35 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-37 In 2003 there was secound modernization. "In addition to Su-27 conversions, three production Su-35s were completed in 1996 and delivered to Russian Air Force (VVS) for testing.[20] During the Su-35's flight test programme, active controls during manoeuvres such as the Pugachev's Cobra and tailslide could not be maintained. The eleventh Su-27M (T10M-11) was built by KnAAPO and delivered in 1995 for the installation of exclusive systems to give it thrust-vectoring capabilities. The resultant Su-37 technology demonstrator made its first flight in April 1996.[21][22] A second Su-35 was modified into an Su-37 in the late 1990s.[23] In total, 15 airworthy Su-35s (Su-27M) were produced, including an Su-35UB two-seat prototype, along with two static test prototypes.[1][24] The Su-35UB, powered by two modified AL-32FPs with thrust-vectoring nozzles, made its first flight on 7 August 2000. It was demonstrated to South Korea during that country's F-X replacement fighter tender, before becoming an avionics testbed.[25] The original Su-35 never entered serial production due to a lack of funding,[20] and the VVS continued to use its Su-27 fleet. The Su-35's automatic control of canards and the Su-37's thrust-vectoring technology were applied to the Sukhoi Su-30MKI.[26] One of the Su-35s, T10M-10, served as a testbed for the AL-41F1A engine intended for Russia's upcoming fifth-generation jet fighter.[27]"

Sorry i dont.