Cik

well, i'd like to play 80s~ era scenarios with R-27R and T vs AIM-7 sparrow unfortunately i feel it would probably be pointless as you'd play for a few hours with no kills recorded :^)

hear hear. it gets very east vs west in here but really it effects everyone. eagles just don't feel it as bad because the AMRAAM is more resilient to CM. unfortunately there isn't a huge drive from their quarter because the sparrow isn't their core BVR option. anyway, a rising tide lifts all boats, so here's hoping.

those missiles have missed in a way that's physically impossible. here's my question, because what scorch says is reasonable in many ways: is the missile missing because of the chaff that is close to the plane, or is it missing because there is ANY chaff in the air? if it is the latter, there is a huge problem. it really screws over the behavior of missiles in general, not just russian ones. if it is only getting spoofed by the chaff inside it's CW cone, but still decides to randomly go after other chaff there is no problem, it just gives the wrong impression. scorch, i don't really care about modeling that is only cosmetic; if the interleave strength is just an average of HPRF and MPRF it literally means nothing. what i care about is if my missile is about half as effective as it should be because it's being spoofed by chaff that it can't even see. i mean, that's a non-cosmetic difference there buddy. a HUGE one. you talk like i'm against adding proximity fuses and all that shit. i'm not. the AMRAAM is a clearly superior missile but it's modeling is still pretty bad. it seems like an SRM to me, for one. if they FIX this problem that may exist then every missile will noticeably improve. maybe sparrows will be worth taking, who knows what sort of magical dreamland we may enter?

what might be worth trying is using JTAC with a laser pointer so, use the SPI they send you to get pretty close and then use laser search to find a pinpoint, then simply employ directly onto that point with whatever you have. in the early versions of 1.5 there was the model enlargement setting that made visual CAS a possibility but it was mostly removed unfortunately. not sure exactly how to do it but you can still enable it in the config of missions themselves i believe. maybe give that try if you really can't get the TGP to work.

i mean, come on. the way this works out doesn't make any sense. either 1. the radar knows where the target is and you have a good track, and can thus guide the missile to somewhere NEAR the target 2. you don't have a lock in the first case the missile should not be tracking a trail of completely stationary chaff miles away, it should be getting pretty close and in the second case you should simply lose lock (or, in the case of su27's case you may keep an EOS lock) and thus all of your radar missiles in flight should go dead (in which case, you may miss by miles) currently AMRAAMs and ERs behave in the same basic fashion when on terminal attack when in fact this doesn't make any sense at all. currently ERs have a de facto active stage BUT ONLY WHEN ATTACKING CHAFF in every other case they attack the same target, but suddenly when there is chaff in the air they seek the chaff even though they have no capability to do so. if the illuminated target exits their sight they should just go dead in the air (or continue their last maneuver, like someone upthread said) instead they beeline for the chaff that they have no ability to see at all! you can't have missiles violating the principles of their own guidance. i mean, do you disagree? is there some 'hidden mechanism' that allows the missile to guide to something that the host plane is not even illuminating? the behavior is patently bizarre. you can't magic that away by saying ten dollar words like 'centroid' when the modeling is totally broken.

no it doesn't. do you know how SARH functions? the radar paints a continuous-wave "cone" onto the target, and the missile flies a lead pursuit course. missiles flying at bundles of chaff that are multiple miles behind the target WHILE the radar is locked onto the target (and you can tell because it tells you where the target is on the HUD) impossible. furthermore, multiple missiles will track multiple different chaff bundles which is also impossible. if it's modeled correctly they'd at least all go for the same one. tl;dr it's totally broke.

alright, after a reasonable amount of testing of both AIM-7m and ER, i have found the following things: in a frontal aspect without chaff they are almost perfectly effective (5 tests apiece on a target with a 20~ degree or so nose-off of my nose, him at 19000 and me at 25000 with an 100% hitrate) i say almost despite the 100% because there may be a small clutter miss% that just didn't crop up. as long as you can get a radar lock in beam they are marginally effective. PK was still pretty high at the missile's near-max range. about 21 nm for the ER and about 12 for the sparrow. (5 tests of each with the same altitude, target in beam aspect with no chaff allowed) if the target is anywhere near beam and chaff is allowed they are both entirely worthless. of 5 tests with each, one hit was recorded. (4 sparrows/ERs per test run, so 40 missiles fired total) missiles generally go wide by miles. the 'bug' of which rage speaks is obviously in-evidence. for whatever reason missiles seem to fly at the chaff as if it is the target, even though i still have an active radar lock on the target (as evidenced by the HUD) and the missile is only capable of flying lead pursuit on the radar's illumination. how you ripple them seems to mean nothing at all; if you fire all 4 or in a slow ripple it makes no observable difference. missiles that come off the rail often try to fly for chaff that is in trail of the target by 3+ nautical miles and obviously at zero speed. conclusion: SARH missiles are basically worthless if the target is anywhere near beam aspect, even if they make no maneuvers. chaff alone is enough to screw over SARH even though that makes no sense. basically, it's ****ed.

sure, maybe but why is it losing track against a medium/high speed non-maneuvering target at relatively close range at a barely look-down aspect that isn't even notched? what kind of joke is that? i would expect missiles from the 70s to have a reasonable chance of intercept in those conditions, let alone a "modern" missile. in fact, i'm going to set up the same sort of scenario in a little bit and see if i can hit the same target with an AIM-7m. my bet is, i'll be able to. >eagle, also probably has a better SARH missile than the ER, also has actives

wow i knew it was bad but not that bad holy christ you don't even have to notch. you can be totally in the merge and drop a few chaff and it causes an entire formation worth of sukhois to miss with multiple missiles wow now i'm thinking that the lazy maneuvering i see out of most eagles is actually TOO MUCH. they could fly right into my nose and launch AMRAAMs with some half-hearted chaff and win. i can't believe it edit: that last video WHERE IS IT GOING it takes a perfect lead pursuit until terminal and then it just flies off into space what is even happening in this game

tracks are useless. if you really want to review missions your best option is to just download OBS (free, open source) then just record the entire thing. the video will be much bigger, however it will actually work. the tracks being a few MB means nothing if halfway through you hit a mountain you never hit while flying the mission and everything past that is a "mission failed" screen.

1v1 or many v many the situation is much the same, sweep. playing at a disadvantage is not something i am against as long as the disadvantage is authentic. i have no issue hanging in the dirt if that's what i would be doing real life if i were a hypothetical russian piloting a hypothetical su-27. what i'd like is definite realism or definite balance (even if that turns out to be asymmetric, as it currently is) unfortunately i have neither. what i have is a radar missile that performs about as well as taking potshots through my canopy with a service pistol. at least makarov rounds can't be spoofed by chaff against a clear sky.

yeah, if you think the AMRAAM has the same problems as the 27ER you need your head checked. have you ever used this missile in combat? because i've used the AMRAAM and it's a finger of god compared to the 27ER. to reliably dodge a single amraam you need to pump out a fourth of the chaff in the bird, easily. sometimes you will still get hit even if you do everything right. the 27ER can be dodged by chaff alone.

you can trash an AMRAAM if you notch hard and are in clutter, then slam the chaff button a dozen times you can trash an ER against the sky with a tiny token of chaff. you don't even have to notch most times. ER launches from almost any range are a joke. don't even compare these missiles, i mean sure the AMRAAM is missing like half of it's actual range but at least it hits the enemy. BVR in the flanker is a total joke. i dare you to go high sometime in it and see if you can achieve a kill in optimal launch conditions (not that you'll ever reach them without getting a face full of 10 AMRAAM from all the eagles nearby, but still) satisfying all the weapon parameters then firing 4 missiles then getting them all trashed in seconds by halfhearted, sloppy maneuvering by the enemy eagle is disappointing to say the least. if someone could actually point me to a source that says the R27 is actually just a piece of junk that never hits anything, i'd be okay with it; i guess i'd ask "why model the su27 at all then, if it's going to just be hopeless at one of the things it needs to be able to do?" but i'd be fine with it. no source is ever provided though, so my guess is it's at least competent. i understand PK% is traditionally low, but it's probably not THAT low. certainly it's not that low for the AMRAAM. it's high enough that you actually have to defend yourself, for one. which is all i want, baby. that's of course not mentioning the many problems with the chaff modelling already pointed out, which i will leave to smarter men than me.

yeah, all the eagle "advocates" in these threads trying to keep the 27ER from ever becoming a missile that can't be undone by the laziest notch in history are obnoxious. i'm not asking for a 500km 100% PK wonder weapon. in fact, pretty much anything above it's current 0% PK would be great. what is supposed to be a BVR platform being basically incapable of BVR is extraordinarily silly.

as far as i know SARH missiles should just fly ballistically after losing track, making no corrections. even if they were programmed to fly to last known target location and then detonate the chances of you actually getting hit by it except maybe in the case where it loses track 1 second before intercept is basically 0% just because i've never encountered the bug doesn't mean it doesn't exist FYI, though yeah track would be nice.

impressive post

there's a blindspot on the top and bottom of your jet. are they on the top or bottom of your jet (or close?) if not, then maybe. i've never had issues with any RWR, let alone the -15's, though.

FC isn't a sim >no avionic simulation >every missile has the range of an SRM >historically flight models have been super-arcade i mean, i'd guess that leatherneck did reasonable research on the power and ability of older, mig-21 missiles and it seems like those are more chaff resistant than the 27ER lel

hey BD, do you think going forward it would be possible to make campaigns if not multiplayer out of the box, then at least convertable? i understand not wanting to convert all of enemy within to it, as it would be piles of work and then more piles of work to playtest every little trigger to make sure they aren't a broken mess post-conversion, but could the new missions maybe be built that way from the ground up? i ask if it's possible because honestly most DCS modules lack multiplayer content WAY more than singleplayer, and to me the game is best played as a small group. is there some technical issue that prevents missions as complex as yours from being built from the get-go for MP? it would be really nice. in any case, i'm looking forward to anything you produce because your campaigns really are top shelf.

cruise missile strategic missile artillery barrage SEAD flight (squadron) none of these include a ka50 for good reason. the reason is "don't try to jam something that is hard-countered by something else into it and expect to win" you may as well ask why you aren't able to penetrate a tank with a popgun. if you think the ka50 is supposed to be able to clear that area you are a fool, and in real life you would simply never EVER send it into that environment and rely on strategic missiles instead. pretty much NOTHING in sim, let alone a rather vulnerable helicopter can deal with 8 tunguskas. the mission is a crock. 8 tunguskas is something you task like half a DEDICATED SEAD SQUADRON with for goodness' sake.

you're complaining about something that doesn't really matter anyway, your average zu-23 will still kill you even with an RWR and unless you recce perfectly you will die to them anyway. shilkas are actually easier to deal with, because they are easier to see and tend to stick to roads or columns tl;dr get good

eh, unfortunately the environment is skewed against it, because you aren't really fighting the west as such, you are basically fighting russia circa 1970 in the theater; RWR isn't such a big problem if you hang low against terrain if you are fighting against your average western force where radar AAA isn't terribly common (at least, IIRC) but the georgian army/insurgents in country field ridiculous amount of ZU-23 / shilka, and the ZU-23, is especially egregious in that it's AI has "perfect" aim, where the only thing that ever saves you is bullet dispersion; they lead a moving target perfectly as far as i know, almost regardless of skill. essentially the odds are stacked enormously against something without an RWR, and even helicopters in general by the force chart of your average enemy in theater, as well as AI competence/cheating it's still possible to fly though. just have to have really good recon going in or expect to die horribly and often.

EORL means you have a lock with both sensors, which will happen for a few reasons, if you are tracking a forward aspect target with the radar and he starts to maneuver against you, sometimes the plane will detect this and lock him with EO as well, sometimes you will see RL and then a few seconds later EORL and then a few seconds after EO, this means that the radar lost him but EO retains the lock. AFAIK this means your ERs will go dead. you can fire any type of missile with an EO lock, but of course the radar ones will flip the radar on first, once it attains a lock you will get EORL as you have a lock. only infrared launches from EO are stealthy, but you can flip your radar in EO in order to IFF. for reference, AFR on the bottom left of the HUD while radar is on (ILL) means it's a friendly. the AFR will disappear as soon as you turn the radar off though, so don't assume that he's suddenly become a hostile.

default -87 settings are next to useless, cut both HOF and RPM in half and you have a useful bomb. if you haven't done that you're just seeing the result of the default settings, the result being basically nothing but a gridsquare of tiny explosions that result in no real damage to anything save a few patches of dirt.

in a high altitude engagement EOS cannot be relied upon with at detecting at any sort of range; contrary to popular belief flankers can "win" BVR as long as you don't expect to get many kills. if you approach very high and very fast you can get a chance (low pk%, obviously) at getting kills while being safe yourself, as long as you disengage correctly before you enter (sp)AMRAAM range. you'll probably get more by going low and headhunting, but that has it's own problems, if there are many eagles on the opposing side a stealthy approach is almost impossible and furthermore you have a very large kinetic disadvantage for being so low, so any engagement you get into in the mountains that the opponent starts higher than you is almost guaranteed a losing fight, and if you choose to run the high-alt eagle is faster than you are, so unless friendlies are close to scare him off you are probably toast. tl;dr BVR engagement possible as long as you don't expect many kills, disengage early. radar is primary high-alt BVR sensor as EOS doesn't detect well in frontal and cannot be relied upon to detect outside amraam NEZ