metzger

Wait, DCS is free to play :megalol:

And how to gun him without closing on his 6 ? :) Set up a OBFM 6k or 3k perch and it is a loop from the start. From High aspect WVR BFM as long as he is loosing the fight he is in a loop, and if on excelent, he can sustain so much energy that you barely catch f-5 with f-16 in a vertical loop :)

Yeah, looping loop always. tested agaist F-5 and F-16. It always end up a in vertical loops... i remember it wasn't that bad in the past

Until what engine rpm the brakes should be able to hold you ? Right now it seems around 85% you start moving slowly even with holding the brakes, is that correct ? Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Thanks for the missions! Having fun flying them. A small remark: "Day 2 - AAR and BFM training Try air refueling and then engage Springfield 1 over FEBA guns only!" This mission is actually 2v2 which makes it ACM not BFM. Would be cool if you remove the wingmens and make it really BFM.

Yes, what I am trying to say the whole time, instead people started screaming about balance for some reason. I am just slightly worried that ED improvement will not come so soon as we would like, so until then, we either have the unrealistic(based on the facts available) tactcs and limitations or DEKA should release with that in mind and update accordingly and in coordination with ED.

A quick google search: "Designs are quite similar...The PL-12 is outwardly very similar to the US-designed AIM-120 AMRAAM. The two share a comparable aerodynamic configuration, although the PL-12 is a little longer, wider and heavier than the AMRAAM .... According to Chinese claims, PL-12 is more capable than the American AIM-120 A/B, but slightly inferior than the AIM-120C." But in sim, it is modelled right now very superior to the 120C. So all I am asking is, make it as per irl differences. And when/if aim120 and 27ER and the rest of the missiles get updates, update sd-10 as well. Why make it so complicated ?!

Oh god you got to be kidding me.... From your comment it seems more like you are looking for way to win with super weapon rather than someone else. with the risk of repeating, no balance is requested. If irl sd-10 has twice the range of aim120 I am totally ok to be like this in the sim as well but this doesn't seems to be the case irl since both missiles are almost identical irl.

It's like you guys can't or don't want to read ? Who speaks about balance ?! We speak about relative difference between aim120 and sd10 to be the same as their relative difference irl. As now they have different way to model them which end up in normally inferior weapon to be superior because of the different way they are modeled in the sim.

Who is asking for balance ? I was asking just for following the same standard between all parties so modules/missiles have the expected differences between each other. I agree the best would be ED to update 120 but knowing ED timings we might end up in sd-10 being the superior missile for years. Realistically Sd10 should be at most similar to 120 if modelled otherwise it might be more realistic for the missile itself but the overall realism between the modules will degrade. Anyway, this is my opinion, only time will show how it will work out.

Actually, the f-16 we have is from 2008 and jf-17 is slightly earlier than this 2007 I think so it is the jf17 older not the other way around. Not sure about SD-10 but I believe it is also copy of aim120C5 as on paper numbers are quite similar, the AIM120C8 or D is still way to confidential to have chinese counterpart and even more - modeled in a sim.

Oh please... but whatever, I don't care, bugging out this is pointless.

And how in a proper simulator a pakistan copy of chinese copy of f-16 is superior to f-16 or 120 in this case ? No body ask for balance just for realistic differences between the aircraft we have in the sim. I doubt they have more reliable sources than ED, who are doing millitary projects as well. They all claim their sources are reliable and model accurate but some are wrong obviously.

Yes but this is the same number deka said - 60 miles no ? They also give 120km for the 27ET and 130 to ER. And what those numbers means ? What shoot parameters ? What closure rate ? Altitude ? Weather ? All parties should agree on the same standard otherwise they can model whatever they want and claim some nonsense number. Next 3rd party will model mig23 and hey we have ultra good sources those r-24 can hit target at 50 miles we make it that way ed fix the rest to match. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

120C5 in Wikipedia 57nmi range whatever this is suppose to mean. I wonder what are those top secret resources giving 60 range to the sd10 and what exactly this number means ? Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Or may be make sd-10 availability for other aim120 capable aircraft until ed updates it Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Exactly, otherwise we end up with using gazelle to gain air superiority because it's missiles are more realistic :D

And no body says them to do so, just dumb it down until ED changes their missiles so all have the same standard. Otherwise it will be just annoying and not realistic at all.

Realy ? How shooting the original f-16, f-18, su-27 like they are a generation older will be more realistic ? Until all missiles follow the same standard it will not be imho. You will just have a chinese copy of a copy of a f-16 superior than F-16, F-15, F-18, Flanker and so on.

It's the same in SP, take the jf-17 and shoot f-15s like mig21s. How this is more realistic than having the missile matching the current dcs level until/if ED fixes it. Knowing the ED timings I am worried that we will end up in that situation for years so I would rather have them do the double work.

Yes, there should be more cooperation between the parties in that regards, and follow some standard. As right now, because certain 3rd parties claiming to be more realistic makes a normally irl superior fighters to be inferior in game. Not talking only for upcoming jf17 but Tomcat too. I agree tho that the 120 right now seems way too short ranged but it will be really annoying if JF17 version of 120 will have double the range of the original 120 if this is not the case irl - don't make it in game. Dumb it down until ED fixes the 120 and them update it with the original intended performance.

Missiles(and not only) in dcs should be all either equally realistic or equally unrealistic. So to be with realistic difference between each other to make the way you employ them against each other realistic(too much use of the word "realistic").

Same issue, attached is a track from the AIM9X instant action mission. Watch the full track. Sometimes it is fast sometimes very slow or even not locking at all. Very dependent on distance, more than 5 miles it doesn't lock or it takes a while. Aspect also affects it. Not sure if it is correct or not and we are spoiled by FC3. ACM.trk

Wags says they will fix f-16 rwr to work not based on signal strength but on signal type and also correct the manual to reflect it but this is not what I report and there is an issue either way... so read before post.

I am starting to think I am not expressing myself correctly: 4 ship formation of f15, su27, m2k, f-14 radars on search mode, no locks or lunches head on 20 miles away from f16. The f16 rwr shows the picture in the OP post. Why 14 is way back with the Mirage ? 1. If it measures signal strength which is what manual states and what it seems to be then f-14 should be the closest treat due it's powerful radar. - So there is an issue with f-14 radar emitter. 2. If it is based on missile guidance and lock, why f-15 and su-27 are inner when they neither lunched or locked the f16 which is also visible from the rwr symbology. 3. We made similar test with mig29 instead of f-16 and beryoza rwr showed the same radar strength of the F-14 as the M2K even tho the f14 radar is much more powerful. So I stand behind number 1. Something is not right for how f-14 is detected on the RWRs which are measuring signal strength and I kindly ask moderators to move this thread into heatblur f-14 main section. And I will kindly ask anyone willing to comment to read the thread carefully first. Thank you. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk