Jump to content

Northstar98

Members
  • Posts

    6656
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Northstar98

  1. Yeah, a temporary over-inflation of the warhead for existing anti-ship missiles would IMO, be a worthwhile (and easy to implement) workaround until ships receives an appropriate damage model.
  2. Your guess is as good as mine, I'm in the same boat as Callsign JoNay
  3. +9999999999 The Oerlikon GDF-002 would be perfect for the 1982 Falklands War, alongside the Skyguard system.
  4. Only for the AIM-7P Block II, the Block I doesn't have that. Not sure which we have in DCS (doesn't help that the name is ambiguous), though apart from the names, the only difference between the AIM-7P.lua and the AIM-7MH.lua is an entry for "rad_correction = 1" [source, with credit going to _Quaggles]
  5. It depends on where the ship is hit and exactly what happens - it's by no means a gaurantee and estimates can be wildly off. For your examples, IRIS Sahand (1100 - 1500 ton frigate) took 3 Harpoons, 4 Skippers and 2 Rockeyes and even after all that, only sank when the fire caused a magazine explosion. However, even if it was still afloat, the Sahand was destroyed. Moskva on the other hand (9400 - 11500 ton guided missile cruiser) only took 2 R-360s (equivalent to 1.35 Harpoons) and sank. True, though it sank under tow in heavy seas. Regardless, the ship was basically a destroyed hulk, just still afloat. All 3 examples show how there are just so many factors that simply don't get considered for in DCS, leading to results that are wildly off. I'm dreaming, but having a damage model anything like this (or hell, just 1 part of it) would be a god send. Agreed. Yeah, something is up with it, though information on what precisely it's supposed to do is very sparse. Suffice to say, it's a sea-skimming anti-ship missile, the whole reason why they exist is that they can delay being detected by hiding in the radar shadow caused by the curvature of the Earth.
  6. IIRC RB 15F has a massively overinflated warhead to get over the incredibly lackluster damage models of ships.
  7. As The_Tau said, I wouldn't be surprised if Heatblur has modelled magnetic deviation (note, not variation or declination - which is the difference between true and magnetic north), where the magnetic compass gets influenced by local magnetic fields (such as an aircraft carrier).
  8. Only thing I've seen is Chile testing Sea Eagle on the C-101CC. As for the Mirage F1, AFAIK only the Iraqi Mirage F1EQ-5/6 had Exocet. The F1M supposedly had the radar that could support them, but not the airframe modifications to actually fire them.
  9. Yeah and ARH, only a few modules (namely the Mirage 2000C and Tomcat) factor them at all it seems (or at least in a way that's obvious).
  10. Hi everyone, Can we get the Exocet anti-ship missile added to DCS World? Specifically the MM38 Exocet Block 1 and the MM40 Exocet Block 1 (and if an aircraft comes along that can carry it, the AM39 Exocet Block 1). The MM38 Exocet Block 1 in particular was present on numerous ships (and an improvised coastal battery) during the Falklands war - a few of these ships are planned by RAZBAM (see the list below). It's also the missile that our La Combattante IIa (which is depicted as a German Type 148 Tiger-class) should fire, instead of the RGM-84D Harpoon Block 1C that it currently fires. As for future ships that have at least been teased that have MM38 Exocet Block 1: Type 21 (Amazon) FF Type 22 (Broadsword) FFG County-class DDG And other ships and assets that to my knowledge haven't been teased, but were present during the Falklands War: Type 12I (Leander) Batch 2 and 3A FF Type 42 destroyers ARA Hércules & ARA Santísima Trinidad Improvised, towed, coastal launcher As for the MM40 Exocet Block 1, it's the missile that the Condell-class frigates currently in the South Atlantic asset pack should fire.
  11. Yeah, AFAIK it has is 2 antennas; the seeker in the nose that receives a reflection from the target and another in the rear that receives the illumination directly. The Sparrow does a comparison which allows it to determine speed (which I guess will be a sum of the target's and missile closing speed) and it then uses a speed gate to track that (with angle being tracked via receive only conical scanning (up to F), or inverse monopulse (M and onwards)).
  12. Not exactly. The Sparrow is a semi-active homing missile - what happens is that your radar illuminates the target and the Sparrow tracks the reflection. Think of it kinda like a cat chasing a laser spot - the laser (radar) emits radiation (which will be visible light for the laser and microwaves for our radars) which reflects off of the target and into the cat's eyes. As Dragon1-1 said, countermeasures are just probability. Each missile has a coefficient that determines how likely it is be decoyed or not. I believe the coefficients can be found under ccm_k0 = x in the respective .luas of the missiles (can be found here). Here are the ccm_k0 values for all Sparrows in DCS: AIM-7E: 2 AIM-7F: 1 AIM-7M: 0.5 AIM-7M(H): 0.5 AIM-7P Block I (II, as per hoggit?): 0.5
  13. I think it goes to the closest ship where the waypoint is.
  14. How are you getting them to land? On my end, I've made a battlegroup with an identical composition (1× CV, 1× CG, 2× DDG and 1× FFG) and the helicopter simply lands on the ship that the landing waypoint is placed on. So long as you're on edit for the waypoint, you can drag and drop the landing waypoint onto whatever ship you want (so long as the ship can accept a helicopter) and the helicopter will land on that ship.
  15. Yes. All the documentation we would need (apart from maybe sensor and display resolution) is in the -34-1-1 applicable to DSCG F-4E.
  16. While true, I doubt the current behaviour is accurate (and certainly isn't the case in a certain other sim).
  17. I seem to remember a typical range of sqrt(2) × the detection range of the threat radar, but barge full of salt and there are a lot of unaccounted variables here. Regardless, it doesn't really make sense that a RWR would have a shorter detection range than the radar itself; it should be getting 4× the received power compared to the radar, owing to the radiation only needing to make 1 trip as opposed to 2 for the radar (received power for a radar is inversely proportional to distance to the 4th power but only to the 2nd power (inverse square law) for the RWR. The radar in question also isn't LPI capable at all.
  18. @skywalker22Try forcing the AI to use the radar for continuous search and try again (can be found under radar using, in set options, in the advanced waypoint (tasks)). Which is correct as is AFAIK - we have the Fishbed N, the L has the Lazur DL.
  19. +1 Right now the KC-135 in DCS is the KC-135RT, this vis a special variant, being the only type that can itself be refuelled in flight via a boom receptacle above the cockpit. It however is far less numerous than the baseline KC-135R (8 as opposed to 390). There's also the KC-135MPRS which is the same KC-135RT (though textured like a regular KC-135R) with the MPRS modification which AFAIK is mid-to-late 90s and onwards. I'm unsure if the KC-135RT IRL has undergone the MPRS modification (though images online don't appear to show the drogue pods - it's possible this is a DCS fiction). Personally, as far as tankers go there are 2 aircraft I've got my eye on: Firstly, there's the KC-135A - this aircraft covers a wide range of the Cold War and is probably the most appropriate tanker for the earlier DSCG F-4E (which is mid 70s). The KC-10A, while less numerous (58), supports both types of refuelling, can carry more fuel, with a longer range and can itself be refueled in-flight, which would be appropriate for the early 80s to the present. The problem though is that DCS has a few issues with how it supports multi-type refuelling in a single aircraft; the current KC-135R (MPRS mod) only supports probe-and-drogue when it should support both. This is already a problem now and it'll be just as much a problem on the KC-10A. The other thing is the drogue adapter on flying boom aircraft as well as supporting buddy stores (which is why the S-3B and S-3B tanker are separate units when IRL they're identical aircraft, with different loadouts).
  20. Hi everyone, Firstly, would it be possible for the Tomcat to have consistent switch logic implemented, for 3 position switches? For the overwhelming most part, the Tomcat's switch logic follows the same logic as the majority of other switches in DCS; a right mouse button moves switches up/forward/right/increment/clockwise and a left mouse button to move switches down/backwards/decrement/anti-clockwise. However, there are some notable exceptions, mostly in the RIO cockpit: Pilot cockpit: Kneel switch Emergency flight hydraulics switch Altimeter mode switch (while this switch rotates, it only has 2 momentary positions and a centre, the 2 positions are more left and right and at the moment the left mouse button moves it right and a right mouse button moves it left). RIO cockpit: Altimeter mode switch (see above). Target size switch MLC filter switch Aspect switch Closure velocity scale switch Mechanical fuse selector switch Missile option switch IFF mode 1, mode 2, mode 3/A and mode C switches IFF mode 4 monitor switch (audio/light) IFF RAD test switch IFF ident switch All other 3 position switches, in both cockpits, have the right mouse button to move forwards/upwards/right/increment/clockwise logic. Secondly, would it be possible to have rotary switches (with say, more than 10 positions) use the mouse wheel to move clockwise and anti-clockwise (mouse wheel forwards to move clockwise and mouse wheel backwards to move anti-clockwise)? Namely for the AN/ARC-159 and -182 preset channel selectors, the AN/ARA-63 channel sector, both TACAN channel selectors and the master test switch. Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...