Sweep

It isn't. You can get a good enough understanding of electronic warfare if you have the time. If you want a really high level understanding you need time and lots of money. With that 'good enough' understanding somebody could build an excellent EW model in the sim. Not 100% real, but not some total guessing game either. As for Hornet EW specifics - You don't have exact display layouts among other things (this stuff is protected, ofc!)- But anyone's imagination, based on what is known about this stuff, would suffice.

The Flanker thing is so funny. He pulls up in fingertip for a bit, turns out and joins up on the HVAA and suddenly that's a hostile act!?! Okay...:P And, uhhh...Blaming aircrew for following their ROE...? No, an F-16 ID'd and maybe escorted a Russian VVIP bird in international airspace. A Flanker escort pulled up on the Viper's wing on video and then checked away/formed up on the HVAA. The media said "OOOOH HE FLASHED HIS MISSILES OMFG!!!1!1!!11!" like they always do. Defense.gov doesn't support the CNN story or any of the other sensationalist silliness. At least where specific details that have been in question in this thread are concerned. :smilewink:

Same story being circlesourced by all the news normies! Yay! AFAIK, they've mainly been flying with 9Xs over there...Like every picture with AAMs shows 'em as I remember.

CNN for military aviation news...Interesting. As for Syria's AD network - 6 years of hell does something to you at every level. That's not even getting into training differences and such.

I'll throw my two cents in as well. As for radar try "right control =" or "right control -" to fix the azimuth scan. The 60 degree sweep is quite useful in RWS too in certain scenarios, fyi. Tactics...1v1 BVR is inadvisable. As for the -31. Get high and fast to start with then transition to a more defensive posture (notch/drag in the 10s/20s) while defending to close in so you can face shot him at 10 or less (120C has a 7 mile kill range). If you merge he *might* be able to separate depending on the altitude but he can't turn for crap as DF mentioned. Against a Fulcrum...Or worse a flight of 'em...Stack all the problems on him. Keep maneuvering, changing altitude, turn out randomly, whatever. Make him lose his SA then pounce on him closer in. Here's the thing with the Adder - You outrange it. If you can survive down to 8nmi, shoot him, abort by 6.5 and reset a bit...Just watch 'em burn. Don't play their low alt hide and seek. Fly high as hell, scan low as hell. Merging, anything 2v1 or better works.

Sources?

Lol they should put 120s on the wingtips now like we could/can in DCS. :D

3,500ft... Not exactly unrealistic for any merge/intercept. Especially considering the overall scenario of The Sandbox.

The 120 IRL is NOTHING like what we've seen in the sim. You're talking 40g missile with real guidance and a real "flight model" - 200,000ft, 3,000ft, who cares, you're still in the DLZ! :D

If ED has enough energy drinks and other resources I'd love to see skins for all current Legacy Hornet operators. Considering all the upgrades that have gone into As/Bs I don't think it is too much of a stretch...As opposed to making a C skin based on an F squadron...*cough* :) I have faith that the community will pickup the wishlist and make all the Legacy skins if required tho'.

By this logic, 180:1?

USN's all like "Bug off, Syria" Edit: Ya know these Hornet memes really sting.

In the Su-25 and Su-25T you have to wait 3 min or you will lose proper heading/attitude indications pretty quickly. Never been a problem in the Flanker for me.

If you train/standardize and plan enough you really don't need to say much over the radio to your flight. You'd likely have both aircraft on the GCI frequency.

Rage, if Ragnarok's missile CM thing works, why not test it on a server?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3168876&postcount=97 Or maybe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror Seriously... Here's the issue with SARH, we don't have an EW model. So missiles shouldn't be as effected by chaff, sure, but realistically I'm defeating your radar track with jamming/chaff too. What we have right now, by design or not by design, roughly approximates the effects of realistic CM employment. Stuff like head-on engagement gets a little screwy, but if I just broke your radar lock IRL, your missile goes stupid anyway... You can cry about expendable CM interactions with missile seekers all day, but you've lost the big picture - We don't have the modeling depth, right now, to get a fix for all of this. And if/when we do, your situation gets worse, not better. Edit: a 10% solution isn't a solution, either, FYI...You know why. As for heaters, do you have anything other than unsourced opinions? The Tacviews are horrible examples. 1v4? Really? Why? So you can have 30 ERs in the air from bad parameters and complain later? Okaaaaay then.:megalol: Calling the scenario out for it is in those Tacviews isn't about bias. I want to see my radar go ape-excrement when you light a jammer while I'm trying to go STT. I'd love it. But I don't want to see only half of the problem fixed...Fixing it the way you guys keep recommending only serves your balance narrative and hurts the credibility of the sim. DCS isn't an airquake-exclusive simulator, there are many many people who use it for other things. Many of them are SP only, some (like myself) do realistic things in multiplayer. Every single one of these threads involves an airquake scenario and MP balance concerns. The threads that didn't start that way were dragged into the firey hell of balance whiners. The people pushing the "muh SARH = broken" narrative are doing it so their missiles become more effective...So *they* have more "enjoyment" of their DCS: Call of Duty scenarios. You know what would make flying an F-15 more rewarding? Give it a scenario that isn't about pumping KDR. And maybe, just maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe, don't try to "balance" the "simulator" around an entirely unrealistic scenario.

Funny how this is still all about MP airquake balance.

Why should chaff do nothing in a crank, though?

True. It goes to memory track (flashing cue) and then tells me where to go! :) It seems like it's easier to make the Flanker drop STT than the Eagle, which I suppose is quite realistic. I probably could've worded that better, too; didn't mean to imply the system is screwing me over...its really the bandits maneuvering! Wanted to point it out, though, since they were talking CMs and defeated missiles.

F-15C "Cranky McF-PoleFace" :megalol:

One other thing I've found with the Russian stuff is that the FCS loves pulling my radar track and replacing it with IRST+IFF when the bandit beams. You want a trashed Alamo? That's how you get a trashed Alamo. :(

Good bump, great idea from the OP. +1

Assuming the FCR of the launching platform will reject all CM attempts though is not the best idea. Current implementation is wrong, but fixing only part of the problem will make things much worse.

That face when a half-decent 80s F-15 would beat the living excrement out of our current Eagle. :D :thumbup: