Chrinik

The TacViews are showing two situations, first, an F-15 is perpendicular to a 4 ship of Flankers within 4km, they all launch R-73s. The Eagle pulls 11Gs INTO the missles and flies toward them and most of them pass by so close the proximity fuse should have set it off, but alas, all of them miss. The second situation is against 8 Flankers in a hot situation. The Flankers all launch ERs well within parameters, and the Eagle flies a barrel roll, dumping chaff, and ends at M0.25 airspeed while still none of the missles (including another full barrage of ERs and some R-73s) connect. None of them. He was a single F-15 flying through 16+ missiles at absolutely no airspeed and none of them came close to hitting. And all he apparently did was dump CMs and wiggle a bit.

Well, not only is the ER easier to spoof then a toddler and apparently has a shorter range (not clear on that tho), I also think that pilots easily get tricked by eagles because of INS launch... I tend to break when I see that an Eagle is hot on me, within weapons parameters, because I KNOW he has launched already. I only stay engaged until I can force out an active missle to make him go defensive, and then break for the deck immediately and spam chaff. A couple seconds later I get the RWR warning of the Amraam he launched at me, but typically I am already in a much better position to evade it. Sometimes I broke entirely out of the missles seeker, so that it turns it´s head on and sees empty sky, getting confused. But since I can only judge that from my cockpit, not from his, I don´t even know if the Amraam can follow a TWS target very well. I just know that I get most of my kills with ETs/R-77s and the occasional R-73, while dodging early to avoid invisible missiles.

Okay, I was confused initially what you were on about, but holy crap...that should in no way be possible. Especially the macross missile massacre should not be spoofed by "Do a barrel roll!" and dumping all your chaff... Like serriously, atleast the second barrage should have hit you considering you had no airspeed left. ED needs to step up it´s efforts and fix the missles. No wonder I´m having more success in MiG-29 ET/77 loads.

Well, I got that feeling when I bought the KA-50 because of my friends, and it went on sale a week later. But you are still saving money, considering that they are going to up the price...since you already own it, all updates they do on it are free for you.

It was based on the C-Sparrow...but just because it´s based on it, does not mean they are interchangable... And yes, obviously the jet didn´t get wired for AMRAAMs before there was any AMRAAMs in service... But AJS is not JA so I don´t even know who brought that up and for what reason. We are getting AJS-37 as far as I heard, and that is Sidewinders only for Air to Air. Altho six AIM-9s is nothing to laugh at.

Remember guys, the gun also has an Air-to-Ground specific load. Before you trash the gun in A2G use, make sure you used the correct belting. S-24 is indeed very powerful in DCS and has a large blastradius, there is a reason why it was the standard weapon for the SU-25 for a long time XD For me, it depends on the target. Runways = BetABs, convoys = rocketpods, heavy armor = S-24/Grom, AAA = Grom, (guys, there is a throttle...the missle has a 10km launch range, if you throttle down, there should be no way in hell that you get "dangerously close" unless you try to plink SAMs with it.) And unless it is a strategic target, like a large factory or an airfield with lots of planes on the ground, I don´t use bombs at all. Bombs are only good when you fly large sorties and need to saturate an area that has lot´s of weak targets, like buildings or parked aircraft (funnily enough, bombs seem to do quite a number on parked airfields, serriously damaging 3 or 4 with a single impact.).

The MiG-21 and FC3 Soviet/Russian aircraft have anti-runway bombs and so far, noone´s used them.

Seeker is not bigger(in radius), just more advanced, more electronics. It´s the main reason for increased length. Fins are thinner, less drag. Rocketmotor burns for the same time but burns more fuel in that time thus stronger, but also more room. It has also increased in size, tho not as significantly. "The Super 530D retains the same general aerodynamic features and internal layout as its Super 530F predecessor, with cruciform low aspect ratio wings and cruciform aft controls. However, the stainless steel body is longer to accommodate a new radome and seeker assembly and a new and more powerful dual-thrust solid propellant motor. The Super 530D is 3.80 m long(from 3.54 m long), has a body diameter of 263 mm, a wing span of 0.62 m (from 0.88 m) and with the same warhead as the Super 530F, weighs 270 kg.(from 245 kg)" - Pakdef.org

If I go any lower in my snakeeye approaches, I will be considered a car. And if I go any faster, I will be considered a physical anomaly. Dunno, been playing around with the seat adjustment, the HUD does extend a good ways down from a normal seating position, so I might try that.

The JA is also wired for AMRAAMs. I´m not sure about Sparrows, it was wired to use SkyFlash missles.

I think this picture clears up why the Super 530D has a longer range then the F. It´s bigger.

I also think one of the issues is incorrect weapons...I have noticed in steep dives the Snakeeyes generally impact where the pipper was at the point of release, but the cluster munitions are way off. Considering that the Belouga 66 works completely different then the Mk.20 we currently have as a replacement, I´d say that is part of the issue. The Mk.20 explodes and creates a cone infront of the bomb that gets showered with bomblets. This means that the CCIP solution needs to be rediculously accurate to put that cone on the target, I have to release early with the pipper about half an inch from the target to get a chance to make the submunitions hit the intended target. The Belouga has 155 submunitions aranged in ringlaunchers around the bomb, launched over a period of time creating a spread some 220m long. I´d say if we get the Belougas, CCIP for clusters will definately improve. I had less success with snakeeyes since I try to drop them low level, and the pipper is nowhere to be seen as it is somewhere under my aircraft apparently. CCRP seems to work just fine, I usually drop in pairs and start dropping a couple seconds early, the bombs tend to impact in a nice spread around the designated target.

No, it doesn´t...the target is closing towards the missle at 1.4 Mach... You can launch from 100km away because the target will literally fly into your missle in that hypothetical scenario. Hot-aspect, high closure rate missle ranges are always much higher then cold-aspect shots, range wise. I thought people knew that.

I hope you realised this was from 2014 and you just necroed a year old thread.

This is my entry. Some Flanker love. I couldn´t get the DCS Logo on the pic.

Regarding "flare resistant Aim-9". http://aviationweek.com/blog/we-didn-t-know-what-90-percent-switches-did The last paragraph details the problems with "testing" flare resistant heat seekers.

I think people are so giddy for the F/A-18 C they literally wish every plane is one. Since they can´t wait. I mean, the F/A-18 C will be the first aircraft (I consider FC3 to be toys) in this sim that can literally do everything. Carrierops? Check. GBUs? Check. ARMs? Check. ASMs? Check. Mavericks? Check. Air to Air? 12 Spamraam check. So yeah, M-2000 C S5 RDI can not use ARM, ASM or any of that sort...we should be lucky it can even drop GBUs, even if they require buddy laze.

Very nice. I´ll go ahead and do that.

Well, I thought that organizing large numbers of people to overtake a server entirely is a little harsh...so I settled for just one day XD

Honestly, I come to realise more and more that their "unique thrust and force distribution" will reference a prop plane... Yaaaaawn...Sorry guys, but I don´t really care much for WW2 Prop planes in DCS, there´s tons of WW2 plane sims out there for that scenario. Seen them all before. Not to dampen your spirits, you guys can get exited about WW2 planes all you like, I´m fine with that. But if the "mystery" planes would both be WW2, I´d be disappointed. More interested in early 70ies-late 80ies birds.

I was thinking for a bit and decided to kick this idea out to the masses to decide. Alot of people, including me, seem to like the MiG-21, despite it´s age and apparent lack of on-par enemies to fight, it attracts alot fo people simply by being a well made, very fun fighter/interceptor to fly and use. So I thought, why not pick a day a month and make an Event centered around the MiG-21. First of all, you MiG-drivers are probably gonna like the idea anyway, but what I would be really interested, is all you mission- and scenariodesigners, aswell as serverhosts. Give some plane apropriate tasks (No SEAD missions, f.e.), have one side be whatever, the other side is nothing but MiG-21s in very large numbers (4-1 ratio or even 5-1 in favor of the MiG) This would mean a single Eagle would find itself fighting 4-5 MiGs...this would probably create an interesting challenge for both sides. And of course their could be Bomberintercepts, some Mudmoving etc. to spice things up. So, anyone interested?

Ich habe ja auch gesagt, das keiner ein Problem damit hat, ihm zu helfen. Es klang für mich und andere nur so, das er einen "Flightinstructor" sucht, der ihm alles beibringt, und das natürlich unregelmäßig weil es nach seinem Zeitplan gehen soll, sorry wenn ich da seine Posts und den Threattitel als Anhaltspunkt für seine Absichten herangezogen hab, statt meine Vorstellungskraft. Da muss man schon ein bisschen Eigeninitiative zeigen. Und das bei euch keine Gegenleistung erwartet wird, und dann zählst du mir die Gegenleistungen auf...naja.

From what I read from RAZBAMs updates, the Super 530D will pretty much outrange both of them by a large margin. But we´ll have to wait and see.

No...you don´t even know how much difference the two MFCDs and the navigation and computer systems behind them make. Even if you restrict the weapons and no TGP...a true 80ies scenario can pretty much only be archieved with FC3 and MiG-21. MiG-21 was (and is) still in mainstay use by some countries at that time. Amraam was not in operational use in the Gulf War, B version was introduced in 94 and C version in 96 so that´s out. Sparrow it is. But you probably already knew that. SU-25s in the beginning of Afghanistan carried KH-25Ls, not MLs tho. MLs came out later as said by Basher.

In closing I want to say that this issue could be resolved if we removed the C amraam from the game. I mean, serriously...why is the C variant even in FC3? It was specifically designed to be carried internally by the F22 Raptor back in the day. :lol: I mean, what are we complaining about, FC-3 is a game...F-15 is best in BVR, SU-27 is best in everything else, since the F-15 can´t even carry any air to ground, while the SU-27 can. I fly the 33 as a strike-fighter most times anyway since it´s plentiful hardpoints give me a good selection of weapons to carry. Since we don´t know which Amraam C we have in the sim, I am going to assume the first batch. The R-27ER had a much longer burntime and more thrust, creating a longer ranged missle then the Aim-120. This negated SARH disadvantages as when you can shoot sooner, you have the advantage. The Eagle (or whoever) would have had to press the attack with a missle underway at him. Doable, as at these extreme ranges, flight times and closure rates where higher then in DCS. This was changed in subsequent updates to the C variant 120. It´s later variants do indeed outrange almost anything with some boasting ranges closer to the Pheonix then any "medium range missle" has the right to have. But it would be an interesting "balance" for DCS, sure, the Eagle gets active missles that can be launched stealthily, but the 27 has more range, so different tactics have to be employed by both. Of course, this is based on googleable data. I am sure Missle PK data exists for both relevant missles, but especially when they come from the militaries that employ them, expect data to be skewed downwards by X% as having publically available information about how your equipment performs is still a big nono for many big players. I have spend too much time with military intelligence personell to not suspect everyone to be lying at all times. It just benefits you, as Sun Tzu already said. So let´s all agree to stay on topic now, If anyone has rebuttals to my comment, please, I have a PN box. To stay on topic now, I wish ED will fix missle aerodynamics and tracking issues and all that fun stuff, especially since it´s a big part of the sim to lob missles at each other. The BVR ranges in this game are laughable, and ED confirmed this, saying that missle performance at 12000[?] feet and above was "acceptable" but anything below was way too low...boosting the ranges for the lower altitudes resulted in "outrageous performance" at higher altitudes. So they are looking into that. What they could also fix would be the indefinate ECM Jamming bull that is going on in DCS for, what I believe to be, ever. The reason why jammers have an off button is that they can only run a very limited amount of time. Very short in fact. The F-15Cs jammer for example, when turned on, requires 80% of the entire airplanes cooling capacity just to run, and then still randomly breaks, is a harsh mistress to maintain, and even if nothing breaks, after 5 minutes it starts melting out the back of your aircraft... Fighter sized jammers are not indefinately usable is what I am trying to convey. The nature of "take off, music on" is also hurting both the sim, and the russian birds as for some reason their TWS doesn´t work if there is a single jammed threat anywhere. It reduces combat ranges, and skews they way actual BVR combat was fought, the radar screen wasn´t full of jammed contacts everywhere, you would use the jammer if you noticed a bandit is looking at you, to mask your movement to get critical advantages (like climbing, going cold, whatever you decide to do really), and then turned it off again when the threat was dealt with.