Croaker47

Well that's disappointing. Not altogether missed, really, but disappointing.

Are they more reliable on a round-for-round basis? The fact that they jam (Amd have systems for unjamming) in the sim is pretty cool (No idea if the new IL-2 has that). I haven't really decided which plane to pick up, but the 190 has always been my favorite WWII model.

Don't own this plane, but IronJockel is correct. The 30mm cannons liked to jam during maneuvers, the 108 more than the 103. I would guess that's why some (Well, at least one) German pilots kept a G-10 with a 20mm around for dogfighting.

Got to try it out, and did what you did naturally, it's definitely easier to judge by stable lead than pure track. It isn't a terrible sight by any means, it's just particular and requires a good stick.

My understanding is if you are in a doppler mode on your FCR, then a beaming target is going to be rejected. It knows it's there like it knows trees are there, but if the clutter filters are large, then it gets rejected like the trees when it is at a low enough rate of closure and perpendicular to travel (where the doppler effect is still high in front and behind, but effectively zero on the sides that you're illuminating as far as the radar's concerned). It shouldn't have much to do with terrain masking. The target would still appear on other radars, but you would not have velocity information like you do with Doppler. I would think given the high update rate involved in STT, that it would be more immediately apparent that you've lost lock. Maybe the Mirage has a large blind speed? Beaming is supposedly effective as well; a lot of Fox-1 defenses seem to start with 'put it on the beam, and if that don't work then do X' or something to that effect (Though 3/9 is a good place to be to defend a missile anyway). Someone correct me if I'm wrong in those assumptions, it's easy to learn a lot while being shot down, heh.

Thanks for the answers, guys. I'm only just now getting to jamming methods in the thing I'm reading, so I only know the utter basics. The jamming in game looked a lot like strobes to me, and that didn't look right compared to the SPJ examples in the text. Thanks again for clearing that up GG/Beam.

I feel under the impression that the snap-snake (With pipper) and the Sabre sight have similar use with different GUIs. Both are limited to radar ranging and information coming from only what their own platforms are doing. The Gs being pulled are represented by the ranging ticks on the snake moving down the line, and they have manual wingspan settings represented in some manner (Wingspan setting on the snake works a bit like having two Sabre pippers set for 300-600). I don't find myself using it much differently, though standard LCOS sans lock is much closer to the GUI of a Sabre sight. The snake would appear to have a higher G-limit for use, and higher accuracy at those Gs, presuming a target withing the same Plane of Motion for high-G tracks. Your explanation is far better though. I'm still moving (So internet on PC isn't available yet), but I'll have a look at that track when I can. The screenshots look like you're getting lead to walk rounds on target, which is what I usually do; I tend to have more trouble with tracking shots than something closer to snap-shooting. Nice screenshots by the way, good capture times. Debatable, I don't really prefer either method (Snap or LCOS). All things considered I'd rather be in a Mirage without lock than a Sabre without lock (Easier to judge fires without ranging information within same POM, at least for me). The snake does produce plenty of screen clutter though, and it could be easy to be distracted by the snake's motions.

Do we have any Deception Jammers in the sim at the moment?

It's not too cumbersome, it could be worse, but it's better for tracking shots than anything. The G stability for a solution is the real kicker. An article on SimHQ mentioned that some pilots preferred the old manual sights, so you're probably not alone.

Mhm, due to Doppler's gizmomatic clutter filters. Also, I should have been more specific. I meant when it can move later on (Hopefully sooner is the new later), so for now it's the MiG Radar shuffle. I just really want to finish moving so I can fly this thing again. Only managed to get an hour in so far.

Missile Defense (Presuming that's a good source) suggests a 3/9 with timed jinks (To use up its energy and induce oscillations if I recall) with a last-second orthogonal break into the missile as a last ditch. It was suggested because the standard break didn't work against the Fox-3, is this correct? Radar missile defense relies far more on maneuver than chaff, I know that much. With a missile launched within proper parameters (Presuming nothing wrong with it) it would have to be defeated at the cost of giving up all initiative, though I'm skeptical of Korean-era documents on missile performance, given Vietnam (But only skeptical, given today's systems and combat records). Against a Fox-1 at short range (The current topic from what I can gather), notching to try to break lock, and then a break turn are the options that come to mind for me. I wish that there was some sort of DCS Top Gun or something that people hosted so I can sound like an idiot making guesses like these less often, heh.

Wouldn't you just decease the range (For a better view of contacts on the scope) and point the antenna down (Or up)? You'd get better results than with a small pitch I'd imagine.

It's no EEGS, that's for sure.

Well, it's based on distance and G like the F-86F sight (Or LCOS), the line just tells you where the rounds can end up going. You have to be in stable G for a second or so for it to be accurate, I would think.

The abrupt FBW takeoff pitch, the bane of exhaust nozzles everywhere. I remember my friend managed to taxi without breaking anything; I was so impressed. The fireball that came afterward impressed me far more. He had to check the recording he made to make sure I wasn't bs'ing him when I guessed off-hand what got him. :P

Well, it doesn't have an A-G radar, so CCIP is probably just the easier option for targeting, especially since you need visual on the target to use CCRP (Difficult to use at low-level when following terrain). I'd imagine (Given the M2K's role) that the M2K would be at a high enough alt to dive bomb anyway, and it has the power to do a proper pop-up from low altitude. Just less faffing about in the mode anyway (And iirc, the CCRP is still manual consent anyway).

Thanks, it helps to visualize the start-up nicely.

Depends on what you're using them for. The VHF radios tend to hug the earth, and do well in hilly terrain, however, I believe they have shorter range overall. I think it also has an advantage in wet weather. I think it also has the overall longer range AGL. UHF signals have a better range for line-of-sight (At altitude; I believe VHF has more interference up higher), but is more affected by obstacles, though the reflections they produce make them good urban signals (Presuming you're in one, not trying to communicate to one, I think). In a fighter I might want to use UHF for outer comms (Package or Tower), and use the VHF for intra-flight comms (Depending on a number of factors that I need to read up on), but if I'm in the A-10C doing CAS with a JTAC, it might be easier to communicate using the VHF and use UHF for intra-flight comms (I'm presuming due to the way it hugs the earth; the assumption I'm gathering from the JTAC usually being assigned a VHF frequency). I'm definitely wrong, and hope someone who actually knows what they're talking about explains it, so I can learn the actual use too; however, that's what I gather from it. :thumbup: EDIT: Forgot TACAN. TACAN is a frequency set that's tied to navigation beacons. If you're set to the right band and frequency, you can pick up the signal, and know where it's coming from. It's the primary navigation for the older jet aircraft that do not have HUDs and/or on-board INS/GPS, along with another type of homing that doesn't give you range. So, if there is a TACAN Beacon at a runway, you can use that to get home.

Joke aside, loaded it up, and yeah, it just looks like a screwdriver/pick of some sort for utility. If I had to guess, I'd agree with mvsgas.

Presuming it's a screwdriver, probably driving screws. :P

From what I can tell, with the radar locked it works like the Snapshoot line in the F-16. The line is an artificial tracer line that shows a history of where your bullets (Presuming you fired any) have been. Wingspan input for the ticks will show the estimated impact point (in terms of Time of Flight) to hit at those ranges (Such as 300m and 600m). Radar lock will do the same thing, but put a pipper on the Snapshoot Line to estimate that for you. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, here. As for the lag, I couldn't guess.

Missile Defense usually centered around actual changes in direction for a period of time to allow the missile to start a turn, so I'm suspect as well. The missile might be tracking more than it should, maybe? Following the slight oscillations during the roll? Barrel rolling is a thing, but I don't think being illuminated in a stationary bearing should help.

From what I can gather, jammers are far more effective at longer range. If they get close enough for burnthrough, you have a problem. If they Home on Jam, it's a bit like dealing with a Fox 1 (Pure Pursuit, depending on your angle), but you deny it range, so it'll home on the signal until it rams it, I suppose. I don't know the jammer's FOV, so to speak, but I can guess that at shorter ranges, it'll be difficult to keep the jammer on the missile and target, especially if you are using the high power setting, and have no Radar confirmation. I forget if an AIM-120's HOJ is F&F, or if it still needs jammer illumination from its carrier (Presuming I know a single thing about how any of that begins to work).

Thanks for that, I didn't catch the "SL" in the original post, or if I did, I saw the 15k chart and entered my fantasy world. Helpful community, here. :thumbup:

Yeah, I'd imagine it'd be like having to react to an active Adder or something at that range, as far as danger levels go.