ruxtmp

I am not sure how bad the R77 is but if it uses the same code I would say its not very good either to those using it. I just stopped flying missions with air to air. With the generally poor AI and poor ATA missile performance it is just less frustrating to fly single player ATG attack missions. SAM missiles do not seem to suffer from the same tracking issues from what I can see.

I only fly US planes so no I have not tried the R77. If you are saying Russian missiles have the same issues I would have to check and see but anecdotally they seem to generally track targets at least slightly more reliably.

Standard defense against an Aim-120 in game aside from the notch.

I stopped using all US radar missiles as their pk is about equivalent to early 1960s stuff.

Any chance at all for some additional Iranian assets, especially ships? Thank you for all the wonderful already created assets they are amazing.

All air to air missiles seem to have a terrible Pk in single player for me. Does not matter if it is player or AI launched at best any air to air missile is a 50% chance of hit or less. Online against human targets that are somewhat aware the Pk goes down to about 20%

Yes at least 90% of the time especially in MP.

The Aim-120 has numerous issues. All it takes to defeat is a barrel roll or split S, Chaff optional but ensures a miss. Also at further ranges just an easy 90 degree turn to put the missile in the notch defeats it too.

2.9 broke a lot of mods. We will have to wait to see if the authors can find what changed and hopefully repair the mods

The time it’s taking to get this module finished is beyond frustrating. I don’t anticipate anything being added or done after they roll out the ready room which still has no timeframe. The Harrier module was what put me off of early access on 3rd party modules but the super carrier has stopped any early access purchases for me. Hopefully we will see some progress in 2024 for this module.

Random failures would be great but should be added like the current failures. Also it should be logged as a failure in the mission log otherwise it will cause confusion to no end. These random failures would account for equipment degradation due to all but the ECM adjustments. But every piece of equipment including the planes is considered brand new off the production line in the game. It could be interesting if certain parameters could be tracked as part of a campaign and this modified the probability of failures occurring. I think if ECM was implemented in somewhat close to reality then that too could be added as a probability of success, but ECM is to simplistic at this time.

Not sure why they would add it then remove it. Does the real missile not have the capability to re-engage a target inside its seeker FOV? Seems like a pretty basic thing to have but Im not a missile engineer.

Im pretty sure once the missile loses lock, in this case due to notch, it goes dumb and just flies off on a ballistic trajectory. I have never seen a missile in DCS an air to air missile re-acquire a target even if it was inside seeker FOV.

Nice find. But who uses this missile in MP? A simple notch instantly defeats it at anything more than 3-5nm almost 100% of the time

I wouldnt bother with AI and single player the game is best experienced in multiplayer. The AI in both the jets and warbirds are less than impressive and single missions require so much scripting its not worth the effort. If you are going to stick with AI you will have to wait for ED to update the AI for the results you want.

There has not been any news on the carrier other than they are working on it. At this point since there is nothing in the promotional communication that would suggest a barrier or ready room is near it's a safe bet nothing is going to come in the near term. The only thing that has been communicated is the Ready room and the possibility for more deck crew. The ready room is in the works so I would think that is going to happen before anything else. I've seen that Vulcan was mentioned in some posts as a requirement for ready room but I don't know if that is true. If it is then in my opinion we won't see anything for a few years. The carrier works with the hornet OK and its better than the Stennis so that's not a bad thing.

Cant say it's any different then prior versions. A rock solid meatball in the green and orange doughnut AOA will result in you sailing over the wires unless you cut throttle at the round down, just go full throttle when your wheels touch.

As I understand it, the AIM-9x likely was an out of parameter shot with ground clutter being the primary culprit.

Nice mod

VSN has an A-6 but an early model that you can use. Other than not being an A-6E shape I dont see how the Heatblur AI will be any different in what it does regarding dropping steel on target.

Pretty realistic the Aim-7 was notorious for missing (the best they achieved was 68% in 1991 gulf war). The mission puts you at a disadvantage as the normal US tactic would be to sneak up on the attacking force and not just meet them head on.

Yes please anyone with the capability to make ships, vehicles, and objects used by or located inside Iran would be excellent. Specifically ships, only the La Combattante and Kilo class are correct for the Iranian navy. The Bayandor-class, Ghadir-class, Alvand-class, Parvin-class, and Hendijan-class would be amazing as targets in the Strait of Hormuz, not to mention a Ghadir-class sub. Old AAA would be great as well such as ZPU-2 and ZPU-4.

I'm struggling to remain patient with this module. They keep saying things are in the works, don't really care about the ready rooms. The additional yellow shirts and plane captains will be nice eye candy. It really feels like this module is not a priority or is more effort than it's worth now that it's out. Still an improvement over the free carrier but I struggle to see the non-sale price of $49.99. Its only worth it when it is half off at this time.

US Patriot system for the time period unit we have was somewhat ineffective so I'm not sure ED's representation is that far off the mark. I think the current version fielded by the US has improved performance considering the number of updates in software and hardware that have been done. Also doctrine is different, US uses aircraft as the main deterrent to aerial attack. Russia uses SAMs, aircraft are mostly intended as aerial artillery.