BlackPixxel

Tacview is only recording with a rate that is lower than the simulation rate in DCS, maybe this is just why it seems not as smooth.

Don't let the current R-77 implementation in DCS fool you. Once the R-77 gets CFD rework and lofting profiles (which it will) it will not be far from a Aim-120B.

Just another one of those "I got killed, must be a bug!" threads.

Might be the AOA sensor reacting to the wind. Su-27 does the same I think.

Maybe one of their developers could clarify if the image was intended to be a teaser for a new module? A Su-17 module would be absolutely amazing. And in one of the Grim Reapers videos it was said that a new redfor airplane will be coming, in addition to the MiG-23.

I hope so much that a Su-17 awaiting us under that cover! It would finally bring proper A2G capability to the red side!

I wonder if the detection range of the missile seeker is modelled? Otherwise players could set it to large to benefit from earlier active guidance, even when engaging fighter sized targets.

Here are some of the commands that the R-27R receives before launch: As you can see, one of them is the index of the missile (1 or 2), which defines which radio correction signal it will look for. Radio correction for missile 1 and 2 is seperated by time, as you can see here in the next graph: One "working period" consists of 358.4 ms of RK1-1 (radio correction signal for missile 1), 358.4 ms of RK1-1 (radio correction signal for missile 2) and a "reserve" of about 300 ms. Then the cycle repeats, each missile is updated with 1 Hz. Each radio correction signal is now time multiplexed with the regular radar tracking operation. The radar operation cycle takes 20.48 ms, which is followed by 30.72 ms of radio correction signal. During each 30.72 ms, a single value of the target gets transmitted (3D position AND 3D velocity of the target get updated, so 6 values = 6 time frames needed). There is an additional 7th frame, "RK", which is for commands to the missile. So the radio correction signal for the two missiles is definetly time multiplexed. During homing, it is not mentioned that the missile differentiates between frames for missile 1 and missile 2. So the half-PRF "feature" maybe means that every second frame CAN be empty and the missile will still be able to guide, not that it is ignoring every second frame by default. If that is the case, then it is very likely that the PESA radar will, when engaging two targets, use a different illumination frequency for each target, otherwise each missile could pick up radiation intended for the other missile during every second time frame, where the other target is painted. On the other hand, that earlier quote of the MiG-29 manual states that the missile operates with half of the PRF. Using the command of the upper screenshot, it would already know which time frame it has to look for.

Once the change Chizh talked about earlier gets implemented, you will see a rise in R-27 effectiveness in multiplayer, because simply changing hemisphere will no longer trash the missile.

It is not strange, the HUD in DCS is just inaccurate. The mark is the guidance ring towards the target, similar to the guidance ring in navigation mode.

Speaking of extrapolation mode, why is such a feature only present in DVB, but not in BVB? This video shows that even in the close combat modes the sensors will extrapolate / use memory: https://www.youtube.com/embed/UaDBOiYq0r4 Note how after firing, the aircraft turns to the right, which causes the target flare to quickly disappear from the OLS field of view. But the lock is not instantly reset. You can see the guidance ring moving left and right a little as soon as the target leaves the OLS field of fiew, propably because the OLS is trying to scan the area around the last known position.

What makes it even worse is that the F-14 ECM does not have a 15 s cooldown like the FC3 aircraft. So it has the best ECM in DCS whilebeing unaffected by ECM of other aircraft. The best of both worlds.

This would be an excellent solution for now, as it would also greatly reduce the occurence of the chaffbug!

Here is another example of the same issue, showing how the instant switch causes the R-27 to miss. If the instant transition to OLS is avoided by putting the target outside of the OLS gimbal limits, then the radar keeps illuminating the extrapolated target area for up to 4 seconds, and the R-27 hits. So the aircraft with OLS in DCS have a big disadvantage in a SARH fight, as all the other aircraft can guide their SARH missiles for a little longer in extrapolation mode. Clearly this is not how it is supposed to be (OLS should be an advantage in these situations, not a disadvantage).

Great video, it perfectly demonstrates how the OLS is hurting the DCS Su-27 in the exact situation that it should actually help it in. With the current implementation, I would rather not want to have the OLS at all when I fire R-27. I would also add that even when it switches to the OLS while guiding a R-27, the radar should still emit the discrete CW target illumination. Tracking/recapturing would be done during the 20 ms time frames in between the time frames of SARH illumination.

The original plan was to have PFAR in the elevation and conventional mechanical scanning in azimuth. With this design it still seems as if it would only able to engage two targets when they are sepearated in elevation, but not in azimuth. The only way I could imagine it to work if it is was using the roll gimbal of the radar to align the electronically scanned axis of the radar with the two targets. Is it known if this was the idea? With the PFAR of the Su-30 it is no longer an issue, and tracking and illumination of two targets for R-27 is possible.

Only for the much simpler L-203 pods (for export) we know how it is set up. There you have indeed one pod receiving and one pod transmitting. But it is a much more primitive design overall, with simple antennas just transmitting/receiving in the whole coverage sector and additional antennas pointing downwards for the terrain bounce jamming. L-005 is not comparable at all, it can controll the beams and focus the radiation directly on the target. But whether or not each pod is a transceiver or transmitter and receiver are seperated is not known I think.

In the track you can see what I described, although it does not go completely pure as I initially thought. Once the lock switches to OLS, the R-27 does a sharp turn to the left with a peak of over 7 g. Then, once the radar switches back on, the missile does a sharp turn to the right with a peak of over 13 g, bleeding speed. If it just kept flying straight as expected (R-27 is 'dumb' missile as you said, so it should just keep its trajectory), it would not have done the first sharp turn, and the second turn would not have been necessary. If you added some chaff, the missile would have been chaffbugged.

But after every transition from radar to OLS and back to radar the missile is trashed, for these reasons: As soon as the lock switches to OLS, the R-27 goes pure on the target with a very sharp turn instead of keeping its current trajectory. Then, once radar lock is restored, the missile does another sharp turn as it starts properly leading the target again. This bleeds a ton of speed, making it impossible for the missile to reach the target. And as soon as some chaff is involved, the missile is trashed anyway due to the chaffbug (turn radar off, and missile homes in on chaff as if the chaff was a RF beacon). There is no reason for the illumination to turn off in the first place when the target turns through the notch, as the radar would keep illuminating the target by being slaved to the angular coordinates of the OLS, as explained in the Su-27SK manual.

ECM does not have to be a single emitter. L-005 pods of the Flanker are widely spaced appart, and might do angular deception using crosseye jamming. Then the monopulse seeker will home in on a twisted wavefront, and point in the wrong direction.

For the first two shots, a missile indicated by the number "97" is used (R-97?) After this missile is fired at target 1 and 4, it switches to 77-1 (R-77-1), and the range reduces to 80 km, BUT aircraft and target are flying at medium altitudes.

Yes, purely hypothetical, but it would certainly work against bombers. The "original" N011, is it just a purely mechanical scanned slotted array, or does it have the electronic scanning in elevation while being purely mechanical in azimuth? This is the video (with timestamp) where some of the HUD symbology is shown, on a Su-57 though. The narrator says that a target with the X mark is a target that is being engaged. Look how at first target 1 was engaged, later target 1 is no longer there (destroyed) and target 4 gets engaged. In the HUD photo above, both targets have the X mark. Also, there the targets are marked with circle and diamond, which is the same symbology the MiG-29S uses in DCS for its SNP2 mode. I like how the symbology in that Su-57 video is still similar to what the pilots are used to. Even the target marks look like they have the velocity line that also shows the direction and the altitude line, as we know it from our datalink screen in DCS.

Before launch the missile receives commands. One of these commands is whether it is "missile 1" or "missile 2", so whether it has to listen to radio correction / illumination of time slot 1 or time slot 2. The missile can keep track of the timing because it knows the time diagram. (20 ms radar operation, 30 ms time slot 1, 20 ms radar operation, 30 ms time slot 2 and the cycle repeats) Why is it odd to mention the dual target engagement in the manual? It is in the section about the R-27, so it is not wrong to mention its technical capabilities. And about the HUD symbology: In one of the Combat Approved videos (which of course have to be taken with a grain of salt) an engagement in a simulator was shown, and it was said that the cross within the target symbol means that it has been engaged. Here is what the Su-27SK manual says about launching more than two R-27: После схода 2-х ракет с РГС в режиме ОДИН (двух серий в режиме ЧАСТЬ), пущенных по одной цели двумя нажатиями гашетки П, в зависимости от условий пуска, символ ДР может скачком переместиться на меньшую дальность, максимально, примерно, на 0,5 первоначальной дальности. Если осуществлять пуск третьей ракеты с РГС (до достижения первой ракетой цели), то она пойдет на цель без радиокоррекции. The sudden reduction of the permitted launch range mark (DR) could be explained by the aircraft not allowing the following missiles to be launched until the radar has switched to illumination for the first missile or something similar related to reducing the maximum permitted launch range of the following missiles due to the absence of radio correction.

On top of that, the original plan for the Su-27 was to have a radar capable of attacking multiple targets, and its main armament, the R-27, was created with this idea in mind. I don't know if the idea at first was to go full PESA, like on the MiG-31, but then the plan was to have hybrid radar, with mechanical scanning in azimuth and electronical scanning in elevation. Even with such a mixed scanning the tracking and illumination of two targets for SARH missiles is possible by rotating the radar on the roll gimbal so that its electronically scanned axis is aligned with the targets. Now we have the PESA on the Su-30's, perfectly capable of tracking and painting multiple targets. But it is russian, so it must be bad. Obviously it cannot have this feature

R-27EA have been testfired, according to someone here in the forums.