BlackPixxel

Great experience, thank you for setting up the event!

Could be, would be nice to have a statement from Chizh if this is intended or not.

So why is the Aim-120 launched in STT not giving a launch warning from the launch aircraft then in DCS? Why should the russian radar turn on the target illumination (that is not used by the aircraft radar for tracking) when launching the R-77? The R-77 could not even use that for some kind of homing, as it operates in a higher band.

A while ago the Aim-120 got changed so that the target no longer gets a launch warning from the shooting aircraft even when fired in STT, which makes sense (Radar does not change to a SARH illumination mode). Why has the same not been applied to R-77 yet? When MiG-29 or J-11 launch the R-77, their radar should not switch to DNP either, as there is no need to illuminate the target. So the launch of the R-77 should not cause the target to receive a launch warning from the launch aircraft, only when the R-77 activates its own seeker the target should get alerted.

After the R-27 is fired, the A-10 turns through the notch, which will make the lock transition to EO only. And because the Su-27 systems are not properly modelled (for balancing in the old Flaming Cliffs days propably) the radar will not keep painting the target with guidance illumination by being slaved to the angular coordinates of the IRST, as it would do IRL. So there is no radar illumination and the missile is not guiding. Make sure that when the target exits the notch, to press the EO button once. This will cause the lock to switch back into a radar lock, which would cause SARH missiles to guide again. Sometimes the radar does not turn on automatically. But in most cases the missile is already trashed when the lock transitions to EO, because of this old bug: https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/digital-combat-simulator/dcs-world-2-5/bugs-and-problems-ai/weapon-issues/255225-reported-r-27er-goes-for-chaff-when-lock-is-lost?t=253434 It basically causes the missile to suddenly turn into chaff as soon as the radar stops emitting, which is of course extremely unrealistic.

Yes, HDD looks a little different. But even the old one from the early MiG-29 / Su-27 is able to show analog video.

At least a variant like that 29SM (?) in this video would be nice: Cockpit appears to be more or less identical to the current DCS model, but it supports guided A2G ammunition (KH-29T, KAB-500) by showing their TV image on the HDD. This would give long awaited multirole capablities to red, and it would still not be a modern MiG.

At least it should not happen in close combat modes (vertical scan, helmet sight etc.), as there the radar is definetly not roll stabilized. But don't expect any fix for FC3. Support appears to have stopped.

Is such INS inaccuracy modelled with the new missile FM/autopilot?

PN guidance does not need range information, all it needs is the seeker to track the angular coordinates of the target which the seeker does in HOJ. A heatseeking missile does not need range information either to do a proper tracking with lead.

But in the meantime, until we get the new R-27 in 2+ years, this particular issue can be fixed completely by just changing a single number. Why not fix it?

If it was something that required a bigger overhaul then it would be absoluetly understandable to wait for the full rework. But all it takes in this case is changing a single number from 1.0 s to 0.4 s in the config file. Done.

What makes you think so? This is very wrong.

Same with correcting R-27ET safety maneuver delay. Right now it is set to 1 second, which should be changed to 0.4 seconds, as the R-27ET can only be launched from the rail launcher. All that needs to be done is to change one single line of code in the config..

Great footage! Very smooth trajectory of both missiles, they fly nicely in formation! And the target they hit almost notching them.

Is the broken signal strength meter on the SPO-15 "Correct as is" as well or what? Signal strenght show in multiplayer are completely wrong.

Why is this being ignored? It is a simple fix, and even confirmed by Chizh that it should be 0.4 s.

The radar being thrown out of SNP is just a gamey feature of FC3 I think and not really based on reality.

MiG-29 manual about launching R-27R1: MiG-29 only carries rail launchers, never catapult launchers, so the safety maneuver time for any R-27 launched from the MiG-29 is always 0.4 s. As R-27T/ET can only be launched from the rail launcher on both the MiG-29 and the Su-27/33, they will always have the safety maneuver time of 0.4 s. In the missiles_data.lua, this value is currently chosen for the R-27ET: 1.0, -- âðåìÿ çàäåðæêè âêëþ÷åíèÿ óïðàâëåíèÿ (ìàíåâð îòëåòà, áåçîïàñíîñòè), ñåê This is incorrect and needs to be set to 0.4

Yes, but Su-30MKI, MKA, MKM and SM have such a PESA and the ability to engage two targets at once. They can also STT lock 4 targets at once and engage all of them with R-77.

R-27R/ER was from the begining designed for dual target engagement. It works with half the "PRF", so homing pulse 1 goes to target 1, homing pulse 2 to target 2 and the cycle repeats, with additional pulses that the radar itself uses for tracking between the individual homing phases. Radio correction works the same, there are two time slots, for missile 1 and for missile 2, which allows for dual target engagement as well. And that is for R-27 made in the 80's! With a PESA such as BARS on a Su-30 it is absolutely possible to engage two targets at the same time with R-27R/ER

For a moment I had the hope that this point was just added in the wrong line in the changelog, and was actually meant for FC3: But unfortunately this is not the case. ED still sells FC3 for full price, but without any support. On the FC3 site in the shop it should say: WARNING: PRODUCT NO LONGER SUPPORTED

Best solution in my opinion would be to always transfer the main missile calculation to the current target of the missile, because the target is what the desync has to be minimized for.

I agree. Aim-120D should have increased range compared to 120C from its better guidance and from the more accurate INS thanks to GPS data, not only from the increased battery life. But if in DCS a 120D was added, it would not be any different from the current 120C except for battery life, because the guidance is already perfect.

Those small R/C coax helis are always level because the upper rotor has this self stabilizing bar with the weights. But on the Ka-50 the rotorhead of the upper rotor is linked to the swashplate just like the lower rotor, so it does not have this autoleveling tendency (but it can still do that with the help of the flight control system).