BlackPixxel

Is there any evidence that real Su-27, Su-33 or MiG-29 lose radar lock when banked more than 120°? It is such an absurd restriction in DCS. When you want to defend against the missiles of a bandit you want to roll and pull towards the ground. But in DCS you cannot do that with the Flanker or MiG-29, as those planes will just magically lose all their radar function when they are banked >120° below 1500m. The bandit can be right in front of you in a perfect look-up situation, but your lock will just disapear as soon as you roll > 120°. It does not make any sense to me. It appears the developers want to "simulate" a side effect of the fixed guard antenna, but this is such a horrible and oversimplified approach. The fixed guard antenna should make it harder to track objects when upside down close to the ground, but it should not completely remove any radar functionality as it does right now. The correct approach in line with the simple FC3 radar mechanics would be another reduction in detection/tracking range, but not a complete loss of radar function. Is there any chance that we see this issue fixed? And what about a working Flanker group datalink for multiplayer? It seems that some components are already working, each plane has itself identified by its number (1,2,3 or 4) on the HDD depending on the position of the selected slot in the flight. But what is completely missing is the sharing of the position of the 3 other group members, as well as sharing targets. Also the leaders of each flight should see the leaders of the other flights on their HDD with different symbology. I really hope to see this implemented in multiplayer, as not having such a major feature is a big flaw even for a FC3 plane.

No one is asking for the same level of fidelity as one of the "big" modules, but we are asking for a rough representation of their capabilities. The group datalink is an important feature of the Flanker and should as such not be overlooked. Especially since ED already said that it should be working in MP a few years ago if the planes are in the same flight. The planes still cost 15€, but all you get when buying the 2 Flankers and the MiG-29 is a copy of the same old systems that are also partially the same as the Su-25T.

But what if the missile was launched with radar lock, then the target notches and it switches to EOS backup. Would the real Su-27 still emitt the radar pulses with the radar antenna slaved to the EOS direction, so that the R-27R/ER can keep tracking the target (especially when it comes from a different angle where the target is not notching)?

Haha yes, some A-10 flew right towards me when I was refueling at Sirri Island and dropped something on me. For some reason I did not explode and was able to repair, but when I wanted to take off I ate an Aim-9 :D

It is used in combination with scanzone up/down to set up the radar for a known target. If you for example know that a bandit is flying 20 km in front of you with an altitute of 3 km less than yours, then you would set the value in the bottom of the hud (distance to target) to 20, and the value in the right of the HUD (scanzone up/down) to -3. This will set up the radar in such a way that a target in a distance of 20 km in front of you with an altitute 3 km lower than yours will be in the center of the radar cone.

Maybe it can turned into a proper Red vs Blue fight by limiting the F-14, F-16 and F-18 to unguided A2G weapons. Then Blue would have to fly the A-10 for A2G, just as Red has to take the Su-25T for A2G right now. This would also make it more interesting, as both sides have to protect their ground attackers instead of the Blue ground attackers protecting themselfs ( F-16, F-18 ). I do not really like mixed aircraft for both factions, I would like to see it pure red vs blue with the nessecary restrictions (e.g. SATAL rules for A2A weapons). Using the Aim-54 is a very risk free way of getting cheap kills, while all the other planes have to work hard and risk alot for their kills. Going back to SATAL rules will force the F-14 to get into more risky situations and would therefore make the fights a little more equal.

It was not meant as an accusation, I just wanted to express that some thought went into the current values, but that the ideas behind it are not in line with the rest of the planes in the DCS universe. Good to hear that you will take a look at it!

Hi! The F-14 IR signature seems very wrong: Without afterburner the F-14 shows up in EOS at about 10 km, which is the same value as the much smaller and weaker F-18. A Flanker shows up at about 15 km, which would mean that the Flanker produces about twice as much power in the IR spectrum. With afterburner the F-14 shows up at 35 km!! The F-18 shows up at 41 km, while the Flanker shows up at 65 km. This would mean that the Flanker produces almost 4 times as much heat as the F-14 in afterburner. The F-14 is the largest fighter in DCS with the most powerfull engine. You don't get high thrust and a big plane for free, the IR signature should be huge! From this changelog it appears as if the current values were adjusted intentionally: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3852980&postcount=2 In my opinion the current IR stealth of the F-14 is totally wrong and inconsistent with the other planes in DCS. It should be on a similar level and even higher than a Flanker. I hope to see IR coefficients fixed.

Is any effect of the smaller flares modelled in the game? Such as a lower chance of defeating a missile?

No, it has been animated for quite some time. Just go into the cockpit, look to the left, go to 3rd person and you will see that the sensor is pointed to the left. Would be cooler if it was like the real one, where it scans constantly left - right with slight elevation changes when not in helmet mode.

I assume the 60 stands for 60°. When the small vertical line on the right is at the top, the antenna is pointed up to the maximum gimbal limit of 60°.

I use the open beta. 60 km is not even an option there, the closest range settings are 50 and 100 km.

For me it still works with display zoom in and display zoom out.

You don't have to unlock the bandit to switch PRF. You can switch it during STT as well, but you have to remember what mode you are in. So if you are in HIGH and want to switch to ILV, just press the PRF button twice (Although I always assumed HIGH is the best for hot targets and MED is always the best for cold targets).

Cool, I did not know that the 25A had a jammer pod, I never checked a station appart from the outer ones! I assume you can do the same more safe with the KH-25ML. It may not give you launch athorisation, but you can just launch overwrite it (alt + w). With the 25T and launch overwrite you can fire the 25ML at ranges of up to 25 km when you are high enough, much more than the actual laser lock on range of the 25A. Even when fired low the 25ML may have higher range then what launch authorisation would allow you. As the 25ML is faster than the 29L it should allow you to turn away earlier.

R-27 is already downgraded over Aim-7 by its outdated flighmodel with very little lift, which makes them very bad at maneuvering and bleed lots of speed, even though they should be perfect at maneuvering and have plenty of lift thanks to their huge control surfaces and the missile body itself. Also the Fox 3 behave very different to Fox 1 to chaff. Fox 3 in DCS is able to reaquire a target when it gets out of the notch, while Fox 1 is trashed when it finds the chaff. Being ARH or SARH should not define whether it can reaquire a target or not. This makes the R-27 so easy to trash compared to Aim-120, because all you have to do is turn around and pop one chaff in the notch. Against Fox 3 you have to keep notching a bit until you get out of the seeker cone or until the missile is unable to catch you when it reaquires you. R-27 go for chaffs even against almost head on fast moving targets at high altitute, which should be physically impossible (super strong doppler shift of the fast bandit should not make the ER R-27 go for a stationary chaff that should be filtered out as clutter). So in the end R-27 are downgraded flight model wise, and in general Fox 1 have an unexplained disadvantage over Fox 3 by being unable to reaquire targets once they are chaffed.

It is sad to read that there is no interest of ED to do easy improvements for the FC3-modules. They still cost money, and you still pay 1/4th of a full fidelity module. But most of them share the same systems, so it is just copy and paste for ED. A little more effort by ED would be very appreciated (these improvements + plane to plane datalink for example)

We are not talking about avoiding the Aim-54 in general, which is easy when the desync is low. We are talking about how the massive desync of the Aim-54 that sometimes occurs makes it impossible to avoid in some cases. Plus that the missile tracks you before it goes active even if the F-14 is no longer supporting it. The missile knows wherever you are at any range until it goes active. How will you avoid a phoenix that does not give you any launch warning, because on your PC it has already passed you or did even reached you yet? This is not lack of skill, this is a bug! From the perspective of the F-14 pilot everything is fine of course, he does not see the desync.

Yes, that would be the perfect solution.

The missile is getting very close to the plane, but this is not about this at all. I also have no need to do a 'biased' tacview video. All I want to show is that the target dies to a missile that was far far away from him on his side. This is not some tacview issue, because in the fight he saw that the missile has flown past him: On the SPO-15 it was on the opposite side and the signal strength was droping (Another DCS issue, you are no longer in the radar beam of the missile when it flies away from you). This is a 100% indicator that the missile is gone, and he turns hot again, only to die more than 15 seconds later to this missile. I do not have the shooters tacview, but there is no need for that as the issue is presented here very well: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3860594&postcount=1 Problem is that the desync is exagerated by the long flight time, by the loft and maybe even by the different radar modes that the phoenix gets launched. An AIM-120C without loft does not differ that much for shooter and client, but with the phoenix it causes big issues under certain launch conditions. Hence why the missile or the systems of the F-14 should be adjusted so that the desync is minimized until the issue is fixed by ED. (Maybe Fox1, maybe no loft, etc.)

The thing is that it does not matter what that Su-33 was doing there. Because for the shooter the missile was somewhere completely else. Maybe it did a loft or it flew a different turn, but for the shooter the missile must have hit that Su-33 head on when for the Su-33 pilot the missile was already far behind him. Remember that only the shooters trajectory of the missile matters, and the position of other players is synced while only the launch of the missile itself is synced. So the moment the Su-33 explodes is the moment the missile hit him on the shooters view, where the Su-33 is in the position that is in the tacview for each client, but the missile is only at the position of the Su-33 on the shooters PC. Let's say the Su-33 did a perfect notch on his side. It would not matter at all in this situation, because the missile is somewhere completely else. The Su-33 does not die because of a mistake he made, but because he gets hit by a missile that is actually somewhere else. In DCS the target does NOT send to the shooter "I notched the missile, make it lose track". So whatever he does to his version of the missile does not matter unless the shooters and the targets version of the missile are at a very similar position and energy. Which is the case many times, but then there are also these cases where there are huge differences. We are talking here about a difference in position of 8 km between shooter and target. For the target the missile was long dead and he did not have any warning when the missile hit him. Such a big discrepancy in missile position is just too much in a flight sim. Blaming this on pilot error shows me that you do not fully understand the problem.

As long as issues like this still exist, the AIM-54 has no place in DCS: The missile has no energy, is outmaneuvered, misses the target, and explodes an insane 18 seconds later in a distance of 8 km, killing its target. The desync is so exaggerated that you can do everything correct on your side and still get splashed. You can notch the missile, defeat it kinematically and see it flying past you in safe distance. And then you still die. To fight the phoenix, you cannot apply your DCS knowledge of fighting an active missile. In singleplayer it is so easy to notch. But in multiplayer you have to get an understanding of the desync. You have to get a feeling for how big the difference in angle between the missile that you see and the missile that the F-14 sees is to notch it properly. You cannot trust your sensors or what you see. This is not how it should be and completely unrealistic. It turns the phoenix into a much more dangerous missile than the big anti-bomber weapon should actually be. To bring DCS BVR back to fighting against missiles and not against desync, the phoenix should either be removed until the issue is fixed or switched to Fox1 as Yaga said, because there the desync will be minimal. It does not matter if it is ED's fault, putting a missile into the game knowing that it does not properly work with the current mechanics is just wrong. The under certain conditions the phoenix just has a game braking behaviour and should as such only be implemented when the underlying missile coding in DCS itself is fixed. Worst thing is when such 'phoenix magic' happens in a competitive match, such as a SATAL match we lost yesterday due to this.

And the Su-33 get their real life upgrade with SVP-24, L150 and RVV-SD!

Even the MiG-29 manual has reference to the R-27EP. For example it says that the missile can even be used in Fi0-mode similar to a heatseeking missile. The tone will be played when the missile seeker has found a target. It also says that the radar complex has to be turned off in Fi0 mode to avoid detection of the planes own radiation.

The HUD circle far outside of the regular HUD field of view is truly annoying. And if the hud can display information that far from the center axis, then why can't it show the firing solution for the gun at a similar offset?