Jump to content

BlackPixxel

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    938

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BlackPixxel

  1. BlackPixxel
    @IronMike Maybe you could tell us why the current CCM values are that way, especially about those two points: -very little difference between the old analog 54A and the more modern digital 54C -old 54A is doing much better than other more modern (and even digital) missiles (much lower CCM)
  2. BlackPixxel
    The missiles are photoshopped into the the exact same still frame from the video. Nothing moves except the missile. You can tell that it is the same frame because the noise in the image from the analog video transmission does not change. It is still possible that one of the images is a real one, but all others from the sequence are fake.
  3. BlackPixxel
    There is a video somewhere where multiple images of the approach of the rocket are shown. There it can clearly be seen that at least a few of them are fake. Edit: Here is the video
  4. BlackPixxel
    And the real data on the CCM of Aim-120, Aim-7, Aim-54 etc?
  5. BlackPixxel
    Can you or someone else from the ED team inform us on how chaff affects missiles with the new API? The old API missiles used to just lock onto the chaff and fly directly towards them, I have never observed that with the new Aim-120.
  6. BlackPixxel
    Although the number of lamps is not an unambiguous indicator that the SUV would not work with more missiles. In the HUD it could still present the actual number of missiles. Not that it would make much sense for the Su-33 to try to carry that many missiles in its original carrier role anyway.
  7. BlackPixxel
    How do they react to chaff? R-27 and R-77 turn directly into them, bleeding alot of speed and flying directly to chaff. I don't think I have ever seen the Aim-120 do that? Could you tell me how they react to chaff? And why did I get a warning for this? Completely unnecessary. I just wrote my observations.
  8. BlackPixxel
    Doesn't matter for me, I don't fly low. But when my ER and the R-77 are the only missiles that go for chaff while Aim-120 and Aim-54 (70s missile) completely ignore them, that I notice alot.
  9. BlackPixxel
    Those extra pylons are needed in DCS to compensate for the horrible guidance of the ER with the old API
  10. BlackPixxel
    Thank you!
  11. BlackPixxel
    Still broken in the current patch. Could ED do something about it? It is a rather big issue. All datalinked targets point towards north and have no velocity vector.
  12. BlackPixxel
    No, from time to time I get some correct targets even without radar on. But only very rarely.
  13. BlackPixxel
    I enountered the same issue. All aircraft on the datalink point in the same direction (north?) and have no velocity vector. Only every now and then a few aircraft with show with the correct aspect + velocity, but only for a brief moment.
  14. BlackPixxel
    Hi, could you share those docs or where they can be found?
  15. BlackPixxel
    It is no comparison at all. It can work in the Flanker, but not everytime and especially for closer missiles it gets very hard and requires luck. Can work in a clean environment, but very hard to pull of in a big fight. Meanwhile blufor RWR turns nothing into a simple minigame with 100% success rate. No need to slow down. If it was less precise there would propably be less complaints about their favourite missile being to easy to defeat.
  16. BlackPixxel
    I think he means the ECM on indicator ("SAP")
  17. BlackPixxel
    Ah yes, Aim-120 should ignore chaff and ground clutter because I think so. It is from the US after all!!
  18. BlackPixxel
    Clutter received from sidelobes will be within the same range gate. It is not that simple.
  19. BlackPixxel
    Keep up the posts Tavarish, they are always very interesting!
  20. BlackPixxel
    DCS Su-27 is not performing as it should. Real life HUD videos of Su-30 (more weight + drag than Su-27) out-accelerating the DCS Su-27 says it all. But unless there will be a FF Su-27 I doubt ED will change anything. No money to be gained from fixing FC3 issues.
  21. BlackPixxel
    Left ALT + Q to enable the front gear steering.
  22. BlackPixxel
    Request: [RU] (Ai | 20' | SEAD) 2*Su-24M (50pts)
  23. BlackPixxel
    That would be a very bad approach, because with the current mechanic there is a 100% success of extrapolation mode if the target leaves the notch. Alot can happen within 12 s, and the target might not be anymore where the radar expects it. The search of the radar needs to be modelled which takes time.
  24. BlackPixxel
    I think it depends whether you lock them with BVR radar mode or close combat radar modes. Same with the Flanker. Radar extrapolation is only there in BVR mode. Vertical scan, boresight and helmet lock do not extrapolate, instant loss of lock. Obviously a FC3 thing.
  25. BlackPixxel
    Regarding R-27ER top speed, it is a bit higher because ED switched to an incorrect rocket motor configuration of just 8 s burntime with a very strong sustain. ED went with a third party source instead of the real manual, so we have just 8 s of burntime instead of 8.6 - 11 s.
×
×
  • Create New...