sylkhan

?? Certainly not, if the R go to chaff, that means the T is in range for his head to track the aircraft (heatest emitting source), but chances are high that it would have gone to the target way before the R go for chaff. It's easy to program priority filters for infrared homing head Since the 2 R27 have the exact same motors, it should work. No, like i explain previously. On the contrary the bad guy will only know about SARH missile, willl decoy chaff(like you said:)) and.....surprise :D

Yes, it's to avoid the T to be confused by the heat emission of the R (iF the T is lock on the target), and it could confirm that the T can lock on the R. But in my concept, i want the T to lock on the R to take the path/guidance of R to have 2 missiles that go to the target. It need to be launch right after the R (without lock on the target) The goal is to give more range to the T (slightly less than the R)and to have a better PK Why, since the T is not radio correct

DCS hollywood combat flight game :)

Sure, but logically it should go for the heatest source. If it's true, it's sad because this method reduce drastically the launch range. But probably they don't want the bad guys (blue) know about their correct method :) False information to confuse ennemies.

The 36T passive infrared homing heat allows homing of missile to aircrafts, cruise missiles, Drones,... Its has means to received data from radar or optical locator :) Ok, if i launch a R-27ER and right after i launch a R-27ET, the ET should lock on the big heat emission of ER, correct ? So it will follow the path of r-27ER, till it detect a bigger heat source (aircraft). In that way we can launch missiles by pair and optimize PK. Why this doesn't work in the game, the ET does not lock on the ER heat emission ?

It could be, but you have mig 25/31 with Vympel r-33 for this task. Su-27 was not design for this type of mission. Something seems strange, i am not totally convinced :)

?? strange, i have LA at 22 or 26 km depending T/ET We don't play the same game :)

The lock on range seems slightly different, i just do the test see my previous post, and tere is a bug in the HUD max launch range for r-27 ET

I just do some test. Mig29A vs M2K, 10000 ft, mach 0.7 R-27 T, HUD max launch 23 KM, LA (launch autorisation) 22 km R-27 ET HUD max launch 32 km, LA 26 km Not a big difference, seems correct. Good answer, at least logic, it can explain the usefulness of a two mode engine. Thx GGTharos

That doens't answer to my question, it doesn't explain why with the same 36T head, the lock on distance is differrent. Your speculations are not serious and that doesn't answer to my question. Do you think that a company will do a new missile with the hope of better IR seeker. and even with a better seeker the single mode engine of the R27 T is sufficient no need for a dual mode engine And please my question is precise and for CHIZ.

It's strange, it's seems that ED is specifically focus in quality of one third party "DEKA", what about the others...? And DEKA is by far, the best and the more professionnal third party who deliver the best quality of products, strange, isn't it ? They have a lot of work with the others RAZBAM, HEATBLUR, POLYSHOP with their Gazelle, ahaha...but ...nio words And no, unfortinately ED don't care about quality of products of third parties, they only care about theirs sells and a part of theirs customers.

@CHIZ, I have 2 questions for you about R-27T/ET These missiles are not radio correct during the first phase of their flight (i mean in DCS Game, not in RL) and the R-27T/ET Infrared homing head need to lock on the target by it's heat emission before launch. The max launch distance is then limited by the 36T infrared Homing head (15 to 50 km, depending of the heating source) - Why in the Game, the Lock on distance of T/ET is different ? it must be the same since the 36T is the limiting and determinig factor to lock on the target by it's heat emission. - If in Real life the missile flight is not radio corrected, why Vympel has done a R-27ET, with a two mode engine, since the single mode engine of R-27T was more than enough ?

Thx Paco2002

Ah ok thx hamza Khan

When we launch C802 AK by pair, in "Skim" mode, the first missile "Skim", and the second "pop up"

Ground radar lost lock when the JF-17 is bank. Same behaviour for GMT/SEA mode

+1

Ok will try that, thx AeriaGloria

Not sure we speak about the same thing. It's the RD93 sound (In-cockpit) that is not that good. There is a strange irritating looping sound (same as the DCS Mirage 2000). I just looked at the last video of Wags (DCS: Syria - Bekaa Valley), and the in-cockpit sound of the F-18's engine, seems very good. I fly from time to time the Mig29 and the In-cockpit sound of the RD33 is great too. It would great if we can have the same sound quality with the JF-17.

Internal cockpit engine sounds please, Thanks.

Thx for the test AeroGloria, now i will keep the probe ON :) Yes, but a good surprise :) I love flying the "fierce dragon", the FMs are really great.

Sure, might be "placebo effect" because the AAR is ...big :)

yes AAR probe adds some drag, but even without AAR, JF-17 is IMO more draggy. It would be good if DEKA made the AAR off by default because yesterday i have done some test on servers like "JUST DOGFIGHT" and the JF-17 start in the air with the probe :(, not the best config for dogfighting. All servers i test the AAR is always on. My suggestion is to make it off by default, and if we need it for a specific mission, we install it.

Just come back to DCS, and the JF-17 seems a lot more draggy or is it just me. Dogfighting seems harder than before.

There is no reliable info anywhere in the world, all is politic... There is no good background for any report about efficiency of the missiles :). If people understand this, it's all good. We just have to trust our intuition, which is often the best guide.:)