microvax

Good data ! Yep, I noticed the severe drag difference once I looked at the charts over time, thats why I added the speed dropoff data points. And tbh by looking at the speed over time chart of an r27 flying through atmosphere it doesnt make a lot of sense to me from what I know about aerodynamics. And beyond a certain range I, as said, agree fully that the ER kinematic performance is way more comparable to the Aim7m then the r27 is to the aim7m. What that implicitly states though is that before that range, the ER has a lot better kinematic performance then the AIM7M. And thats not stating straight away the setup would be 'unbalanced'. Why I am at least skeptical about the statement that the ER vs aim7M scenario would produce more balanced metrics then the R vs aim7 scenario is, because I rarely see engagements happen successfully beyond the ranges where the ER outperforms the AIM7. Again anywhere where the "I think and cant prove data wise" zone begins the ice is very thin and I avoid to go there. So yeah, dunno. I am totally up for running a comparison run for a week if we can record statistics in a meaningfull way. Would be interested how it turns out in the end. :)

See above for an example. Just talking about max range in atmosphere is useless.

I do not think theese numbers justify your conclusion, it shows that the R27 have a pretty unbelievable drag chute built in, that works in favour of the aim7m at longer ranges while the way higher impulse works in favour of the r27ER at shorter ranges. Thats why I put speed, speed loss and range here. It is true, that at some range beyond N miles the Aim7m and the R27ER become a lot more comparable then the R27R and the AIM7M due to the way higher drag of the r27 series in DCS. But given the situation, that the R27 still has incredibly high drag and is comparable to the aim7m somewhere beyond N miles kinematically, that is implying that before that N miles range the R27ER way outperforms the AIM7M in terms of kinematic performance due to the higher impulse burn needed to equal out kinematically beyond N miles with higher drag. Again I do not make judgement about the combat effectiveness. Not at all. I do not have enough data for that. I am just questioning the numbers you use in support of your argument that aim7m vs r27ER is a more balanced setup then aim7m vs r27r. Since from a numbers standpoint it doesnt make a lot of sense. If theese numbers where in vacuum, sure then I would whole heartedly agree but given we are fighting in the atmosphere, and that drag is quadratic with speed I could not agree less. [based on those numbers, for the last time based on the kinematic performance]

In what way is it nonsense, based on what data is it nonsense ? I am aware that the r27 series of missiles suffers from a big drag penalty in the DCS modelling. But thats just incredibly hard to reliably quantify and measure, so I am not providing data on that. Thats why I especially said I am not including them, so I am very interested in your explanation why anything of what I said is nonsense. Only thing I could probably have done better is said kinetic flight performance instead of just flight performance. Afaik the biggest most coherent dataset of missile flight performance I am basing my numbers off: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/de/files/1363666/ I didnt even judge if the combat effectiveness is more comparable in DCS, again I have no data on that. We could ask mav if they hold mission independant weapon sorted statistics on that. There is iirc a aim7m vs r27ER setup isnt there ?

Indeed I dont and I cant really there is no good data out there on it. To consider though: 10 000ft ASL AIM7M falls under 1000kts after nearly 6NM R27r falls unter 1000kts after 5NM R27ER falls under 1000kts after 10NM. Obviously the AIM7M is better, but the ER is like absolutely not more comparable to the AIM7 then the AIM7 to the R in terms of flight performance.

Just leaving that here: R27R max speed 1760kts AIM7 max speed 1550kts R27ER max speed 2280kts Thats avg across altitudes. R27R effective range ~8nm AIM7 effective range ~10nm r27ER effective range ~12nm

Yeah I meant SA19 while you are engaging it with anything isdie gun range. :D Yep RB05 takes practice. Try the DYK modes. That is divebombing

Going in SA19 gun range is suicide. Full stop. There is like no way to survive more then 1 SA19 at best and even that is close to impossibruh. You can at best trick the engagement rules to switch between guns and missiles and buy you some time. RB05 and Mavs are your friend. With that you can take out mostly anything. RB05 tend to work better against high end SAMs though. The viggen has proper a2g functionality in comparison to $fighter trucking bombs. Also once we have a proper BK90 implementation, they wont scratch tanks, will reck light armor though. :) Just a badly executed example, can be timed a lot better. RB05 basically are considered as a target/threat by the SAM. As BK90s should be as well, didnt test if bk90s also get shot. Here an example of flying low enough to actually gun high end SAMs. Throwing Mavericks or spoofing SAMs with rb05 is a lot safer though.

After $patch by ED there was a time last summer/early autum where blueflag ran perfectly stable with more clients then now. Literally no lag, it was amazing. Then I was absent due to uni for basically 2 months. I just heard from squadron chat that lag was apparently bad. When I came back I actually was full WTF what did ED do. Its literally rollercoaster and the buddyspike is at a mercy of ED changes. In such a big event with a single threaded engine small changes can break performance pretty substantially.

The server is top notch, the connection is topnotch. DCS netcode is utter garbage. We had blueflag working pretty flawless without lag. ED changed something, lag came back. We also had contacts starting to behave weirdly on missile firing. DCS simply seems to change the extrapolation then. Nothing new, blame single threaded graphix calculating server binary.

@Maverick, can you add something like 5 total waypoints for the Mirages ? The thing is, the Navigation system can hold up to 20, problem is atm one can only edit waypoints defined in the ME and not use the other 20-N waypoints which not have been placed in ME. Would be very helpful to have more then 1 Waypoint to play around with ! :)

The gazelle has a really good visibility cockpit, so the engine has to render a lot more objets then you sitting in a FC3 Aircraft or KA50 for example. Polychop cant really do much about that unfortunately. ED has to work there.

=RvE=Microvax RvE Mirage2000c Germany

With forward observer slots for ABM/GCI or "just" AI a la radio menu ?

Now only the SAM fired and air to air STT is missing, really usefull apart from that ! :)))

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/02/01/us-forces-bank-new-weapon-protect-civilians-next-mosul-battle.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm This article also states it beeing used on AV8 and A10

"to spend potentially 1 minute not firing?", yes if needed hold fire until you are bingo, if you are not sure. Its not idealistic, its simply a base for having a nice time together online. Everyone of us has so and so much time he can and want to dedicate to DCS and its completely up to him how he spends that. I think its simply unacceptable though to shoot a potentially hostile, potentially friendly target, effectively risking ruining the fun someone else has and effectively reducing the time he has fun, just to potentially save one owns, despite one has choosen the obviously high stakes operation to get into situation having to decide on this at all. So its simply not idealistic, only to shoot if one is sure of ones target, its a basic requirement for complying with "Fair Play is MANDATORY AT ALL TIMES". Especially in the scenario you are depicting, hostile f15 vs a10. If the F15 isnt quite below average on skill, the a10 will be dead before anything happens. If the F15 is somehow missing the a10, its up to the a10 to use that only advantage he has, not beeing detected, to make something of it. And I totally get that its satisfying to down a high end a2a platform with some kind of plane, less capable in that arena. But that doesnt justify trigger happy behaviour. So hell yes, if the a10 isnt sure of the potential hostiles hostility, better die not knowing, taking responsibility for your own decision to go there, then downing someone else, who is indeed allied. Thats the only logical solution I see to this "problem". No, simply stay safe if you "want to live". Nobody forces you to shoot undeclared targets. If you do, you are basically violating "Fair Play is MANDATORY AT ALL TIMES". At best ones own bad decision making, greed and disrespect for other players forces one to take blind shots. I do not exactly get how IFF not working as it does non simulated, for that timeframe of planes we have, is an argument against visual ID. If IFF would be as reliable as IRL we would basically not rely on IFF for BVR. Its a good indication, but visual ID beeing base for ROE even in desert storm might indicate how sure of an indication. :)

Do not shoot before AWACS or visual ID by cammo or type identifies a contact as hostile if you do not have IFF at hand. If one shoots by factors like long STT or other rather speculative things, one is simply trading potentially killing a friendly for potentially solving a dangerous situation for ones own flight, for which only one self is responsible in the first place. And that is, to put it mildly, not nice. :P

The weight of the guidance unit can be estimated if need be, standard aerodynamics and balistics can be applied also pretty easily. For the guidance it is just a standard intercept for a laserdot, probably not bang bang like the paveways, but in the end nothing different then the AGM65E, probably a little more efficient. Would be extremely cool to have this ! :D

Yeah its annoying AF from both sides. Annoyed in the same way by it as flankers with gear problems. I just do not get why people play a sim and then try to gain an unfair advantage by the rules of the scenario.

Yee and ED should do that. But I do not think they are going to do it any time soon unfortunately.

Jesus, Greg, Xcom and others do this in their freetime. They do it because they like it aka they will do it ASAP within the limits of it beeing a hobby and not a profession. Good info on the Desktop app working. Is DCS multiplayer stable atm with 52 player ? No it isnt. Is the relevant DCS part running single threaded ? Yes it is. Did DCS MP run stable with 64 clients even when we had a really good phase with DCS MP stability last year ? No not even then. Is adding more workload to a single threaded programm which already has performance issues going to make matters worse. Hell yes. The rational answer to your understandable request is probably no due to theese reasons.

What moltar is saying that due to the popularity of certain coalition bound frames geographically we have a time correlated swing in considerable unbalance between coalitions. Which is not really fun, imho especially on the outnumbering side. I support strikers and helos to be mixed coalition wise. For the F15 and Flanker its good to stay split imho. There is enough fanboys for both frames.

Honestly for the striker protection you got to thank the F15s dishing it out with the Aggressors on the frontline. I did my job statistically, served as a little confusion and SA degrading factor, ran stuge out of AMRAAMs in the end, possibly saved flame and plaiskool a little. Meanwhile I missed huge engagement options in the initial chaos so yeah. The big succes is really down to F15s and the planning of our structure beforehand. You cant win this with Mirages only, I still think though, properly employed they have reasonable use cases where they beat the F15 [DCS here, do not jump me its not my fault I am just running the numbers :D]. :) Last anecdote to add here. Bushmani during the briefing pretty literally said "The Mirages do something I guess". ;D