Vatikus

will be mission updated with the clouds?

<64>Vati - MiG-21

any news on this? will it be fixed in 2.7?

Yes

In testings we did, we have found out phoneix goes dumb in TWS before going active as soon as track enters memory mode... so when missile goes pitbull (TTI 16), even if target is in missile FOV it will not acquire the target.

Can you add option for Mirage 2000 as well? Thx :)

Can we get Sparrows as well?

bump

I am awaiting guys wanting aim120 on inner pylon as well... :D (there is a reason why we do not see operationally any rocket rail launched wpn on the inner pylon)

<64>Vati f14 rio

F1! Let's gooo!

That is exactly how it happened numerous times in real life. Also be happy we do not have SAR jammers which render a2g radar completely useless.

Well that is a falacy. It does not mean that the weapon system: missile + plane's WCS is uncapable of more complicated operation that a flying dart. There is enough available data on the internet, ranging from science papers of the R27 guidance down to the manuals, etc. which could provide enough information for the model. If anything, all hard data points to DCS being in poor state in current simulation of such systems. That being said.. it is a welcome news to read that there is a roadmap to improve the simulation. :thumbup:

<64C>Vati Su-25A (red)

<64C>Vati - MiG19

Correct of course. I listed _dual pulsed_ motors and not multi stage ones as what OP was describing falls in that catagory. :)

Most 'famous' are ASRAAM, Derby ER and PL15, PAC3 MSE... in works are MICA NG, Astra 2, etc.

1/ it is simple pragmatic choice. why waste loadout station for a weapon which has little to no use for 99.99% of a time. It is the same reason why passenger planes do not have ejection seats... 2/ there are already such a2a missiles which can fire 2nd stage at terminal intercept. Why was that not used much in the past is related to the sensor tech which did not even allow for rangers where such config would had mattered.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=391 66V2 is comparable to 68V5 (also close enough with my previous link in post above)... it states look up and look down ranges for fighter size target.. this is without getting into "sensitive" info :)

There is no (V)5, but one can calculate (V)9 which is better performer: https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/karte024.en.html