pauldy

so, the function of the numerical value "nn" beside "M(n)" that becomes Time to impact counter once a missile goes active, ..is not known? Oh well, i'll just ignore it for now and consider it insignificant... useless, nothing, dead weight, clutter, waste of avionics memory ... ;)

I think the Track while scan mode of the F-15 in Lock On yields an extra numerical value that has no function at all. If one would consider the last missile to have already gone active, thus "M(n)" becomes a counter for Time to impact. The number beside "M(n)", the "nn" previously known as the Time to impact counter now shows a numerical value that doesn't make sense. It reverts back to 30 seconds. Doesn't make sense to me, by the time you have pitbulled a missile. Any of the three timers should have lower starting values; be it Time to active for the next missile, time to impact or time to minimum range, because most likely your now nearer to your targets.. unless you have turned away and run.. Maybe the "30" seconds value has something to do with the M61 vulcan? i dunno.. Also i think, that all of the data for the last missile fired stays on the upper part of the VSD. On the HUD, it's on the lower left corner. Then the data for the current selected missile, is on the lower part of the VSD. On the HUD, it's on the lower right corner. To sum it up, I think it's a clutter data, like Crunch said, hope it gets addressed in FC 2.0 ^^ EDIT: Here's some screens to visualize even further. Note that by this time, my 1st launched AIM-120 had already gone active or pitbull. Anyway the confusions start when your missile/s goes active. EDIT2: By the way, i tried launching an AIM-120 in STT mode. The results were the same, an extra "30" second clutter data.

Yah, actually i first saw the "M15 31" readings in that tutorial Then i tried take a look at it myself in a quick mission, results were the same~ 15 seconds to active and 31 seconds to impact for what missile? even though i haven't launched another AIM-120 towards the Secondary target yet.. Maybe this is a data bit Ironhand forgot to explain? or it has something to do with the last launched missile that's already racing towards the Primary designated target? I dunno but it really adds to my confusion.. EDIT: Ok I tried it again and noticed something If you fire your 1st missile against your PDT, once the Time to active counter reaches zero, it then changes the value into Time To impact, hence, the now "pitbull" launched missile will hit the target in 15 seconds. e.g. after M0 (last launched AIM-120 now active) --> M15 = Time to impact Now the only thing the bugs me is the previously "Time to impact" counter. the one beside M(n). I noticed that when the last launched missile becomes active, the supposedly "Time to impact" counter reverts back to 30 seconds. e.g. M0 10 (last launched AIM-120 now active) then --> M15 30 ..30 seconds of what? and it doesn't match the M(x) reading that states the Time for the current missile selected to go active. Anyway i've made a TWS engagement track file against two IL-76s at high altitude.. to show what i'm talking about..

We know that at the upper part of the VSD in TWS radar mode, there are two values when using an AIM-120, The M(n) time for the last missile fired to become active or tracking a target on it's own, the Time to active counter. Then the nn (enter any numerical value) beside the Time to active counter, that tells us the Time for the last missile fired to hit the target, the Time to Impact counter. I'm just wondering about the given values of both counters after the last missile you launched already went active or pitbull, despite not launching another AIM-120 yet. "M15 31" 15 seconds to active and 31 seconds to impact for what? I remember another counter below the VSD, M(x) which counts the time to active for the current missile selected still attached to the pylon rail. but both M counters above and below the VSD don't match. So all in all, what's this M15 and 31 seconds?

I'd say this mod looks promising ^^

This F-15 Model + Flaming Cliffs 2.0 = absolute win

It would be really interesting if DCS comes up with a Fighter aircraft module. I believe it would be a very different experience~ Still wishing for DCS F-15, F/A-18 or the Flanker variants with lot's of letters :D

I'm guessing early 90s ^^

Shame that there's no weapons inventory management or something though ;) If there was a feature like that, combined with a multiplayer campaign mode, it could force players to make the shots using their best weapons count as much as possible.. Less incentive to spam weapons maybe.. :joystick:

If that's so, what will be the advantage of using the AIM-120B? Maybe it's cheaper or something? Back in my F/A-18 days i remembered that there were more AIM-7s than AIM-120s in the campaign inventory. Maybe FC 2.0 now includes weapons inventory in campaign missions and that there would be more AIM-120Bs available?

I see, i wonder how will the sustained and pure boosts be modeled in FC 2.0 Also the guidance systems, so does that mean the AIM-120B will have more range than the C variant but is more susceptible to counter measures?

If i read correctly, Flaming cliffs 2.0 will include the AIM-120B variant.. What's the difference between AIM-120B the AIM-120C variant? So in effect, US fighter aircraft will have 4 types of missiles at their disposal? AIM-9M, AIM-7M, AIM-120B and the AIM-120C On side note, i found a paint/skin for an AIM-9X in the cdds files of Lock on, shame it was not used lol.. lack of performance and seeker data on the missile perhaps?

I think some people here became personal.. name calling, labeling, taunting etc.. anyways, enough of that :noexpression: If the F-15 was mainly designed to be a BVR fighter then that's it.. There's nothing we can do about it.. Same way how the Flanker & the Fulcrum became excellent close in dogfighters.. That's why the Russian planes have GCI support and EOS sensors. ambush attacks against western fighters anyone? It's like saying Eagle users in Lock On are cowards because they stay up high and do their business at long range. (or that's how i understand one of the posts) I think it's quite counterintuitive to fight a Flanker in a dogfight whilst using an Eagle because "ideally" (or so a lot of people think..) the Su-27 series has edge in a dogfight.. or at least that what the public or de-classified sources, etc say. Though i still believe air combat is quite unpredictable.. Reminds me of Vietnam Dogfights... the MiGs had the edge over the Phantom.. yet the likes of Robin Olds and his colleagues managed to nail some MiGs in their dogfights.. probably because of tactics, talents, skill and luck.. I thought this was about emulating different aircraft with different design philosophies? If we all wanted equality maybe, we should just go play Ace Combat, HAWX or some sort of 3D air shooters... peace out ^^^

Please show us some credible evidence proving that the F-15 is no match against the Su-27 Flanker in a dogfight. (ACMI recordings, mock dogfight results, real life mission debriefings stated by pilots.. etc..) otherwise, you're just speculating..

I feel that Carlo Kopp would try to push the impossible even harder... pleas for exporting F-22s lol or else all countries relying only on F-35s will have their airforces annihilated..

My 1st kill was an Su-25T using an AIM-120 (though maybe it's kinda foul-not-counted..) The more real one would be my nailing of a MiG-29S using an AIM-120 without being killed.. though i think he's fated to be shot down since there were other aircraft from our side engaging him..

Well i guess Air Combat (or at least the lock on one) is like a cooked Chop Suey.. All the ingredients are there, but no two Chop suey dishes will ever look exactly the same.. no matter how similar the amount of ingredients are. That Snaking, did work once.. I once nailed an Su-33 online with an AIM-7 whilst i was snaking.. with very high-Gs. The Sea flanker fired an R-27ER at me and i was able to evade it somehow.. That engagement occurred in close ranges (NEZs) but at low altitude.... and we were almost on the same altitude so no SARH gets fooled by ground clutter or so.. I dunno, maybe he f*cked up with his Situational awareness, i was lucky... or both What i think (or rather learned..) of this all is that.. Players learn the basics.. Radar/Sensors operation, weapons, BFM, ACM, Missile defense, wingman management, etc.. Then apply them all accordingly based on the situation.. Anyway, I think i got the answers i wanted. at least i now know that the ALR-56/TEWS can somehow gauge the missile distances in-game.. Not that i'll only rely on it but i'll always keep that fact in mind should i get into a sticky situation.. :)

I see so it's somehow similar to an F-pole then. Thought it was some High g-force roll or something....

A noob question but.. what is a Crank Yoda? :) Sorry i'm practically clueless in Dogfight terminology..

So how do you evade SARH missiles then? Those last second high-g breaks seem to only work against Active Radar Missiles since RWRs can somehow gauge the missile's distance. Oh, I know a good technique.. Ctrl E E E or maybe just go home and call it quits.. (if the player still can..) :doh: :D

@ A.S: Please do tell why.

I must be doing the right path then. :) I do dive to lower Altitude to drag the threat missile to the thicker air and also to notch it.. I also try to maintain certain speeds to be able to generate enough high Gs against the missile. Although the "M" symbol going to the center of the TEWS is something i din knew.. I shall take that into consideration. Oh yah, a bit off topic but what are the radar gimbal limits of the flyables in game?

To ED Staff Will the AWACs logic somehow be change? Because right now, as some of us pointed, the AWACs usually saturates the player with verbal diarrhea :drunk: Too much information is being broadcast that the relevant messages will arrive too late for the player.. Hope you people somehow fix it anyways keep up the good work ~:)

I never knew the "M" icon could move closer to the center of the TEWS.. It's hardly noticeable anyway.. Maybe because the icons were too small and hard to read just like the HUD pitch ladders... I think Eagle Dynamics wants Eagle users to suffer... Joke~ peace! That aside complications also start when you encounter SARH missiles. As the threat Aircraft Icons don't move towards the center of the TEWS display. How do you people avoid Semi Actives? Btw what's a cork screw? and yah i haven't really been barell rolling against a missile. Also, attempting to notch a missile is also a good way to evade it right? The dive down to lower altitude while in beam of F-pole/A-pole..

For months.. err a year I've been using a working (half of the time something like that..) missile evasion in the LOMAC F-15. I dunno if this is really the best way but, when i know i'm being launched at, I try to do a "Zig-zag" series of manuevres under high Gs.. similar to that "Snaking evasion in the default training tracks." Usually works for Radar missiles but not much on IRs since they don't have launch warnings.. anyway it's another story.. I'm curious, How do the Eagle jocks of Lock On evade missiles? We don't have the distance measuring SPO-15 of the Russian planes so how do you people out manuevre a missile? There's no Missile evasion tracks for the F-15 anyway. (not even Landing tutorial~~) Hoping for Ironhand's sequel but maybe he'd continue it by the time Flamming Cliffs 2 is out..