Tiger-II

Depends. Rarely. I prefer carrying an SPJ.

So... fire the missile, then F6 until impact? That's slightly awkward.

The engine spool rate seems most affected by FPS. This is how I most notice low FPS - it's a bit slower to respond. Otherwise, it seems fine generally.

Most disturbingly, a child's voice actually resulted in greatest reaction to what was said, but was considered too ... questionable ... to use. Bitchin' Betty was chosen for her neutrality. It is no coincidence that her voice is as neutral/flat as it can be (it was modified to be so). It's female because most pilots are male, though I think they found a female voice causes a similar reaction in female pilots as well.

Hi, I replied to a post about low FPS with A2G RADAR, but have another issue. If you loadout with 2x C-802AKG and WMD7, the FPS is almost cut in half even if the relevent displays are not visible. This seems to be the case after arming, and not because of any specific systems action.

Huh.

I'm flying straight at the target, so relative laser is not moving. I nearly became a manned missile a few times. :thumbup:

In reality, the stand-off weapons aren't used because of cost, but even if they were dirt cheap, they'd still use dumb-bombs because an ADS would be developed to take out the stand-off weapons. This is already a problem for cruise missiles, so a glide-bomb doesn't stand a chance. If remote warfare actually worked, we'd be using it. Even UAVs get in close to the action. There are other considerations, too, such as the target not being where it was expected, or finding targets of opportunity. This comes down to intelligence and planning, but you can't replace eyes on target making real-time decisions.

I see low FPS carrying C-802AKG and TGP, whether their picture is displayed or not.

:lol: This is a sim. IRL I'd just launch nukes and call it done. :lol: I've no time for tyrants or dictators.

JF-17 "Growler II". :megalol:

@L0op8ack: Thanks!!

Damn it! Not being able to use the inner pylons for things is a PITA. I keep forgetting it can't carry rockets inboard anymore.

Huh! I thought it could, previously.

Perhaps, but plenty of aircraft carry jammers asymmetrically. I'm sure they wouldn't if it didn't work.

Thanks. That's why I always wait for sales. :thumbup:

Hi, I tried the Harrier during the free period, and now I'm a happy customer! I think the Harrier is still EA, but seems mostly functional. I noticed some of the MFD pages say "Classified" when selected. Is this serious or just another way of saying "Placeholder"? Does the aircraft have all the weapons it is expected to carry, or are more on the way? How complete are elements such as TGP? Thanks! :thumbup:

Speed is relative. The UK are predominantly worried about bombers, so intercepting those doesn't necessarily require something extremely fast. Fighter vs. fighter is a different proposition, hence the whole idea of escorts for heavy bombers. Harrier vs. Su-27 is going to end badly. Harrier was designed with a specific mission profile in mind: numerous, close to the FLOT, ready to strike armor and support vehicles at a moments notice from temporary operating bases hidden in forests and other improvised operating bases with easy access from the regular road network to supply logistics. Since then, its role expanded to self-defence air-to-air and SEAD capability, and then someone thought "if we stick in a RADAR in there we can do BVR as well". It was never intended to do much more, which is why the VSTOL capability appears senseless now because the aircraft weight has only gone in one direction. It was supposed to fly short range missions, with quick-turnaround for weapons and fuel, and head out again. Hiding in forests and other bases was a means to defend against fighters. They'd need to locate the base and strafe it/bomb it, which meant getting within our air-defence capability.

THANK YOU!!!

Hi, I seem unable to put SPJ on a wing? DL pod and WMD7 are fine.

I've actually been trying to take ground-pounding seriously (stand-off weapons make me lazy). The basic problem with the BRMs seems to be they fly exaggerated oval/circle around the target. In the early releases they flew a tight spiral, hardly leaving the TGP FoV. Now, they are so wild, they hardly appear in the TGP view at all, and spiral so widely they miss the target about 2/3 of the time, maybe 3/4 the time. They are about useless against anything the size of a tank or smaller. Ka-50 doesn't seem to suffer this problem, so there is something going on with Jeff (offset of missile to laser?). Also, this is with TGP on the wing, not centerline... Hmm... time for some more testing...

I couldn't get STT at all. It wouldn't enter the mode... I'm thinking it might be related. Interesting about chaff, but does E-3A drop chaff? I'll check the ME. Also, the E-3A was set not to respond, so that should prevent it dropping chaff.

:lol::lol::lol: Uhh... yeah. :music_whistling::lol::thumbup:

This was the same flight, now in pursuit at 30 NM. Speed is much higher now at launch at Mach 1.40. The missile does not fly lead pursuit, instead doing what the first missile did which was fly straight ahead. It then went active (or so it seems) and acquired the target as it was within the search area of the missile seeker. The missile made a hard turn to the right and proceeded to lead the target all the way to impact.

Hi, I'm not sure which one is the issue here - the SD-10 or the RADAR. Single player. I'm shooting against an E-3A that will not take evading action if fired upon. It is flying at 32000 ft at Mach 0.78. Please observe the following closely: * RADAR shows the target off the nose, beaming to the right * HSD shows the LOCKED target ~20 degrees to the left * DATALINK shows the target off the nose It appears the RADAR has locked an incorrect/invalid target behind the real aircraft position, despite the RADAR picture looking correct. As you can see, this missile did not track at all. Please see post 2 for a second round of findings.