dundun92

This is how they work IRL, yes. Its done for aerodynamic reasons, e.g the X configuration would provide more upwards lift than the +. Also, at least IRL, the sparrow does hold the X, not a +:

yes

Id guess yes, and thats accounting for RAZBAM being RAZBAM

ehh not rly, 61nm vs 5m^2 (what it comes out to when you do the math) is pretty much what it is in-game rn. But your right, this (innacurate) estimation is still for the A, not PSP radar like we have in game anyway.

And if thats its captioned as, then its pretty clear where ED probably is sourcing their current F-15 radar range numbers. Incorrect Soviet estimations strike again I guess...

its almost as if... theres a heatblur F-14 subform to post F-14 related questions

according to an RuAF Su-35S pilot, its 3gs avaliable for an unspecified time. So its definitely not an Raero figure

Aight imma go start the meteor for F-16 thread...

So if im understanding right, once the missile goes active there's no sort of support in terms of helping it to reacquire, instead it has a lower notch gate value? And if you drop the lock before it goes active, it does not use this lowered notch gate value?

Im a bit confused. Does this mean that a missile that is supported only has higher resistance to notch when it initially goes active? Or is it more notch resistant for the entire TOF?

they dont do anything RN

No, youre dead set against the F-14/AIM-54 for some reason and the instant any minor bug appears you twist it into this story of HB buffing the AIM-54/F-14 into some OP monster for the sole purpose of ruining PvP "balance".

All the AIM-7s but the E have HOJ, at least the ED ones do per the .lua

F-16/18 do NOT do this anymore, in STT or TWS they give no warning until active

Stable was just a push of the latest OB, so yes

youre either not supporting to active or switching modes during the TOF; both of those cause lofted missiles to fly into space

Yes, but is there any evidence that it cannot carry and fire 8, regardless of how inadvisable it would be? The F-16 HARM issue is a completely different issue, this is a discussion of whether you can actually fire the weapon from the pylon; the F-18 issue your describing seems to be more of an advisory limitation, as in "you can drop them alright, but they may hit your jet". The correct solution for the F-18 issue wouldnt be to remove 8 JSOW, but rather make it where if you carry more than 4 theres a high chance of you getting hit by it. For the F-16 HARM issue, this is either the plane physically can fire 4, or it cant.

All I can say is that I have tried, and it does work, and rather well. What exactly is happening when you fly higher? Staying under 30k vs Vipers at 35-40k means you die anyway as well, as youve clearly experienced at this point. Unless your gonna get good at notching AMRAAMs. Even cruising in the low 30s/upper 20s and pop up to 35-40k to shoot is better than just staying in the mid 20s and expecting to beat a dude at 40k. Also, another thing to note, im mainly referring to being high when you shoot/before you shoot. Once you shoot, or generally when supporting missiles get low. I like to dive to about 20k after shooting while cranking about 30°, then once I hit 20k crank to gimbals. Staying high after shooting is the 2nd biggest mistake you can make here after not shooting from high enough.

You need to be flying higher. You can definitely take shots out to 30-35nm, but you need to be abovr 30k, and you need to pitch up about 20-30° before firing

Thats likely because of too short a shot range. When are you taking your shots?

your looking at the wrong file, that is the file for the old ED AIM-54 (and even that one is commented out so it does nothing). The HB AIM-54 is located in C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\CoreMods\aircraft\F14\Entry\Weapons.lua

All but i think 2-3 were vs Vipers, the rest were flankers, and no I was never low except when split Sing to defend, and even then I got back to altitude quickly. And TBH, I take 10 missiles because personally, I tend to have a good balance between fuel and missile usage with 10. When I take just 6 I run out of missiles well before fuel in airquake scanarios. If i were in say a SATAL scenario, or I had a wingman or two it would be different and id probably take 6. And if im to be completely honest, this wasnt a "high effort" kind of thing like I would describe a SATAL style 4v4/6v6 where your corrdinating group tactics, nor did it require any special tricks/exploits (I dont recall having to notch any missiles). It was pretty simply keeping SA, flying high (above 30-35k), taking lofted shots from ~35 miles to keep a good A-Pole, and defending at the MAR. The important thing is less how many people youre killing, but how well you avoid dying. Whether your missile hits him is out of your hands, thats up to his defense skills (granted you always strive to increase Pk and should never make it easy for him. But ultimately its still not in your hands whether it hits). But your staying alive is 100% in your hands, and is probably the most important skill in BVR. As long as you are maximizing shot Pk, and keeing SA, defending properly, avoiding dying, no matter how little kills you get, your a lot better at BVR than the guy that gets a bunch of kills and dies just as much. Kills ultimately simply aren't a good measure of BVR competence; how well you adhere to the principles and concepts of BVR is.

This kind of rhetoric isnt new, and happens at every new generation of A/C, and ultimately just fades away with time. They said the same thing about the F-14/15 after the conclusion of AIMVAL/ACEVAL, using its results to supposedly "prove" that high tech fighters were innefective and too expensive, and that we should ditch them in favor for F-5-Like dogfight optimized LWFs, like the F-20 that could, in their minds, do the job better and cheaper. In hindsight, I think we are all very glad we decided to push forwards with BVR technology rather that stay stuck in the WVR era. Going to wars such as the Gulf War vs opponents with WVR equipped aircraft lacking BVR armament... that would have been a very different outcome.

I have, I literally have gotten a 9 kill sortie in the F-18, and TBH I dont feel like digging up tons of tacviews to "prove" it. All I will say is that if you are having trouble defending "35K+ M1.5" AMRAAMs the problem is not the F-18, its your missile defense, simply being slightly exaggerated by the worse kinetics of the F-18. Also, theres probably a reason that Ive only seen one team in SATAL with no F-18s (GR, and its not like they really use the F-16 where it does best, high and fast).

which pretty much has nothing to do with F-16 vs F-18 capabilities, and more that F-18 pilots somehow think valley sneaking nonsense is how you counter F-16s (spoiler alert: it isnt). If you put competent pilots on both sides, id say its overall quite a level game