dundun92

That AAMs had such a large RCS and were too easily detectable by radars, specifically AWACSs and the F-18 radar

The point is that if you manually loft a HOJ missile, it should instantly snap to straight PN and not keep lofting. The whole loft maneuver, as well as the Variable PN is predicated on knowing the range to the target. The SD-10, when manually lofted, does not go to pure PN, however. It uses normal Variable PN, pulling low Gs far away from the target. This creates a unrealistic psuedo-loft maneuver, and its unrealistic because theres no way for the SD-10 to get range info to VPN. And to the 2nd part, both missiles auto determine the best loft angle; however, manually pitching up does help both maintain energy and achieve a higher loft peak altitude

The ED team said it was a mistake, and fixed it. Wheres your proof of the "exact ranges and conditions" again? Im not the one to convince here, its you trying to convince ED to undo the bug they fixed

There are 4 AA-10 variants in game lol. The AA-10A (R-27R) and AA-10C (R-27ER) are SARH, AA-10B (R-27T) and AA-10D (R-27ET) are IR Im guessing it was either an ET, or a ER from the RWR blindspot

AIM-54s really shou;dnt be showing up on DL unless the F-14 is very close to the AWACS, the fact that they did so a few patches ago was a bug, and they fixed it

ED has said numerous times was have a (V)5 in our F-16, and thats what they are modeling.

Youve completely ignored, however, that the lofting manuever is TOF limited, and the SD-10 has a full 20s battery advantage over an AMRAAM. This allows lofted shots from much further away, as with the current missile drag modeling missiles can cruise basically at high altitude as long as the battery allows when lofting. Another note is that the SD-10s motor profile (longer burn time and greater total impulse) and heavier weight help it in the lofting phase more than the AMRAAM

The lua vales didnt change, no, but the actual in game effectiveness did, IDK what changed to cause it. And by recent I mean <1 month. I think it may have happened the same patch/patch before the AMRAAM got the chaff reword but im not fully sure

Actually, as of a few patches ago ( I dont remember which one), the CCM of the AIM-54 changed and was drastically increases to the point where chaffing it is borderline impossible/ You can still notch it (it will reacquire if you exit however), but chaff doesnt affect either the A or C much rn; not claiming that the way it was was realistic, just stating the current in game state.

That not quite correct; only the AIM-120, AIM-7, and SD-10 have a built in aiming error. The old API missiles do not have any built in error, any aiming errors are desync/inability of missile to manuever

The only source with that statement I can find with some quick searching is this, but its not referring to the AMRAAM, but an improved version of it (ERAAM) https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/bvraam.htm

Before the EOS bugfix, the instant a target went into the notch the lock would switch to EO killing the lock and causing the ER to go after whatever chaff happened to be in the air at that moment, rather than using the 4s memory and not insta going after chaff.

You can look at literally any of the AIM-120 complaint threads and see BNs comments, hes repeated it over and over again, its WIP and they are working on it. Heres just 1 of many, for example:

Are you just trolling at this point? You know very well that ED is aware and working on the AMRAAM INS issue, and that the AMRAAM is well capable of this IRL. And you legit need to stop twisting it into this "F-14 OP" meta. Theres nothing "weird" going on.

Heres the exact manual quote " Once the target has been acquired by the missile, terminating data link will have no impact on probability of kill (PK) unless the missile loses track." (emphasis mine). It will help the missile reacquire if it looses track from notching, chaff, ECM, or any combination of those. Sure, if the target doesnt do anything to break the track the DL does nothing, but we arent concerned with DL if the target is doing nothing to try and break the track.

How is any MRM supposed to loft without range information?

No. Supporting 120s does increase PK, there are post active DL updates. All relevant manuals (F-16 -34 to name 1) support this

Its the opposite what I've seen in MP. A player questioned the chaff resistence of the ER which seem was quite good after got killed twice by the ER lol. I also saw many good kills with ER in MP (GS server). The guy clearly doesnt know how to defend ERs (or any DCS missile for that matter) if you find it hard to notch + chaff. That being said, the ERs since the EOS bugfix have had a noticeable increase in Pk, and I really do like them

+1, noticed this in testing as well

In DCS its the same. Theres only 1 adjustable factor for DCS ECM, and thats the strength, and for both its the same.

Thats fair, but I doubt it would wait until the 8nm to start searching. Itd likely start searching from further out, and using the DL attempt to find the target as quickly as possible.

I think you and breakshot are talking about different things. You are correct is that once the target has a SNR acceptable enough to be picked up, there isnt gonna be some sort of significant acquisition delay. What breakshot is referring to is the fact that the DCS AIM-120 has a fixed detection range for all aspects. closures, and lookup/lookdown. There is no SNR simulation at all. The AIM-120 shouldnt pickup a hot lookup target at the exact same range as a cold lookdown target.

Your comparing the way the R-77 interacts with chaff to how the AIM-120 interacts with chaff, and seeing it different declaring that chaff has no effect. RN, vs the AMRAAM, chaff works more realistically than before; it does not "stick" to the chaff, it keeps on its autopilot course and reacquires very quickly. Thus, chaff alone will not decoy the AMRAAM permanently RN, and that has changed, and is more realistic than before. However, it does have uses. For example, spamming chaff while entering and turning through the notch effectively makes the notch gate bigger, as chaff dropped just outside the notch will cause a break lock (temporarily), and if you are turning into and enter the notch, it will not reacquire you. Thats just 1 example.

If you want a 4th gen decently modern HWF (F-15/J-11A) (F-16/18 are LWFs, and with the upcoming radar changes for the F-16 [already happened for F-18], youll find flying them as HWFs in BVR to be... not fun), or you like 80s A2G (A-10A), FC3 may be worth it. Also, if you like red jets, its your only option, at least until EDs 9.12A

Then why has ED enabled MP if they dont intend for people to use it? Otherwise its not the wrong game and all you're doing is telling people how to play the game based on your personal preferences.