AeriaGloria

I’ll send them, but it isn’t much. One interesting way I believe Kh-25/29 do it is by flying level, then when target is 6 degrees below horizon the missile switches to proportional guidance which gives it a curve/slide into the target

If you manually loft one missile and fire the other one straight, they will impact at roughly the same time So manual lofting does not improve time to impact, but it does improve energy at impact The limit here is the 60 second turbogenerator. At about 50-70 km for 27R and 70-90 km for 27ER, you will hit this limit wether you loft or not It seems to me that Soviet Fox 1 design theory centered around having your missile beat the opponents missile in speed, so that their missile loses support before it can reach you. Having a straight trajectory maximizes this, as lofting is using rocket power to gain altitude and fly slower, and thus be more efficient. So I think even if the Soviets were quite aware of lofting, they might’ve seen it as having little benefit, maybe detrimental, and adding additional complexity in deciding how to activate it and such I have also found mention in AIM-7F documents of manually lofting it and its benefits, perhaps the Soviets were aware of this perhaps not I have also learned from DCS to never underestimate what the Soviets might leave out or ignore in the name of simplicity or tradition

Why wouldn’t it be correct? The G load bias should limit maneuvering based on remaining TOF right? But then again I’ve tried to translate everything about the R-27 but haven’t heard of this main beam avoidance maneuver, but of course things are lost in translation I see it more as bringing it to same standard as AIM-7/120 by bringing it to new API, modeling the control surfaces, AOA, inertia/dynamic stability. Changing CG, modeling motor plume drag reduction. AIM-7/120 have all these things, and many air to ground missiles since

Yes that makes sense to me, in regards to “original” launch conditions. But its limitations also bring me to how some sources have said it refers to “power limit,” as ultimately no matter what happens, it can’t fly longer then 60 seconds and the pilot can be 100% sure it’s dead

I have done this before, but I often find it only works on new or green pilots. An experience pilot that has fought many R-27 will know when a launch is outside MAR. For this reason, if I choose to “scare” someone, I always try to fire just below max range while lofting 20-30 degrees. This way my missile will actually hit if they think I fired outside range and go straight, and if experienced will still have to dodge it in some way or fire early themselves. Just like any psychological game, it can work on some people yes. But you can train to be “immune” to it My favorite way to do this was to fire a R-77 from J-11. That way enemy might think I fired R-27, and when it gets close enough to be active they might think I still have them locked when I might actually be radar off or targeting someone else Which brings me to another part of this tactic, you need missiles to spare. Of which MiG-29 only gets two BVR missiles. This makes me even more hesitant to use it on 29, whereas on 27/33/J-11 I might take the bet that I’m flying against someone who will freak out about a R-27 shot at 50-70 km. With how MiG-29 radar often barely has the range to fully make use of R-27ER, I again only find this tactic really useful in Flanker against less experienced opponents

To me it’s more about, it can calculate parameters before missile launch. But after a missile launch occurred and the target maneuvers, I would think calculating that and having to estimate how far the missile has traveled and at what speed, would at the very least introduce some amount of increasing error. All the proportional navigation is done in the missile, but this would be vital information to estimate missile position after target maneuvers

My biggest question is, for what purpose are you firing a missile beyond its max range?

Yes, but we aren’t talking about only in look up. And it is only after 3.5 degrees of look up that the notch turns off, something we have to guess I can see why the designers would see 60 second timer as useful. So even if target goes cold at high altitude, you know when missile is truly dead and can abandon it. I doubt the TTI would be perfectly accurate as target maneuvers and estimated missile position might not be perfect

IRL, you should get IFF when using radar ranging. Which would only happen 8 seconds after IRST lock outside laser range in FC3, you can always blip radar on for a second to get IFF when you have IRST lock, and if you do it fast enough their RWR Won’t see it. Does that not work for you?

1. IRL, you would just know from switch position. It is usually used for missile jettison, very rare 2. If you are out of launch conditions, it may become obvious. Say if you switch to R-73/60 far away beyond Max range/lock. 3. in STT, bottom left corner, you have IFF indication “A” for enemy, “AF” for friendly. I think if it as “Attack” or “A Friend” Is your question about flaming cliffs module? It has its own section. This is for full fidelity, and would tell you via the switch position

Su-27/33 and MiG-29 have exact same notch speed. While MiG-29 radar is very poor in rear aspect (18-30 km), it will lose targets in notch equally And about the timer, we have these other mentions of it being the 60 second timer for the whole generator For example, if it is really TTI, what is this command based on? If it is based only on TOF given to missile before launch, it will be too long or short depending on target managers. Does compete calculate change in TTI as target maneuvers? I find this hard to believe, so I really think it is 60 second timer, but if it was true TTI with real time post launch calculation, that would be immensely awesome

This guys SFM mod is very well researched and would help a lot. I believe he’s fine if ED uses or modifies it. If the gun data was changed using his info that would be awesome to, but I dream maybe

Are we really sure it’s time to impact? Seemed to me, it was merely a 60s countdown to tell you when R-27 is 100% dead

Su-27SK documents show same thing. Nothing to do with SM

Really what I was trying to say was, the same way “MiG-29A” isn’t its real name for 9.12 model, “Su-25A” isn’t the name of the first frogfoot. This is merely western conventions being applied. I would still of course love the module, but staying with “A” suffix for full fidelity, is a bit odd

Su-25A goes brrrrrrr

The Mi-8 manual is basically the blueprint. Like that manual you will likely get a short introduction of its history and development. Followed by brief specifications and then a detailed description of the design and equipment including specifications for all components and detailed cockpit explanation Only after these sections, will there likely be a section start up, taxi, takeoff, landing, other procedures. Then weapons procedures and tables likely last.

Nope, just waiting, if there’s any procedures or technical information you want I can help you out

And how is the pilot notified of this bingo state?

No, but most of it will be applicable to 9-12/9-12A. Any information on the Gardeniya jammer installation is welcome as also. Other then Gardeniya and fuel hump, maybe some extra weapons in the FCS, I wouldn’t expect any differences from late 9-12/9-12A

I can’t watch track right now. But rockets won’t work when loaded with GUV pods. If you put GUV on four main pylons, only other GUV can work on other of the 4 main pylons In addition, the rocket “armed” lights that turn on from pressing button above it, are only for setting the firing order to tube 1. So it will always go out when you press trigger no matter what

Yes, it’s started electrically, but that doesn’t change that pilot button is only wired to one of three cartridges/dispensers. There are 3 ASO-2V cartridges on each side. And on the ASO-2V panel in CPG seat, there is a 3 way selector to choose what cartridge is used by CPG I am not trying to complicate things. I am only saying that if someone tried the bind, and it didnt work, this is a reason . That in multi crew it’s simulated that pilot can only control 1 of the 3 dispensers/cartridges on each side, you use up first cartridge, and pilot flare button will do nothing after that. With Petrovich, when you press the button and first cartridge is empty, Petro will automatically dispense flares from any remaining cartridge as if you had told Petrovich to do it and Petro does it instantly.

If this Doesn't work for you, it may be because you are flying multi crew. In reality, Pilot button only launches flares from cartridge 1. Only CPG can launch flares from all 3 cartridges. With Petrovich, it is programmed that if you press button and cartridge 1 is empty, Petro automatically hits cartridge 2 or 3. When I have real CPG, I try to tell to switch to cartridge 2, that way only pilot uses cartridge 1.

Well you can choose to not have trim also trim pedals if you like. You have it on “pedal deflection” which is the default I talked about, where you have 9% around center where heading hold is on and might fight with your turns Some people like it, I don’t because why have something barely useful mess with your turns, but different strokes for different folks. Also choice if you want instant or return to center trim, but I’m sure you know that and it’s a slightly separate topic

I have a whole guide on weapons and autopilot if you like As Miki said, they enable or disable heading hold, and when pressed and heading hold disabled will still dampen yaw movement and help you maneuver more smoothly. But exactly how it works in DCS depends on settings Make sure “pedal auto move” is off, as when on it’ll make the heading hold trim your pedals when it runs out of its 18% authority. By default, microswitch is “pressed” when you move pedals 9% from center, but you often need less then 9% pedal to turn, so it causes heading hold to fight your turns You can set it to be full manual and only work using the microswitch binds, but the microswitch binds will still work by default to override what your pedals are doing. In real life, the microswitch is pressed 98-99% of the time, the pilot has to deliberately remove feet from pedals or only push with their heel. The only reason I care about it so much, is because when microswitch is pressed and instead of heading hold you get a dampening/stabilization mode, and that stabilization mode is awesome, even if it’s subtle and hard to tell it’s there. But for me, every little bit helps, and it’s realistic to boot. That being said, unless you looked closely, you probably wouldn’t have easy time noticing the Yaw dampening/stabilization mode My guide will have all the info about the settings and what they do if you go straight to the Yaw AP section