FoxAlfa

Settle down, if you can't say anything constructive it is always more polite to be quiet then troll by trying to start argument which tech is better. That doesn't resolve anything. Again, AIM54 is SARH missile, not command guidance, AIM54 can require the target with AWG9 help but here the problem is that is this was the case that AWG9 was sending correction, the missile would guide ALL the time toward the target and not suddenly wake up and decide to make a sudden turn. Again you said it yourself "quickly require it" , quickly is the key, if time passes, the math for requiring get a whole more complex and I am not talking about steering cues, I am talking about wave analysis... what is happening here in all is equal to mid air target change, which is you must admit a bit optimistic for the 60's tech...

I love the Tomcat and the Heatblur did an amazing job and it is still early access, but yeah Phoenix will probably need some tweaks since performance is a bit enthusiastic in some regimes...

Because they are damned if they do damned if they don't... we have too many critics, and not enough grateful people in this community

Great work on MiG-19, I am loving it!. Just one request, now when pressed the wheel brake acts instantly and fully, can we have it increase the pressure over half a second or second as it does in the MiG-15 and the MiG-21? It will make it more realistic since the system needs time to build up the pressure and also it will make taxing much less jolting experience.

Hello Chizh, Thank you for the comment, I do agree that performance is close to the diagrams. I was referring and probably not being clear, I do apologize, but can we get then the correction for the Lethal range for R-27R (calculation or missile performance I can't tell from this end), since it is lower than the R-27T which has lower aerodynamic performance.

ED, can we finely get an update for the R-27 family, it is awfully undermodeled in DCS as is...

According to Wags interview by Alert5podcast, ED can't do Fulcrum due to the main studio being in Russia, but that doesn't prevent a third party for doing it.... so Heatblur Fulcrum pretty pretty please!!! :D :D :D

F-8, WOOOHOOO!!!! Excellent news!!!

+1

Generally, I don't find the MiG-29 radar range lacking, having the difference between A and C would be good but I feel some other stuff MiG-29 radar implementation is lacking. First it has a lot degraded performance in MP, there is a bug that the target just blinks and disappears, I once managed to put the TDC (Strob) on it in TWS and it followed basically an invisible target on HUD. Other stuff also like dropping a higher non-notching target at less then 20km for no reason, also PPS and ZPS basically not able to pick the target if it is in different aspect no matter how close it is, etc... Also, I feel that radar parameters complete reset with every switch on or off or mod change is a major weakness, since it takes a few seconds for the radar to build up the picture again, in real life the switches are hard set and settings are kept. So for sure, the FC3 radars could use better implementation. I feel that F-15 and Sukhoi's fix that by shear Radar power, but on the MiG such issues are much more pronounced

Well with the D/L improvements done for the Hornet, I hope we will finally get buddy D/L for the Flanker in MP. Also and getting the D/L info on the HUD Fulcrum would be also great especially since it was a core part of how the plane was intended to be used.

Agreed, I would love more complex red air! It also has a lot of gauge community with the MiG-29A, so if it ever gets allowed it would benefit the development there too

Well, keep in mind that Soviet AD was very highly integrated and had good coverage of potential hotspots, but again we can discuss the performance till the end of time but wouldn't resolve anything. The point is that even periodic updates of the target, bearing (steering cue), alt and range on the HUD would give the pilot more information that he has now. Also if someone can clarify how does the ID mark work it would be much appreciated. Getting per example DL info on HUD of the closest enemy if the enemy is spotted by the EWR or AWACS would be very beneficial and get us closer to the 'designed' actual use of MiG-29. Voice can only get you so far.

I guess he is referring the NPO Energomash RD-180 used in Atlas Rockets, but its getting a bit off-topic.

Yes, please, I need my sweet Nine-teen for the Valentine... hm... that sounded wrong :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hello, Technically the MiG-29 HUD did display datalink data in a HUD mode we are missing, the manual has a clear difference between "instrumental" guidance and "voice" guidance. The data is for the single target ONLY as far as I can tell. Here is the picture of it: The main difference is: 10 - Data linked Speed 1 - Data linked the Altitude of the target 8 - ID mark 4 - Guidance circle from the control - Clear range arrow This display is for the non-locked target. The biggest thing that I am not sure how it works is the 8, ID mark it is only present in instrument guidance HUD mode (to be clear it is not the IFF mark) and I am not sure if the radar needs to pick up the target or it is always present there as a point where to expect the target, and I feel that makes a lot of difference, again I don't know. What ED could add is that when you put TDC over the target and the target is picked up by an EWR to get the clear Altitude and Range information without locking. The speed and the steering circle are vague in the manual since I think they are assigned by the controller.

I wrote to Chizh, he said that it looks like a bug and said they will check. The most simple thing is R-27ET and R-27T engagement envelops out range the R-27ER and R-27R, which simply isn't possible since the T variants have a bigger drag due to a round nose.

Did you guys bother to check the M3 Bug tracker before asking M3 to comment? https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.io/view.php?id=51

Hello ED, Excellent work on the Hornet... it becoming better and better with each successive update! One small request, can we get the ability to preprogram the CM programs in the special options menu like we will be getting for the JF-17? It really tenues to set them up with each takeoff in the Multiplayer... like this? Thank you again!

I do agree that the chaff should have a much bigger effect if you are cold and the missile is tail chasing you... now it is percent based... but flying through clouds of chaff can't be doing wonders for target detection...

We need a full-fidelity MiG-29 if you ask me, but we are not getting that soon...

Yes it is :)

Unfortunately no, it is more like mental algorithm using boolean, maneuvering true or false... subtract -2 if below 4000m...

When based on the Yugoslav manual they are referenced three times or so, first on the HUD diagram marked as Dd max1 and Dd max2 and later in the table 10a: It says that pilot should fire on the first mark if the target is not maneuvering and on the second if the target is maneuvering if above 4000m and (first mark - 2 km) and (the second - 2km) below 4000m. the third time in the text it says the pilot should fire the first r-27r on the first mark and the second on the second taking in account target maneuvering and then perform the exit maneuver. And based on a lot of tests plus 150 hours+ on Blue Flag and the roughly same amount of kills in past few months in a MiG-29, I don't think I ever scored a kill on maneuvering target if I fired before the Dd max2 (aka ' lethal' range), that is why I am taking it to be good calculated.

I completely agree with you on the variable PN, it would increase the 'lethal' range without impacting the 'non-maneuvering' range which seam consistent with the video. Another argument for 'variable PN' is that it was used on AIM-7E, which Soviets got and copied in 1968 as K-25, which in the tests got outperformed by the R-23... but the lessons from its development were used in the R-27 development. And with the increased lethal range/less energy bleed of the R-27, there would be enough performance difference between the R-27 and R-73 to warrant two missiles.