FoxAlfa

Not to be rude, but if we have MIT professor, an ex-Assistant for Weapons Technology in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, after analysing all the evidence, testifying under oath in front of US congress that the effective interceptions of missiles were minimal, as well as well know Israeli dissatisfaction with its performance of the sistem actual built to perform such interceptions. And on the other hand, we have sistem in our simulation of similar vintage, preforming 100% effective interceptions on much smaller, less pretictable and maneuvering target, I find that unusual ...

I know this gif was floating on the net, I am not sure of the author. https://imgur.com/OX30rhV We are talking about 20 nm amraam 100% intercepts Although picking up missiles on radar is a thing RL, regardless I have my concerns regarding this ... The pick-up range would be extremely small due to small RCS, TWS would also probably disregard track due to big position changes ... also, for interception of maneuvering AAMs if we are talking 90's the fusing is also the big issue .... there are well documented issues with patriot interceptions during Gulf War with fusing too late or not doing any damage due warhead construction ... and we are talking about Truck sizes missiles on ballistic trajectory, not small super bikes constantly maneuvering in the sky. https://web.archive.org/web/20021228134420/http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1992_h/h920407p.htm

I agree, the issue it is that the Fulcrum and Flanker are penalised for having EO instead of performing better. Also, the real-life planes have ability to swich EO support off as well a flood mode if lock is lost. So not turning off the radar would be a good start.

this +1, thank you so much and please just this last one!

+1

I think there is a misunderstanding ... I am not talking about missile labels (icons) in the 3d world, I am talking about visibility of the missiles in the F10 view. I currently it is not possible to turn off missiles not to show ... its ether full 'fog of war' or 'none / everything visible'.

Can we get a server option for Combined Arms to turn-off Missile visibility in F10? CA is often used for GCI in many servers, but ability to see missiles ruins the immersion. P.S. Variably/Setable refresh rate would be nice too, but I can image that is too much to ask.

A bit of shameless self-promotion.... I did a Blue-Green Iranian skin for MiG-29 while a ago... I hope you like it. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3313772/

Agreed

I am aware, but feel the effort for that is unlikely to be put in for FC3 ...range change must be a variable somewhere so substancial smaller effort. I would also like autolock disable buttor for Flanker but feel that is also unlikely.

Any new information or timeline for the EO / Chaff bug, also increase of min range for LOFT of Aim-7 (5nm to 13nm) on Eagle?

Not at longer ranges we were discussing

And Aim-54 targeted big non manuvrable bombers, not fighters... different RCS, flight profile, possible defence etc....

First, I do agree CFD are not the silver built to solve everything. But if the CFDs are done the same way for all missiles, they do provide a good foundation and baseline to compare the models, since the same approximate laws of simulation are applied to all the models equally. Unfortunately, here the time is the issue since if they are years apart it is hard to do it exactly the same way.

In my humble opinion, and I expect many will disagree, I actually find the aero of Aim-7, Aim-120, and R-27's quite near what I would expect. I don't think a full CFD will bring any significant changes to the R-27's (but I could be wrong). I think now the effort should be on guidance/seeker performance both for Aim-120 (instant pick up, seeker antenna power) and R-27 (chaff/EO bug) etc. And of course, R-77 needs a full overhaul. Apart from that as other stuff modeling improves (less reliable TWS, RWRs, ECMs, CMs, etc) we will get closer to RL balance and performance.

Exactly

Not exactly, to quote a guy who fired them and got a kill with them in combat, and to quote him "They're not hittles, they're missiles" ..... and their hit rate is around 60% precent according from him...

You have to have flaps up for it to work. Real life aircraft limitation.

True, it got fixed

Issue still present in 2.7 and quite annoying. Axis act digitally with only min and max, without anything in between. MiG19controls.trk

This is exactly the EO/-->Chaff bug<-- we are talking about that is the main issue now

I am talking about R-27ER, although speed is lower, overall l energy retention is better down the range. Dragster got replaced by a Race car, and yes, the quarter mile speed is lower but overall performance is better since any target with SA is going around racetrack and not down the drag stripe. RWR matters for all, not only active missiles. Current DCS RWR are too exact in angle, never misidentify, don't have false targets, don't have saturation, don't have masking, don't lose sensitivity with range, aren't affected by jamming, perfectly detect launches, etc. But hopeful this will also improve with time. Currently this all gives a lot of time and SA to defeat the missiles. This is exactly the EO/Chaff bug we are talking about that is the main issue now, so here we agree. That is the chaff part. And I would like to believe it is high priority for ED to fix.

Yeah, I find missile dynamic much better now, but chaff / ols bug is really felt. hopeful ED can delay EO take over once mem expires, that should reduce it quite a bit. Other thing that is also influencing its performance is too exact RWR, but that will hopeful improve in the future

It's not that Hornet radar is not weak now, it's that Viper radar needs to adjusted, and hopeful soon since it is hurting Muliplayer since Viper lacks lot of its limitations. If you need confirmation just got to Real Life fighter pilots memes about the Viper, here are two of my favorite: and And since us VIRPILs know better, they have a meme about us too:

Similar reliability can be applied to R-27 launch detection at higher range, since DL for it is projected by side lobes which are much weaker signal by default then main lobe stuff... All in all, all RWR leave a lot to be desired in DCS.... they are too perfect in range estimation, identification, target separation, clutter and saturation elimination, angle separation, jammer noise elimination, etc.... but hopeful ED will get to spend more time on them in the future.... getting them on the level of HB Tomcat would be great start.