Max1mus

Crank and dive. Do an initial rollover after shooting, point the aircraft and then stay wings level as you dive. That will help with chaff rejection of the R-27, it has to do with the ground clutter supression. Make sure it is not a shallow dive, but a hard one at maximum gimbals in full burner, to the deck. The indications in the HUD will help you with not exceeding the radar gimbals. Unfortunately, with how many tools the flanker has, there are too many opportunities to make mistakes. This starts with the loadout selection on the ground. To this day, way too many people equip their plane with insanely stupid loadouts like 4 R-77 and 2 R-27ET. The advantage of the AMRAAM bus is that there is only one weapon, and the box of tools is smaller. So even the most inexperienced pilot is more likely to choose the correct loadout, start at high altitude, scan the airspace.

A 1v2 inside enemy missile NEZ is a very bad position, no matter what you are flying. Also be careful when you use the word "merge". The fight continues even within 10 kilometers, BVR missiles will easily work from as close as a few hundred meters. But either way, going from guaranteed defeat to "stalemate" is quite an improvement. 120Cs and link16 are 2000s equipment, the DCS flankers are non modernized and shine in a 1990s environment. Obviously youre at a disadvantage. But there is nothing else you can do. Against excellent pilots, you will need either an equal number of modernized Flankers (Su-30MKI, MK2), or a superior number of our DCS variants. In short, its still harder to beat Su-27s using these sorts of tactics than ones hiding in the mountains with OLS. For the latter, you simply climb and shoot them until theyre dead. And for those tactics, loadouts with more than 2 R-27ET are not viable. Especially given how in DCS, it will refuse to lock a hot F-16 well within 10 kilometers.

No. For running targets, use R-27ER. you can add an ET on top, but the ET alone not only lacks behind in range, but also allows the target to pop 2 flares and recommit.

2 R-27ETs is plenty and once you get more comfortable with the flanker, you will see that 2 of them is even too much. For fighting NATO aircraft, i like 1 R-77 1 R-27ET 4 R-27ER when in a group, or 2 R-77 1 R-27ET and 3 R-27ER when alone. Try to find methods that dont force you into the mountains. Once you start cockroaching, youre of little more use than a MiG-21, and a high flying opponent will pick you up regardless. Shoot R-27ER to push unwanted people off and then surprise unaware bandits with sub 10 kilometer R-27ER+R-27ETs. Avoid relying on R-27ET alone since 2 flares and going out of burner, or simply popping flares preventively will entirely nullify that threat. Plus, its a large smoke plume that shouts: "Im here, please kill me"

There will not be a CFD before ED releases the soviet MiG to the game. Whatever it takes to get the highest profit margin. It could be many years until then.

Not a single one said that. Apart from the video Foxalpha posted, which was recalling a situation against aircraft with low amounts of countermeasures and no jammers, the pilots involved in red flag mention how AIM-120s will miss even at close distances, allowing indian MiG-21 and Su-30 to "get to the merge". Find one source from an SME or documents that support the thesis that AIM-120B and C5 should outrange R-27ER. You named one CFD study by ED, where there is an economical bias (better missile=happier customers, mostly NATO aircraft users) and one study by a gamer which does not attempt to hide his biases at all. One of the things motivating him to publish his few page long PDF file was because he noticed that AIM-120s in Multiplayer were not getting kills outside of a few miles when he thought the real one had "a 100 mile range". That whole sentence is a quote from his podcast. I dont mind overperforming missiles. But then all missiles need to overperform, not just one.

В DCS да, 120B тоже. Реальные летчики Ф-15 и все експерты говорят другое. Не один говорит что АМРААМ-Б и С должен иметь больше.

Why not a Su-30MK2? Its pretty much the same as the MKK, except with a slightly improved radar (N001VE->N001VEP) and additional PL-12. And if its an MKK, is it possible to hve both chinese and russian weapons on it? The JF-17 is also just a mix of Block 1 and Block2. The MK2 is simply a block 2 variant of the MKK.

Any implementation is needed. None is unacceptable, given that Heatblur gave the F-14 a cheat implementation of ECM, that abuses the jammer mechanics in DCS by turning itself on and off every 1-2 seconds. This makes tracking it with a missile not improbable, but entirely impossible. This has been the case for 2 years now, and the implementation promised to me on these forums is nowhere to be found. Looks like there is no interest from HB, i will adress ED instead.

I asked about this almost 2 years ago, but now ED is implementing jamming effects on their F-18 and F-16 radars, and reworking INS of its missiles. When will you add the possibility to defeat the AWG-9 with ECM at long ranges? The F-14 jammer (with it turning itself on/off in extremely short intervals) has the aircraft 100% immune to any SAM or missile from Soviet, RuAf and PLAAF fighters above around 25 miles. Note, the much more modern F-18 and its jammer are nowhere near this capable, and using them affects their own radar. Meanwhile the AWG-9 can track a fighter sized target from more than 90 nautical miles, almost 4 times that distance. Heatblur said that this is planned. You have announced a new module, so i assume you consider the F-14 nearly fully finished. Can we expect this to be adressed very soon?

Missiles going for chaff is hardly a bug. ED is maintaining a relative effectiveness, where they want missiles of newer generations to be more resistant to non-kinematic defeat than missiles of older generations. Any change to R-27ER will benefit AIM-120 twice and thrice as much. ED tests mostly against AI, which is programmed to break their own missiles lock on purpose (im not joking, AI Su-27 will do that) and will intentionally deploy countermeasures slower than any human player. On top of this, most of the ones testing it are casual players. This means that whatever is released with a patch, will be much different from what effectiveness the developers really want. On top of this, i think what is most likely to happen is not better and deeper simulation of jamming and chaff, but simply more randomness. ED added random aiming errors for missiles already, where they might miss with no input from the defending target. On top of this, if only 3 missiles are reworked, the other ones will stay the same for a very long time. It should go without saying why that is unacceptable in an environment with dozens of radar guided missiles. It adds pure Video Game Meta situations to the simulator, where for example launching a SAM, AIM-54C or R-77 (current modelling: jammer off, fly slow and chaff a lot to defeat) and an AIM-120B (possible modelling: jammer on, fly fast, smartly placed chaff) at the same time from exactly the same position will get the target killed to one of the two, even if both have an almost identical seeker.

Seperate the R-27R and R-27ER update. The update of the R-27R actually significantly improved the missile, comparable to what ED did to the AIM-120 last year. In the fight between AIM-7 and R-27R/T, you will find russian planes at least equal, if not even at a bit of an advantage in DCS. Of course, in such an 1980s scenario, many soviet fighters would still be old inferior MiG-29A and MiG-23/MiG-21. The update of the R-27ER however is only a tradeoff. The traditional strength of R-27E in DCS was the high speed and acceleration at the no-run-zone. It lost a lot of this advantage, and is now even outsped by AIM-120 under certain conditions. On top of this, the slower acceleration gives more time to perform defensive maneuvers. The range at low altitudes however did not increase, it may have even slightly decreased. The thing gained is a bit of extra range at high altitude. But R-27ER/ET are still at a big disadvantage there, more so than in 2019. Does this mean the missile is the same as before, or slightly worse? You can argue either of these points. Too exact RWR only matters for active missiles, and this OLS stuff almost does not matter at all. Our group ran a lot of tests (which we shared here a while ago) where we learned that even without the radar transitioning to OLS, R-27ER will be defeated to chaff on a target passing the notch for one second. The only difference is that there is a slight chance (way less than 10%) that it may track. As for youtube videos and hoggit post, you will not find any objective info there on DCS missiles and effective tactics to use in DCS World. Just ignore them. The channel posted further above stated in an earlier video, that R-27ER has better chaff rejection than the AIM-120C. You be the judge.

Этот "баг" существует так же для всех других ракет. Если вы снижаете эффективность диполь, пожалуйста сделаете это для всех.

Надеюсь что это тоже будет быстро сделано для всех других ракет. Если против одну ракету с тоже самый технологии надо медленно летать, а против другую быстро, это просто полная катастрофа.

Bignewy говорил о новым изменением помехазащиты, в этот раз для ракет "AIM-120, AIM-7 и тоже R-27ER" (Р-77?). Как это будет выглядить? На близкой дальности какой тип защиты будет более эффективным чем сейчас, какой меньше?

Notching does not work against the sky in DCS. You need to be in a lookdown situation. Chaff works against the sky, though much worse, requiring very slow speeds. That is, against air to air missiles and radars. SAMs can be notched at any altitude.

I would argue that the anti-ship and maybe even anti-radar abilities of MKK are better than the strike eagles. At Air to Air in a 2000s setup, without PL-12, it will be either slightly inferior or significantly inferior, depending on how much better R-27 performs with the MKK radar when compared to the current DCS flankers. With PL-12, it will be either on par with or even superior to the strike eagle in Air to Air. All this considered, MKK would range anywhere from very nice to AWESOME, either way its worth it, especially since no one else is moving a finger.

Dont be scared to dream a little bigger. DCS and the whole combat flight sim market has been waiting for a modern redfor fighter for at least a decade. You releasing a satisfying one would put you on a level that no other developer could hope to achieve. By releasing even a slightly modernized SU-30, you wouldnt just provide one of the most (if not the most) eagerly awaited modules in DCS, but you would also save the sim itself by providing all these new modern BLUFOR modules something to fight against, both in Multi- and Singleplayer. Think about the long term advantages of this. EDs F-18 was just the beginning, what followed was a rush of nearly every single western fourth gen getting announced. The Flanker, Fulcrum and Foxhound family is even bigger.

Title says it. AI Su-27 will intentionally drop the lock on maneuvering targets, without any notch, chaff or ECM involved. Well within perfect killing conditions AI_Flanker_Breaks_Lock.trk The fact that they are all soviet variants with severely inferior missiles already makes them bad enough, this bug just nails the coffin shut. Until this is fixed, my recommendation to singleplayer pilots fighting OPFOR: If you fail at the task of just flying straight at them and shooting them with missiles and somehow end up being chased: just flare and do a barrel roll, maybe go low. You will be entirely invincible to their missiles.

Title says it. AI Su-27 will intentionally drop the lock on maneuvering targets, without any notch, chaff or ECM involved. Well within perfect killing conditions AI_Flanker_Breaks_Lock.trk Until this is fixed, my recommendation to singleplayer pilots fighting OPFOR: If you fail at the taskJust flare and do a barrel roll, maybe go low. You will be entirely invincible to their missiles.

Long range performance only really got better at high to very high altitudes. Down low its either the same or worse, against a maneuvering target certainly worse for the reasons Blackpixxel described. I note that the AIM-120, especially the C, still severely outrange the R-27 at high altitude, passing it at about the 30-40 second mark. So there are still no tactics or timeline required to operate F-18 and F-16 in the DCS environment, just fly straight and kill the target.

Понятно. Значит как минимум ещё 2 года, когда вы советский МиГ в игру добавите.

Что касается планы с Р-27, есть новости? Ухудшение 27ЭР и 27ЭТ на дальностях <10км очень заметное, ракеты сейчас намного меньше смертельные.

Why not both? There are lots of creative ways to make everyone happy. DCS lacks lots of modern redfor AI units, both on the ground and in the air. Deka could perhabs make a large package, filling the gaps for at least the chinese side. Sell a flyable medium fidelity MKK on top, and call the whole thing something like "opfor modernization pack".

Title says it. I can not zoom in and out and change my heads position. The standard setting is way different from the Su-27 one too, not allowing me to see my airbrake and generally anything in the rear hemisphere. J-11_cockpit_broken.trk Another bug that i have been wanting to report for a while is that when you speed up the simulation in a singleplayer mission, while flying a J-11A, you can not slow it down again. Forcing you to restart the mission or finish it at 2x,4x,8x,16x etc. speed. This bug has been in DCS for a while. I cant show this with a track, just speed up the simulation speed in a singleplayer mission and try to decrease it to normal again while flying J-11A.