TaxDollarsAtWork

the manual speaks remarkably little on the back end of the system though its good for symbology and things like that. Unless you have the flight leaders manual. I'd point you to read EA Fedesovs book where he goes into detail on the many data links of the Su-27 and other soviet types (Федосов Е.А. Авиация ПВО России и научно-технический прогресс (2004) The Joint networks with multiple groups is mentioned here null

I have done this and the issue persist

Ive tried a repair and I've tried other planes Nothing seems to be the issue but since this latest update Im not able to actually tweak or assign axis to any planes I click Axis Assign and Axis tune and nothing happens at all This prevents me from binding new planes as I cant assign axes

Most Russian literature points to a 20 user limit (Количество абонентов) Most likely additional could be fed through a gate way if not dirrectly https://sccs.intelgr.com/archive/2015-01/06-Aganesov.pdf Yeah that could work too

yes it would be nice to see this fixed could have all friendly flankers on a sever feed with their contacts highlighted as 2 and 1 being things you see and are sorting

This mixed seeker salvo thing, I've only seen it in old PVO docs from the 60s and 70s for certain bomber intercepts. I wonder where this ET LOAL myth comes from, its a rather simple par for the course late 70s single colour seeker. People struggled making more complex ones LOAL...

The behaviour is correct as is right now, it will reacquire if lock is reestablished within MEM time. Merely passing through the beam will not instantly trash the missile. This is in line with what is known from the MiG-29 manuals and so on.

Hope this starts a drive for ED to look at smart scaling?

Would be lovely, I'm not that big a fan of the legacy boomer hornet, I would be all over a Super Bug even if it had the same radar. Probably a pipe dream and I'll have to settle for the cold war relic in game. On the Bright side the Strike Eagle is coming but again not the Korean one that I wanted

Good for you I guess. Their plane is wrong and needs fixing, and its still even under-performing compared to the FIRST APG-63, which isn't even what they were attempting to model! Wonderful I think it's worth pointing out to all the anons that it actually has an APG-63v1 according to ED's own manual for the F-15C nullIt certainly would be nice if Razbam shares some of that APG-70 info with ED so the radar will be correct. Giga Boomer cope over a stupid airforce decisions, should've tried to buy a Strike Eagle like plane in the mid 70s It was all up to the customer and countries like Israel had the foresight to make their F-15A/Cs into bomb trucks as well as ASFs A little off topic but all of this makes me wish we were getting a Slam Eagle or better yet F-15I Ra'am, hero of Op Outside the box

Very interesting info maybe ED can look at your CFD side by side theirs and fix some things id also be interested to see CFDs on something like a python 4 or R73

How about adding peer to peer and fighter to fighter modes to the 27s DL Since it's missing that as a sort of consolation for MFI 55

While it's an improvement I still think it should be better I'll have to find the test data from the 70s and test again

Burn time is off and doesn't match WEZ sim or charts

@ChizhWhat are your sources can you share on the RMD-2