Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TaxDollarsAtWork

  1. Burn time is off and doesn't match WEZ sim or charts
  2. @ChizhWhat are your sources can you share on the RMD-2
  3. No, this is a bad idea OP. Instead the ME should have local stations you can tune into Like a TikTok tunes radio station
  4. So a pilot confirms it, all other sources confirm it too and its wrong in your opinion?
  5. Are you discounting that a RuAF pilot said it has better IRCCM too?
  6. I agree missiles all being on the same API having the same complete CFD modeling is the priority for existing missiles I just want these other 90s missiles to not be forgotten by ED so they can eventually make it into DCS Preferably before I turn into an old fossil like half the forum
  7. The RMD-2 does have superior IRCCM and an improved seeker This source mentions it has a dual colour seeker with 'sensitivity which is twice as high as the basic model' https://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2015/02/20_a_6420965.shtml?updated Sounds like an improvement, and it was a source you gave me less than a year ago It was a source you gave me, remember? Not to mention IRL pilots also agree the Seekers IRCCM have been improved On that topic of 1990s AAMs I feel an AIM-120A without HOBS tapes (while the 120B gets them to reflect some 2000s software upgrades would be nice) More importantly later batches of the AIM-9M https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/mediawiki/index.php/AIM-9M_American_Short-Range_Air-to-Air_Missile Some information of these improvements the -9 would be nice for some 90s environments too
  8. No, I am not a star wars fan, in my generation we grew up with Halo. Now something can be said about emulation of capabilities vs simulation. Especially for an AI Unit. Many sims that have earned lots of praise from our generation did engage in emulating the not so well documented and unknown Do you believe that the MiG-29s FM and systems in Falcon 3.0 were based on the abundance of documentation ED had when it made its new MiG-29 FM in 2018? The answer is no, known estimates were fair enough for a non player asset, that is if the goal was to make a more or less authentic experience. Same can be said for the M1 Tank Platoon I really doubt it had the most authentically modeled T-80Us or Bs You could also take it up with ED, they already have an F-117 Wonder where those documents came from if we follow your line of thinking... Ontop the topic at hand though, yes I'd be a serious fan of a Singapore or Korean F-15E Those are my favourites, these military sims seem to focus too much on Europe
  9. Not sure how 'Gulf Wars' are counted, do we ignore the 80s Iran Iraq war and the prior one in the 70s? Regardless It seems you yourself didn't read what I said Process its contents more carefully, It was quite a common load out from 1991 till the early noughties It would be nice to sim this period a little more accurately with the F-15
  10. Not exactly the biggest top gun fan I am more a fan of classics such as Sky Fighter (歼十出击, the Meng Long attack at the end was beautiful) Sky Hunter and Shir Dil. The most important comparison between the old and new movies for me was in the beach volleyball/football scenes To the new movies credit, the boys in this move were more built than in the 1980s' one, there were more hunks too but we hardly got to see as much of them The older movie is arguably superior in this regard, the shots on the bare chested men are much more dramatic and masculine I liked that The scene was some what ruined by misplaced characters in the sequel, I just couldn't ever take John Hamm as a serious military man after seeing him in so many rom coms in general!
  11. When I think of a Modern combat flight simulator I do not think of museum relics, I think of current events. Planes I am liable to see in a news reports. Not variants of planes that were heavily out dated by the time I was born. On that note DCS needs more modern AI assets like Growlers, Super Hornets (A favourite of mine) newer missiles like ASRAAM IRIST Derbys Noughties upgraded F-4s MiG-21s and F-5s too, so that I can sim things like the 2011 UN Security Council resolution 1973 Or Hypothetical Scenarios with important regional powers like a fictional Russo-Turkish conflict or KSA v Gulf state fight Maybe PRC vs some of its neighbours Things like the Yom Kippur war or Mole Cricket 19, hardly 'modern' as they were events that took place more than 50 years ago
  12. This picture is from just about the end of Southern Watch and was taken in 2000 It was quite a common load out from 1991 till the early noughties
  13. I think you misunderstand my question. I am curious if missiles with older, more simplistic guidance laws should also exhibit such nose pointing IRL, even at incredibly low speeds. Could an example of this maybe be an AIM-9B? Or control lay outs that don't lend themselves to be good at low speed control and flying as it may not be relevant to the misison, like a Nike Hercules
  14. Yes friend, no murzilka in the western brochures more truth in pop culture science mags than the word of god yes
  15. That's interesting that the missile retains that nose pointing even now that is is 'dead' because of the ability to maintain control in the post stall I guess that comes from HOBS tapes making the missile otherwise 'smart' enough to maneuver here without putting itself into an uncontrolled spin or tumbling aimlessly? Something I've always be curious about is this behaviour coming from missiles that are not the R-77 AIM-120 AIM-9X and R-73 Like missiles who's guidance law is so primitive they're susceptible to orthogonal rolls like SA-2 SA-3s Should there missiles also exhibit these characteristics of nose pointing while 'dead' and stalling?
  16. They seriously shot this down? What nonsense. Also not sure why everyone want's an F-15A or some other nonsense that's old as dirt I for one enjoy having planes in the game not old enough to be my parents. An '04~'09 spec F-15C with APG-63v1 DL and other goodies would be my favourite or even an F-15K
  17. I've got a feeling that neither side here knows what they're talking about when it comes to MPRF and radars I'd recommend reading some radar theory PRFs are independent of power They merely determine how long a emitting bit most importantly a listening phase will be Different PRFs are useful for gaining different pieces of information about different kinds of targets As explained in more detail in this excerpt "The use of different pulse repetition frequencies (PRFs) delivers significantly different behaviors to airborne radars. For instance, the main purpose for using low PRF is to obtain an unambiguous range measurement. However, the tradeoff when using a low PRF is that the measurement of the target's radial velocity is highly ambiguous and can result in missing some target detections. On the other hand, high PRF is used to reduce or eliminate ambiguities in the measurement of radial velocity. A high PRF, however, causes a highly ambiguous range measurement. The true range is resolved by transmitting multiple waveforms with different PRFs." MPRF tries to take the best from both worlds to deal with issues of range and velocity ambiguity And an ace up its sleeve is that last part in most MPRF radars of the 1980s and onwards It's actually using multiple MPRFs, so a slightly low MPRF, MPRF, a slightly higher one and another one higher than that and comparing all that information as quickly as possible thanks to digital components running through duty cycles quicker than its contemporaries. Why has ED refused to fix it? God knows why, this company seems to hate money A LOT. It's a simple fix for a well loved plane. Yet they rather let themselves get upstaged by a company that makes FSX mods... They really shot themselves in the foot not doing a FF F-15C I wonder what excuse they'd use, that they'd need to do have a 3rd party do it because of some Russia law Gimmie a break
  18. I pounded 4 of these before my last match and my squadron didn't like that very much Still won, maybe we should get a coors sponsorship I'd dig a Nascar FA18
  19. The AMRAAM we have in game (AIM-120C5) is actually much younger than 1996 the C5 is from lot 12 according to some Selected Acquisition Reports and was still undergoing its final stretch of testing in FY00 As late as October 2000, with some entry into service one or two years later until superseded by the C7 in FY04 the AIM-9X was declared IOC in 2003 You don't want PL-8A/Bs they're knock off israeli junk Even the 1980s R-73 is superior to that Python 3 clone
  20. He has a point, you look at post in the JF-17 F-16 F/A-18 and F-14 bug report sections and youll know what Im talking about Fans of each go into the other sections screaming and hollering this plane does X better than MY plane fix it! This SD-10 out ranges MY AMRAAM, fix it! I swear in bfm discussions those 18 and 16 guys hate each other more than they do 27 fans In that sense yes people argue and flame each other a lot like in another game except there its rhetoric along the lines of "France or Germany should be better than the rest at their expense not mine!" They'd have more of a leg to stand on if they reasoned it more along the lines of 'yes I do wonder if this behaviour is realistic please give sources' it isn't what happens most of the time I guess you should've gate kept the game harder from these vapid children, bies.
  21. What you will find on that site is highly suspect as that man had a political axe to grind with regard to keeping F-111s and buying F-22s for the RAAF. He or rather that think tank has perpetuated weirder and crazier myths as time has gone on. The R-27EA does in fact exist in the sense some might've been made for testing and stir up interest from potential buyers, but that didn't happen. But it does not exist in service of any air force, there is no indication that it is anything but a private venture by a company that failed. By extension most western sources are bad because they pull from AUS Air Powers info. This site will make many sensationalist claims usually about some new capability or weapon shown at a weapons expo as 100% being out there in the field.
  22. In any case I think its worth mentioning @NineLineagain to see if ED will do anything on the mater Since last time he checked in here the thread was derailed
  23. Best OP can hope for is getting the R-73 RMD-2 and a proper CFD of the existing missiles. Would help if ED would interpret the graphs according to SME input though.
  24. In that case you're barking up the wrong tree. Since around late 2020, it has been ED's interpretation that these signals even in STT are discrete in how they work in digital active missiles like the AIM-120 & SD-10/PL-12 The R-77 should behave the same, or the change should be rolled back on all planes. This thread is to prove wrong the assumption that some people at ED might've had that the R-77 integration was sort of jerry rigged and almost SARH like. or maybe they just forgot. (it seems to be specific to the missile not the platform) See above
  25. This is further substantiated by these post confirming it Here a dev talks about how R-77 usage in the J-11A and Su-30MKK manual varies very differently from a typical SARH launch And here Chizh gives us more detail about it What I also find a little perplexing about all of this @GGTharos is how I need to tell remind you of things that you conveniently forget On this page the special processor/bypass is mentioned. And on the next page you post something, with how often you lurk on that thread you obviously read this before. I'd like to see what solid evidence you have to the contrary, not speculative fiction and conjecture. But if it really is something like old age making you prone to forget, and not a case of you arguing in bad faith. Allow me to remind you to take your meds and multivitamins today sir.
  • Create New...