TaxDollarsAtWork
-
Posts
748 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TaxDollarsAtWork
-
-
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.-
1
-
-
Hope this starts a drive for ED to look at smart scaling?
-
7
-
-
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
-
On 11/19/2022 at 3:49 PM, falcon_120 said:
I dont complain, it's a new life for the F15 as it's the only plane (except the F14/Phoenix combo) able to do very long range; 50/60nm, amraam shots, thus regaining their BVR 1st place again over the viper/hornet.
Obviously not having a link16 it's a big handicap that oblige you so much harder to work on the SA from other sources, but it's fun. But what is important is that between 60nm and 35 nm, and above angles 30, the eagle can dispute the sky and the F16/f18 cannot fight back unless they go low and put themselves in a defensive position.
Also apparently the F15 does not currently suffer from those absurd look-down penalties applied to the F16/f18 radars.
Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk
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!
On 11/20/2022 at 9:23 AM, KlarSnow said:I don't know where ya'll are getting your info that the APG-70 is worse than the 63v1. They are essentially the same for air to air performance. The 63v1 replaces several of the old APG-63 components with APG-70 components and keeps some things from the OG 63 like the antenna. This was to improve the mean time between failure and reliability of the 25 year old APG-63's and make it so that more modern and easily accessible parts were what were being acquired to keep them running. For all intents and purposes their performance is the same.
Don't know what the comment about usability has to do with anything. The F-15E's HOTAS and interface from the front seat works exactly the same and is modelled after the APG-63 in the F-15C... its nothing like the F-14A/B where you MUST operate it from the backseat.
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.On 11/20/2022 at 8:23 PM, GGTharos said:It was capable. The point is really, "Not a pound for air to ground".
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
-
On 9/17/2021 at 6:19 PM, uboats said:
it's on hold and currently we don't have enough info (several mfd page details missing) to continue.
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
-
On 8/13/2022 at 10:23 AM, F-2 said:
They mentioned they didn’t have anything on the J-11B cockpit a while ago so I don’t think it’s likely to be in the cards.
Type-1493 Might be a Chinese development of Zhuk used on the MK2 so who knows.
they have some info on MFI-55 but not yet enough this seems to hold back their ambitions for the J-11
Hopefully they will eventually get what they need to upgrade the J-11 and build the MKK. I don’t think it’s an issue of them not wanting to do it rather data is still sparse.
They don't use the Zhuks they were purchased with N001VEPs
-
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
-
On 9/2/2022 at 5:43 AM, FlankerFan35 said:
Can you post the study?
R-27ER flight is mostly ok from what I know, I'm more concerned with guidance, it can be notched as easily as a Sparrow. And for R-77 guidance issue is the same.
Burn time is off and doesn't match WEZ sim or charts
-
1
-
-
@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 -
So a pilot confirms it, all other sources confirm it too and its wrong in your opinion?
-
20 minutes ago, Chizh said:
Yes, the R-37 was developed in those years. It just didn't go further than development.
RVV-BD is a new missile that appeared only a few years ago.
No. I can't. Sorry.
Internet sources like to write fiction.
Are you discounting that a RuAF pilot said it has better IRCCM too?
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, FoxAlfa said:
Is it just me, or it would be more beneficial to push for update to the new API and AP of the R-27s and R-77 so there is more foundation to up its priority then to ask for a nitch versions of R-73?
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 -
13 hours ago, Chizh said:
It's not true. All R-73 varians have a same IR seeker MK-80. Its analog missile without any kind of digital processor like AIM-9X.
We can't deal with modern Russian weapons by political reasons. Sorry.
No in this time.
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 agoIt 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 hours ago, Nahen said:
So you want Star Wars;)
Growler? As far as I know, today it is one of the most closely guarded aircraft in terms of its avionics and equipment ... But if you want, Boeing will send documentation to ED quickly so that you can fly with it ...Unless you just need an simulator like a Ace Combat... then you can prepare the documentation yourself and let someone make a Growler based on it ...
It's really so hard to understand that if you want a simulator and not an airborne arcade shooter, you need documentation of a real machine to recreate it ? Otherwise you will get a fiction like the F-22 mod based on the F-15C and reflecting the dreams of its creator?
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 hours ago, Nahen said:
Well, if I can see the markings on the tail correctly, it is not surprising that the F-15A from 131 FW ordered in 1977, brought to the C standard, wanted to remember how it used to be years ago...
It does not change the fact that you probably haven't read it - I wrote about the fact that until the "second war" in the Gulf such combinations could have taken place. AiM-120 Revision B began to be delivered in 1994, revision C in 1996. Since the AiM-7 Sparrow has be produced more than 70,000 units by the time the AiM-120 came in, it is probably logical that for many years people tried to get rid of them in other ways than just scrapping them.
Find me a photo of an F-15C / E flying in combat mission over Syria, Afghanistan, Europe in the last 15 years with AiM-7s suspended.
Yes, you can, just like removing the CFT from the E version, but does anyone in their right mind do it from the moment when the amount of AiM-120 in warehouses provides full service facilities for all USAF and USNavy aircraft?
I am waiting for you to specify exactly which planes are not recognized by NCTR
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 noughtiesIt would be nice to sim this period a little more accurately with the F-15
-
1
-
1
-
-
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!
-
On 8/21/2022 at 10:20 AM, unlikely_spider said:
Because older planes are more fun
Stuck & rudder skills and classic gauges > learning all the correct button sequences on yet another MFD screen
Don't get me wrong, I have spent a lot of time in the Hornet and a few others, but it was because I wanted to experience the campaigns in DCS and not because I especially like to look at a computer screen on my computer screen.
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-
2
-
-
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-
1
-
2
-
-
54 minutes ago, KlarSnow said:
Its not really stalled tbh its just at max AOA and slow, and as I stated even in a stall you can still move control surfaces and affect the nose of an aircraft, just look at the hornet, or the Mig-29 or the flanker, or really anything. Push the rudder from one side to the other ad the nose will fall off in that direction. Thats all thats happening here.
IE just because the wings are stalled doesn't mean the tail is stalled.
I think you are seeing this behavior in the AMRAAM because it is one of the only missiles on the new API that has a full 6DOF flight model going on. I don't think the older API missiles are quite there yet.
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
-
8 hours ago, Бойовий Сокіл said:
A car magazine says so, so it must be true.
Yes friend, no murzilka in the western brochures
more truth in pop culture science mags than the word of god yes
[REQUESTED]Su27 datalink not working with clients
in Su-27 for DCS World
Posted · Edited by TaxDollarsAtWork
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