TaxDollarsAtWork

It probably should also be noted that Pk isn't exactly something to take at face value, threats you are facing (in the case of the AIM-120, lots of those Galebs it killed lacked RWRs), Crew training (The USAF is the gold standard here though it has acknowledged in its own Vietnam reports that crew training influences Pk) and Shot context (Is this an e pole turn signaling shot? is this a defensive launch and leave spoiler shot? is this a supported NEZ shot? Here one could possibly make a case for IR missiles as they all are by their nature shot for maximum Pk) According to this USAF report the AIM-7E from 1965 to 1968 achieved a Pk of 38% compare that to the 3% of the AA-10 and it looks wonderful doesn't it? Now would one really say an Eagle with AIM-7Es facing off against a Flanker or even an Eagle with AA-10s say the former has a BVR advantage over the later? I don't think so. Would anyone say the R-73 and AIM-9L are evenly matched in terms of effectiveness because of them both achieved about an 80% Pk Or even that the AIM-9X is inferior to both since its Pk is only 50%? See how absurd taking Pk at face value is?

Our in game one is a 120C5

As far as I'm aware there isn't a real limit in terms of range, the only limit I believe is a fighter supports the AMRAAM for about 90 seconds

I am not sure what you mean here. INS+DL Phase similarly to how it works in the R-24/27/7P family where they can guide onto targets before the seeker can see them? Yes it does, and can be unsupported before the active phase and still attempt to guess where the target is most likely to show up and go active there. Though this isn't nearly as consistent and reliable as supporting till active as I understand. Its is a situational tactic, but an option nonetheless.

If you want more qualitative measures on how big a leap it is comparing information from non digital missiles that went digital like the AIM-54A to AIM-54C and those pilot accounts are a little telling or open source information on Air Intercept radars like the AWG-9 vs say the APG-63 which are basically the same class of radar. As for the INU its a known capability for the AMRAAM to fly to the last known intercept point when unsupported and seek the target on its own (or what ever it finds there) Pretty much all digital actives do this, though there have been some extremely rare instances where a customer opts out of this option I do believe though that Fox Alfa is talking about certain aspects of the AIM-120s kinematics and maneuvering. And of course its active range not being dependent upon RCS of the target and aspect/closure. If something like that can be coded for IR missiles maybe something can also be done for RF ones

I certainly would like Fixes on that front, but EDs response on the F-16 and F/A-18 over performing radar detection has been to lock the thread. It would be nice for things like Jammers to introduce some INS error for RF missiles even while in burn through and so on

Which is why I am asking, what sources you have to say it can fall victim to such a maneuver so we can compare the data to say AIM-7 info.

What's been the conclusion on the F-16's radar implementation?

These sorts of maneuvers have been largely considered obsolescent since the Vietnam war, why are they effective with this 1980s tech? You could simply say "R-27/73 is stupid missile" as always and fair enough, but that's your subjective assessment (And oddly enough a USAF pilot who tried the AA-10A say within its kinematic capability 'it was a very good missile') What quantitative information do you have that these missiles can still be defeated by these maneuvers? It is my belief that had this have been a flaw in the missile, the pilot probably wouldn't have said such things about it.

This is very expensive, do you know where I can find this for free.

Yes my thoughts exactly, its not whos better than who. Its how accurate to real life are we, because this is a sim game not a AAA shooter or MOBA. Fedosov? If this is a paper of sorts please link it to me it sounds very interesting. Could I know more about this Fedosov fellow?

Will the Flankers receive peer to peer data link in MP like they do in SP some time in DCS 2.7? Will the Eagle Fulcrum and Flankers also get their radar detection ranges fixed by the time MAC releases?

I wonder if we'll end up seeing the F-15E in DCS before the Eagle gets its radar fixed. I want to have faith that it'll be fixed by then but I know thats a lie.

On the topic of FMs can an ED dev look into Flanker acceleration in excess of 1100kmh, or explain the difference? There is a discrepancy between the in game Su-27 and this As pointed out in this thread in more detail It would also be helpful to know the conditions during the test in the video

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/elbit-to-install-infrared-missile-warning-systems-on-us-national-guard-and-reserve-f-16s/137174.article The other source shows more about how far along the capability is in service

https://defensetechconnect.com/2020/03/26/elbit-systems-will-equip-f-16-aircraft-with-pylon-based-infrared-missile-warning-systems/

Well I'm happy to see there is a chance.

Your first Russian source looks a lot like this one https://www.standard.net/news/military/air-force-working-through-f-35-readiness-rate-issues/article_e7c71fdb-1262-5a5e-9b6f-18f628b9e206.html Which talked a lot in relation to training squadrons which have more LRIP JSFs and as a result more lemons. Something else I think that's worth mentioning. The average American politician has brought up program bashing to be more than just a national pastime but now is an elevated and quite sophisticated art form. As far as I'm concerned they're all snake oil salesmen Even more so if I didn't vote for them

There are other aircraft as well with it, USAF F-16s recently received the Elbit PAWS DIRCM/MAWS for example. Its rather new technology just now getting out there as it's hit that point in maturity, I think the first system ever for it was from 2002

The difference in temperature between traditional flares and the exhaust is rather high and the rapid deceleration gives even older missiles two clues to use to discern between flares and the target iirc this was at the core of the AIM-9Ms IRCCM and other similar missiles of the 1980s. The trend has been towards a combination of DIRCM and Maneuvering flares to defeat FPA seekers. The Su-22 did nothing of the sort. https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2003/11/30/2003december-smart-flares-being-designed-to-defeat-heatseeking-missiles

I have two question, will MAC aircraft see their bugs not fixed in FC3 fixed such as radar detection or how some Dogfight modes work? And is multi-player peer to peer datalink for the Flankers something we can expect to see in MAC this year, if at all ever? Even in a simplified form (1 denotes your aircraft, all other Flanker donors appear as 2, or even simpler make Flankers donate to the DL in the same way AWACS or EWRs do to at least somewhat show the feature)

An interesting claim, what information are you basing that off of?

Not worth much but, more likely than not the AIM-9X failed as a result of not being well maintained. Even just sitting on the hard point inflight after a few sorties they need to be serviced. Remember, a Turkish F-16 did shoot-down a RuAF Su-24M some time ago with an AIM-9X Given the amount of planes doing strikes from a carrier nonstop and how you'd have probably a worse ground crew to plane ratio I see it as very possible they loaded an AIM-9X that was long overdue for an overhaul on accident. The AIM-54 comes to mind, in US Service it was less than stellar but in Iran it produced amazing results. We also know for a fact from American experience in Vietnam that proper maintenance can greatly gut into Pwe, if it was even in question.

I'd like to discuss some confusion I've had about long time bugs in DCS World and this seems like a more correct thread to do that in. The Su-27 and F-15 as well as the MiG-29 have for a long time had issues with under performing radars More on that here When can we see this tweaked? Q3 or Q4 of this year? Another question is the confusion and miscommunication around the future of P2P DL in MP for the Su-27/33/J-11A @Chizh has said this won't happen at all since its an FC3 level plane But here Kate says it is planned https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/230714-dcs-world-roadmap-update/?do=findComment&comment=4235568 And so does Bignewey https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/158913-requestedsu27-datalink-not-working-with-clients/?do=findComment&comment=4195266 Is this a miscommunication because of working in different countries offices and departments Could some one explain if it truly will or will not happen? And can we get a small quality of life improvement fixing the aforementioned DL and radar bugs in FC3 hopefully before the end of this year partially?

When will these bugs be fixed or better yet the CFD be released? Will it roll out along side MAC in Q3/4 of this year? Will other FC3 bugs be fixed there too like the Su27 DL or F15 radar range Or will MAC not correct these issues