falcon_120

Guys, dont be so cocky. What we are asking is not easy, as it has not be done before in a commercial product. So no need to disrespect ED or HB, which btw have made a state of the art job simulating the f14 and phoenix combo, not perfect for sure but very close given the circumstances. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Just another example, although i cant find no more the reference. In one red flag around 2007ish french mirage 2000-5 came in with new ecm pods to test its effectiveness in close to RL scenarios. Pilots made comments on how good those pods were, being able to constantly brake lock constantly to almost all radars, until almost the merge. Imagine that kind of effectiveness in DCS, it would mean a different game. For me what it would be awesome is that this kind of effectiveness would be randomized considering certain parameters, like for example, elint or jamming planes in the vicinity that have been protected for several hours within a campaign. So, when we have the DC, we can also have this very important assets into consideration that increase the overall effectiveness of jammers to simulate the electromagnetic recon missions. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I hope ED models at least AWACS calls. How difficult could that be? Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

ECM in each plane, how good it is, and against what type of source its better will always be totally unaccesible info. A same jammer could be absolutely effective against a mig29 radar but may be almost totally ineffective against a particular SAM. Due to eccm techniques in each system and due to gathered info by elint planes for example . Having said that, DCS could simulate much better different techniques of jamming and its effects against missiles, fighters and ADS. The effect they will obtain(wrt ranges or effectiveness) will be totally made up, but the technique behind and tactic diversity and importance of having a jammer on will be there. So yes, they should improve the simulation as much as possible. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Really nice work sir. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Sorry, can you please make some easy points on what changes are you expecting pepin? Its difficult to follow your post. I understand that what you are saying is that ecm should make missiles to miss a lot even at close ranges, so r27et can be used and will find much more operational use? And right now ecm is almost totally ineffective? If that is the case i agree to an extent, although i'm not sure how that can be done to a minimum realistic level since everything is classified wrt ecm. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Yeah i know what you mean, actually i made it a hotas button myself, cause its very handy. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Yes, this is what i meant. Hope is not my memory playing me tricks, since as i say i almost always use manual mode for the increased SA. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I leave here a very interesting live stream recorded session with a spanish f18 pilot describing many features of the jet and its systems. Unfortunately is in Spanish(for non Spanish speakers) but you will find some amazing footage like radar and flir. There mention very cool stuff like that you can play with the radar filters otherwise you start picking up high speed trains and windmills (wind turbines). Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

No one? I love the secrecy around russian tech :(. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

For me there makes no sense for ED to "use jester". In any case, just make use of the concept of jester, this is, similar flow and layout. But whatever backend they do should be ED's alone. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

This has been somehow solved. I say somehow cause agressive maneuvers sometimes makes you loose lock (quite real on the other hand). From my experience the TWS in the hornet works flawlessly, especially in manual mode which let you make some naughty things, like for example guide 2 amraams at 2 targets totally separated dozens of miles, just by moving the tdc left and right from time to time (6-8 seconds depending on the radar memory setting). Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I agree, i mean i'm happy they are doing the f15e, but they definetely will need to step up a notch. Not regarding art and 3d model, cause they are great at that. But regarding system coding. Its seems stupid but i wouldnt accept as a customer a tdc like the harrier in the F15E. Its so annoying in those clutch moments you need speed of actions... Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Yeah, what is this boeing thing? :/ Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

The meteor is gonna be soooooo banned in many servers... But a nice addition for SP.

SO? Even if you have a plane designed for that you will probably need other aircrafts capable of helping in that regard, for tactical situation where the mig 31 is not available. People are very strict with labels. Like that the Phoenix its used for bombers so it should not be maneuverable against fighters , or the r27et is for chase so it cannot be used otherwise... Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I kind of do the same, except for the aircrafts i really dont like, for example the I16, or trainers, because although i want to support ED, i also like to vote with my bullet, so they know which type of modules i'd rather prefer resources not be wasted in

Thanks IronMike, i was not aware of the stop gap measure. Sounds right to me.

Thanks for the answers. Common sense tells me that there has not to be a relation between that missiles still being made in ukraine with the fact that they have not been updated. Production lines change constantly in any manufacturing industry even if the location remains the same. But if you guys have that info, it is the way it is, and i'm ok with that :).

Sounds great! In any case Chizh, maybe the 1980s R27s was a stupid analog missile. But we could at least get a newer 2000s R27 missile, which i'm sure is not analog anymore. Maybe they also loft. I'm sure you guys have more info to update a bit russian weapons to the standards of year 2000s.

You make it sound like that is a aim120 thing, but it happens to ALL MISSILES. Where is the conspiracy there?

Then so be it. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Mmmm i don't think that is true at all. One thing, is that a modern missile could in theory and under ideal conditions discern between a chaff and a plane. And a different story is to think that chaff does not degrade missile effectivenes. In addition chaff stays in the air for a long time creating lots of noise and degrading the SNR of radars and SARH receivers. That is not simulated in DCS but should be a factor in real life. That is a strange point. Let me flip it to see where we arrive? XD "Don't you think there are lots of engineers, just in a different building, trying to create more advanced chaffs, to sell it to whoever wants to buy that very same unspoofable missile? The marketing could be like this: Our missile is unspoofable... unless you use our new chaff...XD Now, getting back to the real world, yeah, i'd imagine there are lots of engineers trying to solve the problem of a missile that cannot be defeated by chaffs... but that does not mean they have solved the problem right?

The so called "poor intercept curve trajectory to increase range" its actually a feature we have all asked for many times, and it should be added in almost all missiles as far as i know. Before the upgrade, the missile would make crazy stupid 9g turns event when the target was 50 KM away, which it did not make a lot of sense. This should make (once implemented) the R27 and R77 conserve better energy inside its Maximum range.

Unless i stand corrected, the pilot can do everything IRL as well, it can deliver both A/A and A2G ordenance. It just happens that as an operational decission, the WSO is focused on navigation, and fancy A2G procedures (Setting JDAMs,JSOW,LGB, working the FLIR and A2G radar modes, IFF codes...)