falcon_120

There was a guy in this forum that run a very imteresting test with hundres of samples regarding the probability of defeating shots based on different combinations of chaff/flares (number and spacing between them). I will look for it to see i find it again and drop it here. EDIT: So it turned out it was on reddit, here you go: Kudos to tideroller2 who made this post. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I used to follow that approach, however, after many many hours in MP and getting the hang out of what you should be doing and what you should never do, i've moved to the following principle (which I feel is more clever and more true to RL operations): -Make flare program really aggresive (something like 12 flares every 0.20 seconds), such that you will most likely defeat an IR shot at the expense of running out of it, which is ok since dieing with flares left IS A WASTE (Use them or loose them). The reasoning is simple, if you receive an IR shot you did something very very very wrong, either you are fliyng too low and too close during CAS/SEAD, or you are getting too close during BVRing/CAPing or you got trapped in an ambush. In either case if you manage to survive then it is time to go home and rearm or go to friendly zone to regain your SA. In the end, if you fly properly and to your strengths (Both technically and tactically) you should very randomly receive close shots from IRs (the exception being fighting flankers).

Does it brake mp ic? Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

The thing is, no one is finding that behavior, at least not me and also i have not seen any threads about it like on many other topics (amraam vs sd10, phoenix op, etc...). I can tell you from my end an aim9x shot is almost always a guaranteed kill or a guranteed dead. So if you are noticing something that needs attention(which might be the case not saying you are wrong) im afraid you need to back it up with tests or tracks that shows a possible bug or misbehavior. This is the normal process. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Its a whale hornet!

I would ask you, can you share the details and statistics gathered? Otherwise is hard to tell. And btw, yes i would say flare resistance for the 9x should be much better than for the r73/9M series. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Exactly the sames happens in the f18. The range gate that should stop this from happening is not implemented (wip), and the viper and the hornet shares a lot of the radar code... Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Correct, for a RL pilot takes a second to extend his right arm and change the radar to TWS. For us the same requires reaching a mouse and pressing the button that can be more troublesome. I also agree that without the permissiveness of the Navy Boeing would not have developed such a HOTAS system, or at least it would not have stayed like that for so many hornet lots and versions.

Sometimes i've even seen myself as hostile on datalink (always in MP), with the consecuence heart attack until i realize its myself (#likeadogscaredofhisshadow). Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Well hard to say, i have both modules and i can say that the amraam is deadlier when used from the f16c but that i think it is very much due to the massive accelaration of the viper, which allows me to shoot at M1.0-M1.25while on the hornet I normally only do M0.95-M1.1 unless im really empty of pilons and bags. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Atazar, you need to use cranking as an approach method to reduce the distance at which any bandit can engage you, this will let you get closer to a high PK shot without being so exposed and trash enemy shots done at long range. Here is some videos that will help you:

Vaicom pro is an addon on top of voice attack (VA), so the latter is required. It is a HUGE enhancement over VA, so pick them both. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

In 2 weeks they will post the link Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Same to you. If you have any doubt about the profile just let me know, it can be tricky to understand at first. Just some tips: -You need to define a MODE switch in the joystick control panel for the secondary functionality of the buttons to work as defined in the layout attached. -The profile assumes that your SA page is on the center MFD, the radar always on the right MFD and when in AG mode your storage page is on the left MFD. Regards,

As promised :) F18C TWCS.diff.lua F18C Warthog.diff.lua F18C.rar

You are forgeting: -Sensor select switch left (or right if your harm page is on the right) to make harm page SOI, to check this make sure there is a little diamond in the top right corner of the MFD. -Uncage button to hand off the target to the missile, you will see a h-off indication. -Shoot.

Hello and welcome, Just wanted to let you feel at home in this little niche passion we all share here. I will add to the helpful replies you've received, don't miss the chance to surf the community/multiplayer section, you may very well find a squadron that may help you in your learning curve while being casual enough for your liking, i've seen enough flavours to cater all palates, and life is funnier with buddies. Regards,

Is adhesive tape what i'm seen in the canopy of that su22? o.o :/

Just as a side note maybe worth considering: The SD10 is an export variant of the Pl12. I really have a hard time imagining an export weapon as capable as it chinese counterpart (either in electronics, engine or whatever area they decided to tune down). As a similar example US only export its latest variants of the AIM120 to tier 1 allies (UK, Germany...) or not even that. Although maybe this is not the case and the SD10 is just as good as the PL12, i don't know. I am just trying to apply weapon export "general" practices, here. Btw do we have any official confirmation of what C amraam are we seeing in DCS (C2/C3/C5...)? Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I understand your frustation and I will throw the only last solution you may have not tried yet... how if you give Rift S a try with Amazon so you have 30 day trial? What you could solve with it is: -Plug & play and working wondefully for a lot of us without all the problems you have described (caused by WMR or god knows what) -Acceptable frames at this expense of slightly worse visual quality ( i say slightly cause the difference is not as great as the numbers may indicate at first sight). -Enjoy the beauties of VR. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I think that would change once we have F4 and mig 23. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Nineline what are you expecting exactly? As already explained RAID mode works ok, since it cannot do what is designed to do in DCS. -For it to make any sense you should sometimes see singles contacts for more of one aircraft flying in tight formation, WHICH NEVER happens in the DCS F18 radar. Or am i missing something? Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Nope, if you go TWS, offset the antena x degress to the left (or right) and then you go RWS again, then whatever azimuth degress you select in RWS is offset x degress to the left (or right). So basically you could end with a 140 degress RWS scan pattern that do not scan the full 140° only the left side. This means a non centered RWS scan pattern. For me this does not happen always but it happens a lot if you mess with auto or bias mode in TWS and then you go RWS. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Really intensive chaff programs does have an effect and are able to defeat missiles. You should try with something like 20 chaff 0.25 seconds apart combined with some notching. In that case you have a very high probability of trashing a shot. On the other hand chaffs while cold are not very effective because im DCS missiles are "decoyed" for only a small fraction of time after which they reengage (or try to if you are still in his FoV), if you are cold you are moving in the same direction with respct to the FOV of the missile hence making really easy a re-engagement. Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I think ED is making a wonderful job of recreating the most realistic consumer combat simulator available, however the EW side of this is quite simplified and it is starting to be very apparent due to level of detail achieved in other areas of the simulator (iff, radar modes, flight model...). What I would like to do is create a small list with some minor/medium improvements that could enhance the simulation even more but still would not mean a massive work from ED. So basically anything that falls within the realm of what is achievable with limited resources in a medium to longterm roadmap. Let me begin with some things i'd love to see, hopefully you could add some more ideas on your own or even qualify my own if you think they are not feasible or realistic. Let me start with some ideas: 1- Introduce some minor randomnes regarding false target detection. Basically this would mean to introduce if its makes sense regarding type of radar and operating mode, of some (very small % posibility) false target echoes caused by for example large quantities of chaffs or other phenomena. It is my understanding that the most simplistic yet achievable simulation would be to limit this only to chaff, as explained before, or in some cases to a specific type of jamming (though this could be too complex...). 2-Basic standoff jamming. Without getting too complex, this would mean making the first introduction of dedicated EW aircraft (EA6b, F/A18G growler...) in DCS. The most simplistic way I can think of that yet adding to the gameplay it is that the existence of this aircraft in a mission is able to reduce detection/tracking range by a small amount, or introduce some randomness of loss of radar tracking cappabilities. This would mean that they become HVA like an AWACS and killing them becomes top priority for the opossing side. Having this aircraft could mean random jamming of radio communication (specially now that in-game voice is being developed by ED). 3-Doppler cell resolution. This mean that depending of the type of radar long range target flying very close to each other can only be detected as a single contact. I think that the only developer that has simulated sometihng like this is HB in its AWG-9 but I could be wrong though. This would give meaning to the use of modes like RAID addessment in those ACs with this option. 4-Improvements to EW. The only type of jamming now existing in DCS is noise jamming up to a predefined range. Without getting too complex a nice addition could be the use of some deception jamming techniques in fighters that instead of denying long range tracking, they work by causing radar tracking problems with a predefined random distribution (so its high at long range and very very low but possible at short ranges). What do you guys think of these ideas, would it be too complex or unrealistic? What else would you love to see?