GGTharos

No, one long (5sec) 12.5g pull in the most g-vulnerable speed band for the eagle resulted in what you said. The rest did not, at least it's not documented. I'm not saying the crew chief didn't have to do extra work, just that the alleged severity of your comment does not appear to apply. Pull 12g for a while in the eagle in DCS and it breaks. Yes, it is cumulative in DCS. Add weight or make the g asymmetric and it breaks sooner. Pull 10g and it will take you a lot longer to break it because it's not 12g.

The 'bigger offender' has done this in IRL combat. There is one known catastrophic over-g instance of an F-15A or C known, and very very little is known about it. Even finding mentions of it is difficult. No, I don't mean the one that fell apart at 3g's due to faulty longerons. There have been multiple documented 12g excursions, and them more 11g, more 10g, etc. going down the line out of which only one is known to have resulted in the aircraft being sent to a museum (ie. written off). As for your video - I'll check later if it's even possible to hit that much AoA at 460KCAS, but I have doubts. If it is possible, then that is likely a problem but it is separate from over-g. Regarding your complaints about 12g excursions, for the reason above, I don't care, nor should anyone else. If you play that game too often in the flight the wings will come off. Likewise, score enough damage on the target and the wings will come off under not all that much g. And as for a high AoA break, I have bad news for you ... that sort of AoA is encountered during specific evasive maneuvers for eagles. Just not at that speed AFAIK, too fast.

It doesn't know, it just turns on its radar when you launch it and either finds something or it doesn't. Who knows why (or if) it shuts down IRL if it doesn't find anything? But in-game it does, and this is exactly in line with how emergency modes are to be used: visual range only, ie. you shoot at something you can see.

They never are, this isn't news Exactly like I said it would. At least I don't have a problem with the wings coming off anyway.

In a centrifuge under controlled conditions. The G-LOC thing is pretty old now, and ED said they are reviewing it. Not sure why people are complaining about it still instead of waiting to see what ED comes back with. It means you chose the wrong tyres ... but pilots aren't tyres, pilots can't really upgrade their g-tolerance. Aircraft have pretty much reached and exceeded it under specific circumstances. That doesn't mean the excess isn't useful, but you need to take it in the right doses.

So you are forced to wonder if the other jets overperform because you didn't run the numbers on them? Make F-18 players stop using the paddle (detonate their aircraft if they do? I don't know) and you'll be a huge step closer to realism. Not this made up 'g-tier' fantasy. What would also be really realistic is people obtaining BFM skills. But that's hard. Can't find an aircraft's real E-M or acceleration charts? Ban it from competition since you cannot verify its realism in any way. Suddenly you're all these steps closer to realism before you even touch g-modeling - which ED is doing anyway.

Why? It's not realistic. Why? It's not realistic. Ah, I see. What will you do to punish hornet pilots using the paddle then?

Most people think of energy fighting as BnZ. That's not what he's talking about.

Ok, that superficially makes sense to me. This hornet has higher TWR because of the -EPEs and a lot of fighters in this class can sustain 7-7.5 at those speeds, all of this stuff is flown clean. That's not to say there might not be an error in the FM.

Depends on what's in the tanks.

This is good work, but don't talk yourself out of flying F-16's yet. I don't particularly care about the dogfight server fuel loads, they're completely meaningless (ie. your dogfight situation is contrived). Is this max g or sustained? If max, there's definitely a problem unless it's enough fuel to worry the FLCS.

You said 'hold', this is at least ps=0 in my interpretation Do you mean the maximum g attained? As for BFM, I disagree. The F-16 has a significant rate advantage if you play your game right. It's hard for an eagle or hornet pilot to compete with that, and it's more than decent in the vertical as well. If missiles are involved things change a bit but not that much.

Completely expected. There's no ps=0 line for the F-16CJ at 9g below that speed, and that's a fact for most if not all fighters. Ok, the sight is a separate subject. But it could also have to do with FLCS behavior. It BFMs just fine. Which F-16? And does your expected value match the charts? In this case I would suspect the FLCS is guarding the gate a little too zealously.

I would not use the unlikeliness of the scenario for discussing this; I don't agree with changing the hellfire, it would be nice if the naval DM was upgraded well. The scenarios are ours to figure out

I wouldn't dismiss Hellfire's effects on a smaller ship. I doubt you could sink a Tarantul class with hellfires, but starting fires, wiping out the command deck or seriously damaging it, as well as targeting and wiping out weapons should make the ship combat ineffective. DCS doesn't model this type of thing so I don't believe there's anything to be done wrt hellfires, this is a naval damage model issue.

Yes, they should blink slowly, and the wingtip lights should be steady.

Hopefully ED is reconsidering how missiles will react to ECM, blinking or not.

@BIGNEWY the news says that HPRF can detect closing target only, but that's not quite correct (detection performance for tail aspects will be less than MPRF) - could we get a little clarification?

None of this is well enough described. There is a difference between actually being controlled by other aircraft, and using off-board (other aircraft's) data to guide your missile - you see where I'm going with that. So you could in theory shoot at a DL target but the M-Link is still emitted from your aircraft. Yep, that's the thing. Each missile is coded to a different ID for the DL onboard the aircraft and also separated in channels for the flight of 4 aircraft. The sparrow had other advantages ... basically better overall electronics. You'll see on the eagle VSD and other radar displays a little circle on the DLZ called the 'DSR cue' when the sparrow is selected. This is the computer's guess as to how far it believes the sparrow seeker can see a reflection from your radar based on the selected target. Do not shoot if the target is beyond the DSR cue The sparrow will launch and immediately attempt to lock onto the target. The R-27 will behave the same way if the range to target is short enough - straight to guidance signal, no DL. R-27's cannot be controlled by other aircraft, despite interesting stories to the opposite. TO be more precise though ... yes, 'sure they can be' but then you have two radars tuned to the same channel, which means they cannot both operate on targets close to each other at the same time. And close isn't all that close ... why? They'll jam each other and each other's missiles. So basically you can expect radar channels and missile guidance channels to be set apart for each aircraft in the flight. Same applies for sparrows, and failure to implement this (a lesson hard learned) led to some spectacular misses and premature warhead detonations. It means you can shoot beyond the DSR cue If you mean LOAL yes, but heat seekers are very typically LOBL so that's a huge difference. Well, think about it this way ... why have a jammer if all it does is hurt you? So you have two kinds of jammers, broadly speaking: 1) Self protection jammers, used by fighters, bombers (bombers have far more bombastic jammers though that can act like the ones below) etc 2) Stand-off jammers which operate almost contantly to end enemy communications and raise the noise floor of air defenses to allow own side to sneak closer Your missile's and radar's HoJ modes deals with 1 above. That type of jammer will attempt to repeat the radar's signal in a way that breaks the lock or otherwise sends the missile somewhere else. The key here is that it's repeating the signal that the missile is trying to home onto. Break the lock and the jammer stops repeating (within a few seconds) and there's nothing for the missile to home onto. In DCS the 'jammer' is just a flag that doesn't take this into account, so it makes the missile act like a heat seeker. The SPJ should be able to lower pk on average, but also possibly completely trash the missile or in rare circumstances, make everything worse for the defender. We generally wouldn't be concerned with the extreme cases in a game IMHO. The SoJ described in 2 above requires something like an ARM or other specialized missile - these are the 'anti-radion AAMs' you normally hear about. It's not 'mere HoJ' although the possibility to pull that off may exist...but if it does, it's locked up in manuals we have no access to so unless proven otherwise I'd lean on the 'can't do this' side for HoJ . Also, while specialized missile guidance exists to tackle SoJs, typically you send in a good old SAM or AAM anyway.

Everyone keeps saying that. 'Citation please'. Two-way DL doesn't mean anything in terms of which DL is used The MDL for 120 is transmitted for some 90 seconds, so it's available during that time. For the R-27, it is transmitted up to a certain range, then replaced with the homing signal. Once that happens, the DL does not come back. For the sparrow, there's no DL at all, it's like an R-27 after the DL has lapsed. Yeah you're wrong. These missiles are a) tuned by the radar, b) receive pre-launch information and c) have receivers for the radar's emissions in the rear so at to use that as a benchmark for ranging, doppler shift etc. AFAIK no one estimates range from radar returns as those can vary quite massively with even a small change in aircraft orientation. Also, there's no real passive HoJ tracking. This is a mis-reprentation - the missiles are tuned to and lock onto the radar's emissions. They won't guide onto just anything ... so you have to keep illuminating the target so that it keeps repeating your radar's signal. HoJ isn't some sort of stealth killer, otherwise why have a primary guidance mode anyway? In almost cases the jammer should lower the Pk compared to a non-ECM environment. It shouldn't allow you to turn around and let your missile continue guiding.

The tactical DL has nothing to do with the missile DL. That's why the missile DL originates from the shooter's aircraft, and cannot be guided by other aircraft. The TDL is a completely separate radio equipment and software, the MDL is operated completely by the radar and emitted by the radar. The Alaska eagles trialled DL terminals well before eagles overall got DL; it was too much and too soon, it turned out full JTIDS terminals could not operate on a fighter (at least at that time).

Every -34 I've read has 8 available TWS targets. Even the old ones. I'm not aware of any APG-63 version with TWS that had less than 8.

There are charts that show top speed with a certain payload and/or drag index, and the same for acceleration and fuel consumption. They're probably getting harder to find these days. PS: For the specific aircraft, they assign a 'drag index' to a given piece of equipment that you put on the aircraft so pilots can easily add it up and then reference the charts.

The airflow interaction with the airframe is important so no, you can't assume that an Mk-84 will have the same drag effect when carried on a different airframe. Even on the same aircraft these effects can be counter-intuitive, ie. on an F-15 the centerline bag as as much drag (actually just a slight bit more) that two wing tanks. It's the same tank. The Viper's TWR is much higher as well. As for what you find in DCS, that's fine, your question's fine but when it comes down to it, what you should be looking at is not DCS performance but the aircraft's performance charts. DCS doesn't always get it right.