GGTharos

I don't see why they would guide with so many flares in the air.

IRL you don't go off mission like every DCS player out there. 'Cheap kills' aren't a thing - I mean if it's right in front of you and you can chuck a rock at it sure, but there won't be deviating for this. All detections that I know of that were 'missed' were due to terrain masking. Of course, I don't know everything. Also, composite blades are great and lower RCS, but it's still on the order of m^2, not fractions thereof. Everyone wants to ignore reality which is ... IRL the environment is full of things that will show up on your sensors and are not targets. Even if they technically are targets, you may be prevented from going after them for a number of reasons, be it staying on task or issues with identification or just because the wreckage may land where it's not wanted. And barring an abundance of targets confusing the picture, none of those things have anything to do with a radar determining that something is a helicopter or not. The radar is either modern enough to deal with it or it isn't.

That doesn't reconcile one bit with eagles practicing treetop level cruise missile intercepts, or their attack on (unfortunately friendly) helicopters or the fact that that Mi-24 (or 8, whichever) was tracked in A/A from 50nm until the moment it was bombed (they were ready to attack with an AIM-9, but switched to bombs after they slaved the pod to the radar and realized the heli was on the ground)

There's probably no need for STT, but this not sure that this is worth discussing. You're basically looking for a slow moving Vc jammer You can get this off a hit, and display the classification; I have seen radar plots (not kinds we're used to) showing the main body return and the rotor return, and you could similarly classify prop planes as well. This is all about processing. The moment you get a digital processor the likelihood that you can distinguish certain things goes up tremendously - detecting moving vehicles is just a matter of them going fast enough to be out of the notch gate.

IRL you would have distractions from the environment regardless of how good the radar is. This gazelle video is a perfect example: It's possible the gazelle would be ignore as 'car on highway' unless someone ran NCTR or otherwise the radar itself picked up the fact that this is likely a heli. So yes, flying low is no haven from missiles save for reducing Pk (not driving it to zero, but reducing it) due to fuze issues etc, and there that too depends on intercept geometry and whether the target is maneuvering and using CMs. Clutter shouldn't have NO effect but past a certain technology level it should also not be a safe space, in particular when out of the notch. No matter what you do here there will always be unrealistic things popping up.

Same year as they started carrying them. Actually, before that, in the test trials. Edit: I cannot post the part of the document, but basically it's in the F-15C -34 page 1-140 states that PDT plus up to 7 other track files can be designated for attack.

And yet doppler discrimination makes hiding at low altitudes pretty much a thing of the past. F-15s tracking cars on the highway is not a joke. Also, the F-15 can simultaneously attack with as many AMRAAMs as you have onboard. Not sure where ED got the 4 targets.

No, there are no such servers - it's people that you have to look for I don't know how you go about that but I guess making a post about it somewhere or on some discord could be a start

Find someone who has flown it to teach how to fly the airframe, or at least someone who knows how to say, test fly aircraft - someone who can explain flying technique. Again, not systems (radar etc) but flying. While some techniques will be aircraft specific, the vast majority will be usable on all aircraft and you'll have to 'calibrate' yourself to the specifics of the aircraft like where does light/moderate/heavy buffet start etc. And if you can't find someone, @Schlingel mit Kringel pretty much hit the nail on the head (although here I'll disagree with the trainer approach also simply because you can ignore things that aren't needed for flight). Which portions of dealing with your aircraft you choose to focus on more is obviously up to you - I'm just saying most people focus on the explosive landscaping and tactical x-raying parts which, while important for combat, are not the flying part of operations if you catch my drift. It's a simulator and it will serve as whatever you make of it. You can treat it as a game or some parts of it as a game, or you can treat it more seriously.

Sure, but this is not the point I was trying to make. Regardless of the pace, you're not going to know the things you could/should study if you're not told about them. And while it isn't secret sauce, it's just not 'out there and easy to find and understand and implement' sauce.

I think the problem you're encountering is that there is no one to tell you what to learn and how. And I do mean with respect to flying an aircraft and its aerodynamics, how you translate that into piloting etc. Operating the system is ok, but that's mastering the aircraft's systems.

There's nothing bad about it, that's how the aircraft does things. Yes it does. You can break the wings with no tanks as well. That's just silly. Drop them all, the centerline tank has a much drag as the two wing tanks and it reduces stability.

There is a section in the -34 which describes very briefly the AIM-7 split-s protection. A similar technique could easily be used to coast through the notch, so I think that would be a good section of the document to look through. This behavior affects all DCS missiles, including ARH, it's just that ARH are more capable of recovering in-game for whatever reason.

It is left overs and a basic assumption that because it's 'the same radar' (At least 80% of it) that it should appear the same but this should not be the case.

If there is a difference with the MiG-29A FC3 flight model, I believe any changes done to the FF MiG-29A will be ported back to the FC3 one, much like what was done with the A-10 model.

There's no problem with an F-15C other than the willingness of some party to create it as a module.

The eagle and flanker are definitely subject to repeated stress reducing airframe tolerance.

Yes, it is done if it is necessary - not because of inspection specifically but because hot refueling and rearming is more dangerous - the engines can hurt people and everyone is running around with explosive and flammable things. You're probably also burning more fuel because arming takes time - even air to air missiles are huge and you only have so many people to move them and attach them. Unfortunately I don't have any useful sources for how it's done or why for you

I would imagine it should be able to like any other aircraft, hot refueling and rearming is a 'thing' when necessary.

I agree. Can't have the module without it, if it's not in I'm not buying.

While this is a possible application, it is not reliable for a whole bunch of reasons. One of the things a SARH or ARH missile will do is force the radar return to follow certain parameters. You do not have this with an ARM, and targeting with an ARM may not be quite as precise. Either way as far as longer ranges go, SARH/ARH provide more information for guidance algorithms to fly a more efficient path. Any time you see something you believe is cool, but somehow it's not the primary thing being used (far from it in fact), take a moment and consider that there might be reasons for that

No, it wouldn't be. This is an old topic and there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation involved with these seekers.

Depends on the distance, but you're not far enough for it to be this huge. On the other hand, like I said, the closer you get to 90 deg the more effective chaff becomes in DCS. As for the R-73, I don't know what to tell you - intermittently this can happen (should it? shouldn't it?) but there's issues with low IR signature things in DCS, including helis.

The A-10 has a low IR signature and in particular is designed to hide it's IR producing parts when launched on from below. In theory this will make countermeasures more effective. You don't need to do a stern conversion, it's not your only option. But that aircraft is definitely set up with robust defense in mind - your RF missiles are dealt with in the notch or near it, where chaff in DCS is most effective, and he's got plenty of flares out while you're shooting IRH.

Poor tactics produce poor results. Both aircraft are shooting from a poor position with countermeasures in the missile's FoV and the target aircraft in the most advantageous position for itself. May have locked onto the 120 momentarily or never locked on. Were you using launch override?