GGTharos

They're tuned specifically for A2G. They could potentially be used against slow targets like helis or other slow aircraft as you said, but it's not necessarily the best choice.

I don't believe so. It made it in favor of the overwhelming number of larger aircraft. This is what acceptable merge ratio is about. It's possible that at that time cranks weren't being practiced, so one shot, maybe two would be the best you'd get with a sparrow.

Why would you measure 12KW out of either of those radars when they're at lower power?

They were able to kill more capable jets because the RoE for those jets required visual ID before taking the shot. If they were cleared BVR, the F-5's didn't really stand much of a chance, though there are tactics for that sort of thing as well.

TAS makes no sense here IMHO. But I could easily be wrong, I think those jets read out TAS for you in certain modes.

I don't even remember any more, I stopped doing it when ED hit the file instead of just having IC violations if you change it

@BIGNEWY are there any news on this? This requires the change of a single value in a single file (I know because I've done it), so ... did it get forgotten or is something else going on? I hate to grate on this but the radar performance is a huge part of what makes an eagle, well...an eagle. The information provided was solid, combining both actual test documentation from the oldest versions of the radar which gives solid numbers against specific RCS as well as the F-14 performance documents which give solid numbers (and those radars use similar technology and power input, so they won't be far apart in range performance).

There's already cumulative damage past a certain g AFAIK, so if you over-g to that point and over-g to that point again, there's no guarantee that the wings will remain attached.

If you really want to know: The canopy won't be destroyed but it will deform and will have to be replaced simply because the view out of it will be distorted. On the F-15, the limitation at M2.5 is that of the engine - the manual limits it to 1 minute but the reality is that you can run much longer depending on how much you're willing to shorten the engine life. The canopy is also likely to be suffering at this time. The Airspeed (it's not TAS, it's indicated - ie. the speed that the instruments inform the pilot, and the speed that the aircraft 'feels') limitation should cause the following sorts of things: Delamination or disintegration of vertical stabilizer root or leading edge, possibly leading to disintegration of that stabilizer (with follow on problems like excessive yaw at supersonic speeds, which will result in the aircraft disintegrating) Disintegration or removal of certain control surfaces like ailerons depending on amount of deflection into that airstream Maybe some aerodynamic effects but those are ???? Unlike over-g consequences, overspeed in the airspeed region may yield immediate disintegration and these happened IRL.

Air to ground. No idea how/if you could really use the radar hellfires in A2A. Laser guided ones have been, but radar is tuned to attack things in the ground. It might work vs. an airborne target in a pinch though.

If you really want to estimate the RCS, there's software out in the public domain to do it with. I doubt it's easy to use and you'd have to find appropriately detailed 3D models to run it against.

OMG that myth really refuses to die. There were no flares, the 9X malfunctioned or was shot inside Rmin.

The R-73 didn't exist at the time of those exercises. In the E-E war it was fired a number of times with a fairly good Pk, I don't recall the details though, it's been a while.

No, it doesn't. It's all-aspect sidewinders vs. no all-aspect sidewinders for those exercises. AIMVAL was working on the HOBS missiles but as you can see, they got shelved at that time. You might have to transit the WEZ, in which case do your IRCCM and don't stay in it.

Yeah I thought you said joking aside. The guidance was upgraded immediately to deal with amenuvering and jamming targets as this was identified as a weakness. Like, right at IOC. Because any radar in DCS tracks through trees.

I'm not sure why you'd put things this way; missiles were shot in head-on DLZ, lots of sparrows also simply failed to work.

No. Maybe at subsonic speeds. Notice how everything is going to small fins, and the clue is tail control. The R-27 and AIM-7 both have huge mid-body flight control surfaces while new missiles all have small tail-control fins, and they are capable of a greater g load over all. In all cases there are significant miss distance improvements as well, though a huge chunk of that is seeker technology and guidance.

There are many complaints. I mean there are complaints about super-accurate western RWRs ... may start complaining that SPO-15 didn't have the hardware to detect the frequencies that the AIM-120 operates at. No more AIM-120 warnings for Su-27, MiG-29, Su25/T, or MiG-21

Yeah, because random youtube comments determine aircraft performance. A video is worth nothing compared to the aircraft's performance charts. Unless of course you let ED know that in your lifetime of flying MiG-29s you can tell them how they got it wrong, they'll take your experience into account

R-73's can be shot from 45 degrees off-bore. That isn't head-on (but it is high aspect, which is good to avoid as well), head-on gets guns on you ... so you want to avoid all the WEZs. Your place is behind his 3/9 line. They're not. Your meat-stick actuator is connected to your eyes, no the RIO's If you're not keeping track of your BFM opponent, what are you doing in the front seat?

First, you specified 1v1 but, let's look at the big picture (which I guess probably doesn't really apply where you fly ) The BVR payload is there to reduce your bandits to an acceptable merge ratio, like say 2:1. If you cannot achieve this, you do not merge. ... but ok, you still want to merge, therefore (And it's going to be incomplete, too): Your BVR payload now exists to get you to that merge with positional advantage, meaning something like a 30 degree turn advantage (so he has to turn a lot more than you do) and sufficient/correct speed to exploit this. You can choose 2/1 circle based on payload here, but a 2-circle would probably suit you in most cases here if you have AIM-9s or 7s ready. You do not want a head to head pass, that is not the goal. You don't even want to be in his forward 45 deg when you fire, so don't make the 2 circle choice if that will be the result. If you arrive without a positional advantage, a 1-circle is probably your best bet. Make sure you've prepared for this before the merge, as going 1c while screaming past at 600kts is probably not wise. With a 1-circle your goals are to jam his R-73 WEZ, not get shot in the face (notice how the don't accept a head on pass theme keeps returning?) and get on his 6. If you end up accepting head on passes, the result is anyone's guess. You've screwed up and your fate is in the hands of luck basically, which at this point you can only affect minimally. Your other option, if you have the speed and you know you're merging neutral or at a disadvantage is to go even faster, wave hi/bye to your bandit and haul straight out of there. Keep your eyes on him, make sure to turn such that you keep him on your six (if he merges with an advantage turn in the opposite direction from his turn to force him to turn longer, but don't blow your speed doing that) and you'll out-range his SRMs. From there on, figure out if you want to run home or re-engage. The who would win and by how much question in a neutral fight is irrelevant. Do not accept a merge without an advantage - ie. do not start from neutral if you want to win.

No, he's talking like he doesn't know the difference between them. Now maybe he will.

They lock onto a different IR signature IRL - I mean different wavelength, which is also much less intense. AB contributes but the fuselage hides most of it (this part is modeled). AB off at a certain range. In DCS it's a signature strength change and nothing more. So, with AB you're at 5, drop AB and you're at 1 and then the seeker can't 'see' the aircraft until it's much closer. Although TBH at 3-4km it should be fine. It would just be so marginal at that range. Of course there could be something else going on instead.

I know that you believe this tells you something, but there's nothing here. We don't know how the R-27P is used at all, if in fact it is used. The airframe limits are just that, the seeker's capabilities are another story.

I think unless it's your own aircraft, no. Turning off AB causes a massive signature change IRL. It's not just the intensity but also the IR spectrum. I don't know how/if the seeker handles this; I imagine it would but I suspect it is also a weakness for the tracker here. Obviously the DCS seekers are very simplified with respect to what happens IRL.