GGTharos

Just a warning that after 35CPUs (or less, depending on payload), longitudinal stability gets funky.

AoA limit for what exactly? Normally up to ~25, but there are records of it doing 40+. It depends on what you're doing.

Before now, there wasn't really a simulation of the radar-missile data-link system or missile INS. The missile was either guided by the aircraft's radar or not. This is why if you shot say a 120 and it was in the loft, and the target disappeared for any reason (notch, or the shooter would split S and run away) the AIM-120 would happily fly into orbit instead of trying to fly to the target's last reported location and searching for it there. Now, there is a more proper implementation ( @Chizh , it would be nice if you could add some details for us ) of target data loaded into the missile before launch, then updated with DL, the INS takes that target location and aims the missile as required to reach its own radar activation point where it will search for the target. Loading the last known good data before the launch is also part of HoJ. Your understanding is correct.

Yeah. You forgot 'Everything is subject to change' I thought I saw some F-16 FM adjustments though.

Yep, the Elmendorf birds tested the terminals and they were found to be lacking, this is why they were not deployed to the rest of the force.

IRL and IIRC in the F-15 NWS is fully automated wrt landing/takeoff, N/A DCS. There is button to allow tighter turning, and one that allows the wheel to be disconnected from steering, which is used mostly for moving the aircraft around with a tow bar etc.

You're kinda making it easy. Yep, but as you know they're not priority. And you also know that the missiles in use by player aircraft are old and should not be considered competitive. Dangerous for sure, but Pk should only be going down. Yes. This is the problem with PN. Now, is an R-27 smarter than that? I don't know, I personally assume that there would be something to help there but I couldn't tell you with any certainty. I can make assumptions based on knowing what a Sparrow would do in some cases. The 'WCS emulator' can probably be adapted to the Su-27 and MiG-29 in the game to work appropriately for those specific missiles. And the F-14 really needs this as well (as well as somewhat deeper simulation of the missile's logics, meaning alternative guidance methods for the phoenix). There will be new ways to exploit the missile - it's capability is going up, but it will still be 'down' from what it used to be a decade ago.

Do you believe that REDFOR was 'drones' a decade ago in this game? The missiles were a lot more accurate and didn't lose speed in turns back then. Let's not get into the habit of doom predictions, because that isn't what's happening here. We will see what the 120 will do after this change is released. It will likely require further tweaking, as I personally except it won't handle certain scenarios correctly yet. But I could be wrong. Either way, the change emphasizes supporting the missile to TTA at least.

Yes it's a single day for them to fix, maybe ... but that's a single day where they're scheduled to be working on something else. Everyone believes their issue is easy to fix, and that may well be true. It's just not a priority as you can see

SAMs use a very old FM. There's nothing for you to report, ED knows about this; even the AAMs aren't transitioning to the new FMs at any appreciable speed, SAMs will be last.

Tuning to get the correct acceleration in the 600-1100kph and 1100-1300kph segments. This can be thrust, drag or both.

These days they sure can ... check out SM-6, capable of OTH engagement thanks to an ARH seeker and target feed from the AEGIS network, including any airborne radar. I suppose you can't always have full coverage but either way, there are plenty of counters to low altitude ingress, MANPADS of some form being the most common or other SHORAD capabilities.

Limited in what way? Detection of stealth aircraft is about at 1/8th to 1/10th the distance of the average gen 4 fighter. There's no magic to radar, you can only make it marginally better for certain application (STAP algos may let you detect them 'far away') and only marginally better for taking shots at them. A little ECM makes them next to undetectable.

Same difference, and irrelevant to the subject. The modeled KLJ-7 is an MSA. No, AESA requires more power and more cooling for the range advantage that it provides. The whole thing continues to follow physics as known

So BFM them accordingly There's lots of stuff we can do in a sim that we won't do IRL, like ... ignoring risk to life and limb, deliberately crash into things, etc.

My understanding is that you fight like you train, therefore you will train like you fight.

You are wrong. This is the launch range vs. a moving target under specific conditions.

This is correct. The launch range is against the moving target. The ground track (the amount of distance the missile actually flies) is never mentioned in a 'range to target' document, but it is used by the computer (Actually the time of flight is used, not distance) to compute the launch range against the target. So the AIM-7F is correct.

Installed thrust can easily be 20% less than declared static thrust.

Still toasty? I figure once locked on it's not going to be easy to deal with them but they have a pretty long ToF and they need to be getting SARH reflections during that time to guide correctly so ...

AIM-54As are probably fairly vulnerable to notching. In the documentation it says the FCS will refuse to construct a DLZ if target parameters are such that it would end up with the missile's radar being notched. This has to do with how the missile is implemented IRL.

LD-10s have no special attributes that should make them immune to an SA-15. Their RCS will be a bit lower than a HARM but not that much.

I tested this a long time ago and it was approximately correct. Maybe something has changed.

The launch range is 53nm at 50000', from mach 2. The target is head-on, non-maneuvering, with same altitude and speed. The range_max indicator is probably an old and possibly no longer used field, there are other fields which are used to calculate the DLZ. It's not perfect but it works, more or less. At lower altitude and speed (about 30000', M1.2) the AIM-7F should have approximately 30nm range (50km)

^^^^ This. People want their silver bullet all the time, but the fact is that taking down a powerful SAM site requires you to overwhelm it so that some of your weapons get through or they're forced to temporarily shut down, or possibly employ other tactics (Which are not currently possible in DCS).