Jump to content

GGTharos

Members
  • Posts

    33366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Everything posted by GGTharos

  1. You can search through the forums. It was a while ago and I don't recall any more whether it was on the English or Russian ones any longer.
  2. Because people complained that it made the missile too good.
  3. This capability had been put in and was later removed. Or perhaps there exist other bugs causing issues here, or incomplete features regarding the behavior of the range and doppler gates which are simulated for at least the 120 and I believe the 7 as well.
  4. No, what is a bug is programming something and it doesn't work as intended. This is not a bug.
  5. That's a poor argument. Although this complaint is specifically about the 120, anything that came out of it could/should apply to any 80's missile and probably a bunch of 70's ones, to include SAMs as well.
  6. Fair question - the irony is that I agree with you, but the catch is this: What good is the community opinion (1) ? Maybe you believe this is harsh, but the fact is, most of the community doesn't know, those who know don't talk and those who have a better idea of what's going on without fear of spilling the beans so to speak are far and few inbetween but they are around. So, I think the goal here is to ask the right questions and get the right information, eg: What does it mean that the missile is too easy to notch? A couple of tracks is neat but doesn't mean anything, ie. 'works as designed' within the context of the game - closure < 25kts (as reported above) = break-lock. So, are we now going to talk about a target recovery attempt? It has been done in this game before. it was successful and guess what ... (1) people complained the 120 was 'too good' now, you actually had to stay in the notch and execute very accurately to make the thing stop hounding you. So ED turned that feature off. But suppose this comes back - now what? How do we deal with ECM and countermeasures, because obviously the missile could/should be affected (sometimes positively!)? Basically, saying 'it's too easy to notch' is stating a gut feeling without offering what it should be, never mind how it should be. One problem is that the notch works if you merely fly through it. Another problem is that if you go hot to cold aspect, it's possible (not certain but possible) that the in-game doppler tracker will give up. Essentially 'blinking' through the notch may constitute a break-lock. The simulation used to be much simpler than it is today, but some simple effects appear to remain. Without any debug prints though (which we will not be getting) it's really hard to judge what's going on any more.
  7. RWR's being 'too accurate' isn't the problem, it's a truly minor part of the problem which you've already demonstrated by mentioning the cat's RWR, so why mention it at all? You're not offering a solution, and you're not offering any reasoning with respect to how easy/hard it should be notch, so your report as is leads to 'there's nothing to do here'. As for the last, no, there's no 'guiding an AMRAAM', it guides itself to impact, period. Best you can do is give it target position updates, but those are nowhere near as accurate as homing guidance and you shouldn't be hoping to fly the missile to a lethal pass (otherwise, what's the homing guidance for? It's expensive) You should be able to calculate this by flying a bunch of experiments. I don't recall the numbers which is why I'm not quoting them.
  8. @BIGNEWY I believe this would be a 'low hanging fruit' to get into the game ASAP.
  9. I agree it should be corrected, this has been mentioned a long while ago. Also because rocket motor thrust is 'instant', the rocket motor isn't ignited when the cable separates during missile ejection.
  10. All BFM is done in relation to the bandit, so that's your answer. You need to read up on some BFM exercises; the speeds etc. that you need to use are guidelines to help you form a game plan before the merge and for every move your bandit makes thereafter. You're going to be looking at the bandit, so 'hitting your numbers' is more of a cross-check to make sure you're in the right speed range that you need to be, the rest is all about how and when to point the nose at the bandit. Analyze tacview and see why you're losing 2c (are you really losing it, or are you just sitting there hoping that sustaining at 400 will win you the fight? 'cause that's silly)
  11. Some really nice info in it though, including how ECCM was mechanized for that radar.
  12. First, wrong missile (the sequence you've posted here is for an E of some sort, not F/M/P). Second, in DCS the motor doesn't ignite on ejection anyway, so that needs to be taken care of as well, and third 'english bias' has no bearing on things in-game since the missile does not behave in a way that requires it (ie. seeker is locked at launch). Unlocking maneuvering at 0.5 seconds would be the thing to do, vs. keeping it locked up for the amount of time you've mentioned, but the F/M/P may be doing this dynamically based on distance to target or FLOOD (dogfight and FLOOD are the same thing and the missile would launch unconstrained, an MRM launch defined as exceeding a certain flight time to target would be more restricted)
  13. I think @Smyth point was quite clear - the missile seeker must lock on while on the wing for certain missiles, which means the signal, if there, must already be injected. So in some cases you would expect it to be always present, in others you could expect it to be injected when you pull the trigger.
  14. Yes, it isn't quite on topic but it is relevant - it has to do with implementing half of the realism of a thing, which then leads to predictably eyerolling results, typically much better performance in gameplay than what should be possible.
  15. Sure, as long they're made to fail often in look-down and eat chaff like no one's business, because that's the only way you get realism since that is what we're seeking. Shouldn't really stand a chance against modern ECM either, but then again the state of ECM is what it is. @Smyth good info - while not 100% conclusive, I'd say 99.99%.
  16. This is a non-sequitur. Injecting a guidance signal has nothing to do with the missile's range, the AIM-7 can easily be used within sidewinder parameters and in some cases was the weapon of choice in those parameters - it still had to be tuned to its guidance channel like every SARH seeker out there. If you're aware of an exception, I'd like to know about it. I'm not sure why you believe you can determine that the additional signal would be wasteful, since you don't know why it's there. I don't really know either - I know some reasons but not everything - just that it's very typical for that to be there. The only possible method, huh? You and a few others are really happy to grasp at straws here. The technical evidence is that a signal is injected, or we switch to CW or whatever. While this particular weapon system could be an exception, you'd have to find something to show that this is the case and so far you haven't. Realistically speaking this has nothing to do with the discussion, since we're not discussing 'the best way' to detect an R-3R launch.
  17. You would basically have to fly a specific profile with very specific timing and launch the ASAT. You wouldn't have any weapon systems interaction or anything like that - no radar lock and whatnot. ASAT was a test against a known target, nothing like today's air to space weapons.
  18. No, you don't need 'radio guidance' aka a missile datalink here. The specific signal the missile is tuned to detect with its seeker is injected into whatever the radar's doing - for simplicity we'll say it is in STT. There are may reasons for this system to exist, not the least of which is deconfliction with other aircraft guiding their own missiles, or the same aircraft guiding multiple SARH missiles to the same target.
  19. That is just plain wrong, with a side of wrong and wrong on top. But you did say 'If'. However you want to frame it, guidance tends to inject a signal into whatever existing waveform, and if not, then you likely have an older system that can be easily decoyed.
  20. http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2015/05/more-f-15-with-conformal-tanks.html
  21. I stand by what I said.
  22. If only reality was that simple and easy
×
×
  • Create New...