Pyroflash

MERGE(D) 1. Information that friendlies and targets have arrived in the same visual arena. 2. Informative call indicating radar returns have come together. It has nothing do do with IRST. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

The bug also bleeds energy like a mug in those high rate turns. It is also prone to the falling leaf syndrome.

Yeah, except that's exactly what would happen. If an F-22A were to EVER go to the merge, it would be from a position of absolute advantage. Don't get me wrong, the Tiffy is a good plane, but it's not going to gain an advantage on the Raptor if the fight is "uncaged" so to speak.

Alternatively, ignore the cautions, however I would not normally recommend this. Some times they are there as a reminder that something is not right, and can be ignored (such as APU gen running with engines on). Also keep in mind that the start up video is from a much, much older version (beta, actually, I believe.), and does not accurately represent the conditions that you will encounter in-game. Things will be different. A lot of those warnings on start up are part of those changes.

Yeah, exactly, there is a lot of new tech coming down the pipeline that will drastically change the way people perceive AESA RADARs. Particularly in the T/R module packaging and design process fields. Efficiency is going to go up, and SNR is going to go down, a LOT. Better yet, they are going to be much cheaper than they are now. This also isn't down the road tech either. This is stuff that is here, right now, at the doorstep, just waiting for someone to actually produce it. I know EADS (probably Raython as well?) is screaming like mad for a company to step up. The SNR reductions BTW are going to come mainly from the new SiGe MMIC core chips that they want to produce to replace the older GaAS chips. Basically they are trying to get rid of GaAs as the mainstay or AESA T/R modules. It isn't very efficient, but they can make it pretty cheaply, and easily, which is why it is there right now. I've no idea why the decision was made to also include that material in the signal pipeline, since it produces a heck of a lot more noise, and relies on a gigantic 400nm process because of severe impurities. However now that it is going bye bye. The SiGe replacement can interface directly with CMOS architecture, meaning that digital signals can be processed far faster and easier than having to go through the complex transformation process out of a non-integrated GaAs chip. The drawbacks are that since they can now use <22nm process in the arrays, the failure rate per silicon wafer is going to go up by orders of magnitude due to the high rejection of the silicon process when it comes to impurities in the batch. Also there are some switch routing issues that will occur due to the inability to get conventional microwave switching to work with the SiGe core chips. This however, already has proposed solutions, and is expected to be all but fully resolved.

No, the F-15C really is that much better than the MiG-29 (in BVR). Arguing that the MiG-29 can even hold a candle to the F-15C in BVR is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Although not the same argument, the F-35 should, at least, be able to beat most all 4th gen fighters in air combat. It might not be as good as the Tiffy or Raptor in some respects, but it doesn't have to be. It depends, current work on GaN based core chips and MMICs will allow for almost a 16 fold increase in current radar power efficiency. This, for an AESA radar, is absolutely staggering since that allows for a near doubling of the effective range without a substantial decrease in resolution. AESA is really a wholly different beast than a mechanically scanned array. A Tiffy detected an F-22A's RADAR. What mode was it in? Do you even know what kinds of modes that the AN/APG-77 can operate with? I don't, and I'm fairly certain that you don't either.

Yes, 45 degrees aspect? Sounds like a guns kill in the making. I would fire that missile the first chance I got. Eventualities? It was a one off. Virtually the same core has been used problem free in the F-22A for a number of years now with no issues. They are pretty efficient, reliable, and stable engines. The DoD simply refuses to take any chances with it in the development. That's all this is. Depends on what rocket? If you are talking about a space or ICBM launch, then I will agree. However, at this point you can almost spot it visually. Cannon fire? Okay, I can see it working at tens of miles, but so can modern TGPs. RADAR however, can see aircraft at hundreds of miles. AESA also has bunches of clever tricks to use, so don't so easily discount it. IRST is not a sensor god mode, and has far more flaws than I think you realize.

The jets you are flying against are smaller, faster, and more maneuverable. Just like the enemy MiGs. DEAL WITH IT. (Yes, yes, I did just go there.) :D

Actually the common terminology for it now is Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). But yeah, people saying drones kind of irks me. Like they don't have people running them or something. Also that video is broken. The user got banned.

Yeah, except that is wrong. Your focus is supposed to drift precisely because the peripheral vision, although useful, is unreliable at best. You focus also NEEDS to drift because you should be constantly swapping back to your airspeed, VSI, altimeter, and back outside. Simply staring at one spot in space is a hazard, PERIOD. Flying is like having a case of controlled ADHD. You never let your eyes rest on any one sector of your scan for more than a few seconds.

Now now, no need to be snarky about it ;) And no, the MiG-29G will probably not be getting a re-texture. However, only ED knows what they might, or might not do, and it might be *somewhere* in the pipeline.

Yes, although in real life it generally works as more of a constant scanning process. You scan through your gauges, you scan the sky, everything about it is identify, cross-check, evaluate, act, repeat. This all goes (or should go at any rate) in a constant cycle throughout the flight. It is also important to be one step ahead of your aircraft. If something happens and you get caught up with it, it will probably distract you from something far more important. This is especially critical during instrument flight where procedures and workload management can get very hectic if not kept on top of early on. If you are padlocked, that it different, but in that case, you are paying attention to your bandit, and your bandit ONLY (for the most part anyways, you still have things like AoA, stall warnings, GPWS, etc.). You still have to maneuver your aircraft, but in order to do that, first you have to defeat his weapons ;). So yeah, don't get fixated on any one point for too long. This could have terribly disastrous consequences.

FC3 is a pre-purchase with open beta access (They are still making major changes to it), so you are in the right spot. You can download and install the current FC3 release like any other module. You will, however, need to first install lockon modern air combat, which you can order from: http://fighter-collection.com/cft/tfc-flight-sim-shop-europe/ under where it says: "Lock On Air Combat Simulation".

I think we have bigger problems if SP is broken..

Agreed, you could just post pics of the cockpit and it flying around all day. I'm pretty sure that this would satisfy most people.

Yeah, okay, so where are your bug reports? Your tracks? Your logs? Are you trying to help, or are you just giving arbitrary reports on things that may or may not be broken? I see that you have made at least some constructive posts on fixing things. Is it not, however, enough to know that there are people working right now to fix these problems? Must you also come in here and complain unnecessarily about the same stuff being broken, even though its not exactly a secret?

OMG GUYAS! NEXT ED PLAYNE IS AT-802U, IT SAIS SO RITE ON WAGSS NEW AVATER! (Yeah, seriously, he changed it back to the AT-802U just a little bit ago.)

Good to know, thanks mate!

Does anyone have a link to a podcast version? I would have loved to listen, but sadly I was otherwise occupied.

I'm still waiting for an F-22C on a carrier. The fact that this is not going to happen makes me kind of sad. In lieu of that though, the F-35 is not a bad aircraft. I'm not sure why so many people are convinced that no one will end up buying it. I am even less sure why some thing that it won't ever see production.

Thanks!

Cripes, I too, am unable to log in due to the password reset function not working..

None, for all we know. However we do know that SOMEONE will be modeling the Su-27SM.

Not if the F-22A has a full load of GBU-53/B's :D

Plus, you never know, the patch in its current RC version could be even WORSE than what we have now. I am pretty sure that there is an excellent, and maybe even a good, reason why they haven't released it yet.