S77th-GOYA

Fire those monkeys, Fudd. :smartass:

Copy that. I was told it was on 50% but I guess it was just the normal LOMAC crappy missiles without the help of the 50% slider.

This isn't hyperlobby and it is pointless to compare RedFlag to a regular HL server. Plus, the missile slider being at 50% didn't help anybody. I saw several shots that were closing nicely and just seemed to forget that they were supposed to hit a target.

Does anyone know which SAMs got the kills? Were they mainly Iglas?

Congrats, RedFor. S!

Clay, make sure you have lua export enabled and have the record button on in tacview. It's also a good idea to make sure you have the newest version of tacview. 0.90

That screenshot was only possible because it was taken from watching Cali's track. There is no way to get cockpit views from any a/c where the pilot wasn't the one recording the track.

RedViper works with F4:AF. It does a lot.

No. This was your shot:

The missile heading to 331 isn't strange at all because that's where I was. You fired at me from 26nm while I was chasing Redeagle. I broke lock going defensive from a different shot and you hit the friendly.

MESSAGE FOR YOU, SIR! Compliments of S77th-Highway. S!

Any plans to bring the BUK radar unit somewhere near the launchers?

You've been around long enough to earn this answer: RTFM

This is my opinion and as such, yours may be different: It is plainly apparent that different squadrons are going to disagree and refuse to participate if they don't get their way. The only reason RF has worked to this point is the Fudd has made the decisions and we have not had to work things out so that everybody is satisfied. It is painfully apparent that as a community, we can't agree on many things. This thread and the thread about the LOCERF mod shows a dissapointing ability to discuss things reasonably. So, as difficult as it may be for Fudd, he needs to read the discussions and PMs and e-mails and whatever and make decisions that are in the best interest of RF, not individual squadrons or people. We either accept those decisions and deal with them or we can take our toys and go home.

You are wrong. I have had many, many locks broken because the target went music on. And this may have turned into one of the most pointless threads ever. Maybe PMs would be a better option.

It has been answered, Frostie. To accomodate a hearing impaired pilot.

That neither one simulates the real world is a fact.

Imagine never having to tell your side to turn off their jammers.

Only if a lock is detected and that's not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to a USAF F-15 in the scan cone of another USAF F-15. Jamming then would seem to increase the chances of a blue-on-blue. And from what you are saying, the threat displays we see in the LOMAC TEWS should be full of errors. In your opinion, how often should a mistake be made in identifying a radar source? Of course, we also have the added confusion of the same F-15s in opposing coalitions.

OK, this is one of the opinions I was referring to. Unless you have any data saying that the ALR-56C could NOT identify friend from foe. I will easily grant that it is fallible, though. But, is it not trustworthy enough to jam a radar signal deemed friendly? http://www.eis.na.baesystems.com/brochures/pdfs/twds_56c_001.pdf Yes, it is a brochure. Refute it.

An interesting point that will no doubt go unanswered, except for various opinions, is whether a friendly radar spike would generate a jam signal from the spiked aircraft. Taking the F-15's TEWS system as the example, determining friend or foe from the spike is one of its purposes of the system. It is illogical for a spike determined to be friendly to cause the system to jam that spike in response. And if LOMAC was modeled that way, it might keep Cali's head from exploding. :smartass:

An HOJ lock from a Russian a/c isn't passive. Chizh's post about it: http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=93065&postcount=11

I doubt you are going to get a definitive answer, but I would very much doubt the RWR displays of the US aircraft would show a friendly radar as the primary threat. I wouldn't call it a bug, just mis-modelling. Just as the RWRs don't show any friendly ground radars. This is about as good an answer as you can hope to find without joining the USAF. (from fas.org) The AN/ALQ-135 (TEWS) is an internally mounted active jamming system carried on the F-15C and F-15E designed to defeat electronic threats. It is comprised of Bands 1&2 (low-med freq), Band 3 (med-high freq), and (future) Band 1.5 (low-med freq). The system provides low band jamming capability for the F-15E, contributing to increased survivability against low band threats. The AN/ALQ-128 Electronic Warfare Warning Set (EWWS) is a countermeasures receiver set carried on the F-15C/E. The F-15's electronic warfare system provides both threat warning and automatic countermeasures against selected threats. The F-15's ALQ-135(V) internal countermeasures system acts on information from the Loral AN/ALR-56C and Magnavox AN/ALQ-128 radar warning suites and provides active jamming against enemy radar threats. The ALR-56C Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) detects a broad range of incoming radar signals, identifies and characterizes the probable source as a specific friend or threat, and alerts the aircrew through the TEWS display. It also manages companion AN/ALE-45 and AN/ALQ-135 countermeasures systems. An F-15 Tactical Electronic Warfare System (TEWS) Operational Assessment report for the ALR-56C RWR (Suite 1 Operational Flight Program - OFP) was released by AFOTEC in Mar 95. RWR deficiencies included the following areas: memory capacity, processor throughput, threat ambiguity resolution, and false alarms. Future RWR improvements requested via the F-15 OFP update process could not be met (Suite 4 and beyond) unless a new processor and memory capacity upgrade program was initiated. Specific RWR SORD requirements were not met in Suite 2&3 due to current processor/memory limitations in selected threat environments. The AN/ALE-45 Counter Measures Dispensing System (CMD) provides the capability of automatic or manual response to radar guided and infrared homing weapons. It will dispense a combination of chaff, flare, etc. payloads based upon the Operational Flight Program's evaluation.

F-15E

I say that they are very similar. Not just similar, but very similar. You come back and say that I said that they are completely different. All logic and hope of a rational discussion flies out the window.