Bushmanni

You both need to have the same acmi file opened for the online debrief to work. Copy the file to the client, then client opens the file and then connects to the host who also has the file open.

#3 could be this:

Tacview is one of the simplest programs to install, setup and use. I'm astonished how so many other programs manage to make simple things so complicated but Tacview is a pleasant exception.

Just tried the online debrief and it's exellent! Only thing I'd like to have is a "laser pointer" or similar that's visible to the clients so I can point other things besides objects and "draw". Great work.

Feature request: Could you add equivalent speed to the data displays. It's almost the same as IAS/CAS but doesn't have measurement errors like in CAS or IAS. This could be calculated afterwards to provide "IAS" speed for other planes besides the host player. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalent_airspeed

You still need to determine if the target is within range though, unless the target is stupid close.

It's possible if the plane flies into ground due to desync.

There are mountain side roads north of Inguri dam and in the valley South of Vladikavkaz.

What plane is at 1:39? Looks like P-8 but it has some strange "antennas" protruding from the nose and tail to the sides.

I have had similar issue with brand new stick in pitch axis where the loose movement appeared when you reversed movement direction of the stick. Turned out the potentiometer axis was loose in its hole. I fixed it with applying tin foil tape (doesn't compress with time) on the flat spot on the axis until it fit tightly. The gimbal is put together by sliding parts in their place and then securing them in place by the bottom plate. It's possible that some parts of the gimbal might slide down slightly and become loose. If the gimbal is out of place the moving external parts of the gimbal are not level with the edge of the base. You just need to open the stick and push everything in place again. Unfortunately you can't glue these parts in place as you wouldn't be able to disassemble the stick anymore to change pots after that. Other thing with CH sticks is that as you use them the plastic wears down and makes the gimbal loose. I have maybe 2mm of loose movement in my about 5 year old stick. I suppose only way to fix that would be to somehow fill in the material that has worn away. Maybe the tin foil tape could do the trick if can be made to stick securely.

Nice. Did you use AP or HE? Some newer external models might not have damage models completed. When the new F/A-18 model was introduced Hornets just started smoking and spinning uncontrollably when taking damage like they had lost wings or other structures while looking unscathed. I think Hornets can disintegrate now.

Excellent entertainment, most intense dogfighting I have ever seen. The skills of the pilots was astonishing. Thanks for the organizers for bringing this to us, hope we can see more competitions like this. Congrats to jOONAS for hard fought victory!!

Use nose to nose geometry instead of nose to tail (or using other terminology, use 1 circle instead of 2 circle geometry). You want to win the fight as soon as possible and 1 circle helps with that. Quick win in 1 circle fight also usually requires good shooting skill as you are only getting snap shot opportunities at least with first few merges. Practicing 1 circle fight is also good snap shot practice which comes handy when fighting humans instead of AI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers#Circle_flow Lufbery is prolonged nose to tail fight where neither aircraft is able to gain on the other (at least quickly) ie. both are running in concentric circles chasing each others tails. Keeping up your speed at best sustained turn speed in this kind of fight is important but avoiding this kind of situation is also important as there's no quick way to victory.

Data is gathered with a lua script and then plotted in Excel. Each datapoint represents a 5 second average of turn rate measured from change of direction of velocity vector and any non-sustained non-level turns are automatically discarded. I can share my script if anyone wants to validate my data or make more measurements. I checked my data against TO-1F-15A-1 data and it's seems slightly worse than F-15 with F-100 PW-100. It's hard to judge as my configuration isn't identical to any of the configurations in the -1. Going with the gross weight alone you would expect about 16 deg/s for my configurations gross weight at 0.75M. But my configuration (44430 lbs) has less drag, 20C temp and -220 engines compared to the similarly heavy configurations in the -1 but I can't figure out how much difference that makes.

I just measured the turn rates for new flight model compared to the old one and there's about 1.5 to 2 deg/s loss in sustained turn rates compared to 1.2.16. F-15C, Sea level, 100% gun, 100% fuel, 4xAIM-9M Thick line is 1.5, dashed line is 1.2.16 paras jatkuva kaartonopeus = best sustained turn rate kulmanopeus = corner speed pienin kaartosäde = smallest turn radius nopeus = speed kaartonopeus = turn rate

CNATRA PAT pubs have one manual that has some BVR stuff on it, mostly basic procedures (P-825. BASIC FIGHTER MANEUVERING (BFM) AND ALL WEATHER INTERCEPT (AWI) ). But for a noob it's a treasure trove.

Previously EWR would see a low flying aircraft only around 40km away so extending this behavior to RWR is nice.

There was already some kind of radar horizon simulation present before 1.5 for EWR at least. If you approached an EWR on a beach from sea you would get detected farther away if you flew higher. How it is different now?

The issue is not the range of range finding but the accuracy of it.

Two cameras in Shkval, where did you get that? Besides, TV is an electro optical device. Because the lock mechanization is modeled by cheating instead of modeling edge detection to lock into an image with sufficient contrast, all those image adjustment controls have no effect on locking performance and modeling them would have only cosmetic effect. Color filters are used to help with glare or overexposure. Using filters in low light conditions just reduces the light going into the sensor further reducing image quality. I doubt filters are modeled. Explosions, burning vehicles and other artificial illumination affects locking and I bet that's what helped you get the lock in those rare low light occasions. Besides physics doesn't know about filters that help in low light conditions. You can have coatings on lenses that do help but simply adding such filter in front of any lens system is still going to reduce the light transmission as it doesn't affect the lenses behind, it simply minimizes the light blocking effect of the filter.

A live air operations exercise under the name of Livex-2015 took place between October 5 and 9 and extend over Finland's entire territory. Most of this year's refresher training in the Air Force was merged with the exercise that involved around 1,500 reservists, 800 active duty personnel, and approximately one hundred conscripts. Finnish Air Force F/A-18 Hornet multirole fighters operate also from a road base in Vieremä.

Not sure if this is from the same sortie but here you can see rockets flying. https://youtu.be/lWJ6oFBqdJc POV from the receiving end

That is actually a good point. I checked the acmi file and the missile keeps about 35 degree AOA through the turn which leaves about 55 degrees for the seeker to turn. With 75 degree gimbal limit you get to about 110 degree angle off limit in regards to flight path when you include AOA.

Lock-on range seems to be what it was pre 1.5. At sea level you get a tone on non-afterburning target from little over 3nm while at around 20k feet you can lock an afterburning target at around 17nm. (all ranges for head-on target)

3pJg_A_vEF0 Is this realistic? Especially can Archer really track targets over 90 degrees off missile axis? (gimbal limit seems to be 120 degrees) Israeli Pythons are supposedly designed to do this but Archer?