Ракеты в DCS

It's probably not quite correct. These missiles can both maneuver so much IRL that it wouldn't make any difference to the target. Also, 120C should be arriving with more speed at the same range so as long as it isn't too close, it should be able to maneuver as well or better than a B in theory.

 

 

Fun fact: AIM-7 fins were clipped so that it could pull 25g. The fins being too large created torque that the hydraulic system could not handle, and it impeded the missile's maneuverability at higher speeds.

Im talking about a missile reaquiring a previously notching target at just a couple hundred feet of distance. 120B will make the turn, 120C cannot. Test it yourself, start notching both versions when there are 5s left to impact, or to simplify the test, notch with no chaff. You will find 120B to hit you more often. If chaff was a bigger seperating factor, 120C would miss less often (as it should).

Im not sure if extra available G but less lift of 120C or extra lift with less G on 120B make it turn better. But thats not the issue, its the memory mode chaff immunity. ECCM resistance of the 2 missiles, which previously in DCS was a massive game changer, isnt making enough of a difference now to make up for it.

Will make tracks for you or Chizh if you request.

I understand. I don't know what to suggest, frankly I think at short ranges the notch should not be effective, but the seeker should have some trouble. Countermeasures may never truly enter the equation any more except as brightening of the radar video because they leave too fast and need half a second to bloom (and that's rapid bloom chaff).

There are a lot of things that are not considered in this simulation that would help make things more realistic - and I mention this because the relatively simple stochastic way to determining ECCM effectiveness does not produce the desired results from either missiles or pilots, IMHO. Or at least, in some cases it may, in other definitely not.

Hm... no, Yugo MiG-29 didn't have working radars due to not being able to maintain them due to sanctions, that was part of the well documented scandal after regime change... hard to launch R-27R without radar... but R-27s seam to do quite alright in Yemen from 0 km/h ground launches

Ahaha

TOP soviet fighter + sanctions = fail radar

60s-70s american F-4 & F-14 in iran + 40 year sanctions = no problem.

Also, how MiG-29 radar affects AIM-120 hits?

How many fighters were shot down by R-27 with a working radar in Ethiopia? One.

I understand. I don't know what to suggest, frankly I think at short ranges the notch should not be effective, but the seeker should have some trouble. Countermeasures may never truly enter the equation any more except as brightening of the radar video because they leave too fast and need half a second to bloom (and that's rapid bloom chaff).

 

 

There are a lot of things that are not considered in this simulation that would help make things more realistic - and I mention this because the relatively simple stochastic way to determining ECCM effectiveness does not produce the desired results from either missiles or pilots, IMHO. Or at least, in some cases it may, in other definitely not.

A good start would be fixing this chaff immunity for 5 seconds-bug.

Not correct. For the LOKON level we make simplified systems and, of course, not everything that is in a real prototype.

 

If we'll do high fidelity, then everything will be there.

I understand that the target sharing process for the Flanker datalink in multiplayer might be a bit out of the scope for FC3, as it would require more than 14 additional buttons and additional data to be sent between the clients over the network.

But:

Sharing the position of the three wingmen in the group in multiplayer with their number is not. It requires no additional buttons, it requires no additional input by the player, and all the data that is needed is already on the PC of the client: The position and speed of the wingmen and their number in the flight.

Do you think it is possible to at least add the position of the 3 wingmen of the flight onto the display in multiplayer?

I think that would be a really good compromise that makes all the Flanker fans happy without being a huge workload for ED.

There have been no changes yet.

Когда вы уже поправите 120-ку??? Два патча прошло, а она всё ещё едва уходит на диполи, а делать 3/9 против неё почти бесполезно! Приведите её помехозащищенность хотя бы к Р-77/СД-10, иначе это вымышленная супер-ракета из звёздных войн, по традиции ЕД, на стороне НАТО. Или вы так же накрутите коэффициенты ухода на диполи для Р-27 и Р-77 после переработки?

Когда вы уже поправите 120-ку??? Два патча прошло, а она всё ещё едва уходит на диполи, а делать 3/9 против неё почти бесполезно! Приведите её помехозащищенность хотя бы к Р-77/СД-10, иначе это вымышленная супер-ракета из звёздных войн, по традиции ЕД, на стороне НАТО. Или вы так же накрутите коэффициенты ухода на диполи для Р-27 и Р-77 после переработки?

"Она так может" и ты ничего не докажешь, это бесполезно.

Players wingmen already shown on the IPV indicator.

No, in multiplayer the plane to plane datalink will not show the wingmen of the group.

Other friendly aircraft will only be shown when their position is received from AWACS or other surveilance radars.

When 4 Su-27 or 4 Su-33 belong to the same flight, then their position and their number (1, 2, 3 or 4) should be shown on the display, the same as in singleplayer. But this is not the case in multiplayer.

Почему вы думаете что в помехозащищенности AIM-120 что-то изменилось?

На фоне того что сейчас в ДКС, этот вопрос выглядит как издевательство!

Берём Р-77, у которой ГСН, по Вашим же словам, аналогична в ДКС прошлой версии Аим-120, и уворачиваемся от неё с помощью 3/9 и диполей - получается 9 из 10 (у меня, к примеру). Берём нынешнюю Аим-120 и просто 10 из 10 она влетает в наш самолёт! Ну если оооочень хорошо делать 3/9, то можно увернуться от одной-двух если делать заранее с больших дистанций.

Вот пример - 120С нашла меня у земли на скорости 310 истинной, под углом 82 градуса (радиальная 40км/ч) :doh: Диполи не помогли, 3/9 не помог. Р-77 и СД-10 уходит в таком режиме только в путь.

Дополняю - сейчас был момент когда я шёл на скорости 700 истинной, кидал диполи (всего 11 ДО кинул), угол был 88-90 градусов, и ракета не уходила в течении 13 секунд! В целом она летела и не реагировала ни на 3/9, ни на диполи в течении более чем 17 секунд!

No, in multiplayer the plane to plane datalink will not show the wingmen of the group.

 

Other friendly aircraft will only be shown when their position is received from AWACS or other surveilance radars.

 

 

When 4 Su-27 or 4 Su-33 belong to the same flight, then their position and their number (1, 2, 3 or 4) should be shown on the display, the same as in singleplayer. But this is not the case in multiplayer.

Can confirm.

OK

I tald about AI wingmen.

Would you think it could be implemented that wingmen within the group that are players could be shown in multiplayer as well?

Each player in multiplayer has all the coordinates of all aircraft on his PC. I don't see why it would be so much different to show the position of an AI on the IPV compared to showing the position of a player.

It would propably be quite simple to implement for ED and improve the teamplay of Su-27 and Su-33 pilots by alot.

I am not asking for the full functionality of the plane to plane datalink in the Flanker, just about that one aspect of it - sharing the position between the 4 wingmen in the group in multiplayer.

Почему вы думаете что в помехозащищенности AIM-120 что-то изменилось?

По тому, что у -120 в 2.5.5 такого не было:

30 диполи, после 5сек сразу реагирует

[ATTACH]245843[/ATTACH]

 

~195 диполи, не реагирует

[ATTACH]245844[/ATTACH]

Если ракета ловушки в течение 5сек игнорирует, это фактически значит, что ракеты на близкой дальности (там, где ловушки нужны), только будут срываемые по радиальной скорости. В 2.5.5 в течение целого полета ракеты диполями сривались.

Не подтверждаю.

Недавно делал сравнительный тест некоторых ракет. В 10 раундах были использованы ракеты по четверке Су-25 с ловушками.

 

В результате на уничтожение 40 целей (в 10 раундах) потребовалось 66 ракет AIM-120B и 68 ракет Р-77.

Наверное пользователи используют другую версию, а вообще скорее всего запускают другой сим :lol:

В результате на уничтожение 40 целей (в 10 раундах) потребовалось 66 ракет AIM-120B и 68 ракет Р-77.

Извените, ну этот результат не отражает реальность в DCS.

Спрасите самые лучшые группы выртуальних летчиков из соревнования "SATAL": TAW (1. место в "Diamond" и "Gold", летчики Ф14/15/16/18/M2000), 104th (2. место в "Diamond", летчики Ф14/15/16/18 ), pan (2. место в "Gold", летчики Су27), и так далее.

Они все вам потверждут, что сривать новые 120ки в сравнение со старыми в несколько раз тяжелее, как я с треками вам показать попытался.

Наверное пользователи используют другую версию, а вообще скорее всего запускают другой сим :lol:

Это прости против ботах, которые правильно защитится даже на самой высокий сложности не умеют. Даже умерают против ракет выпущенны на 90км, по тому, что они после новых ракет патчь не получили и еще так же летают как против ракет 2.5.4.

Они все вам потверждут, что сривать новые 120ки в сравнение со старами в несколько раз тяжелее, как я с треками вам показать попытался.

The result is correct IMHO. The nuances are not, and other missiles are also a problem - they are not dangerous enough IMHO.

I agree that comparing AI to players is not a good way to tune missiles. AI should be able to act like humans in the ways that matter WRT missiles.

This means either make AI behave like human players or restrict human players. Maybe both are needed.

In terms of restrictions I consider the ability to restrict how often countermeasures are released (probably not a realistic restriction) or enable CM programming similar to what players can do (probably much more realistic) together with programming the specific maneuvering that players would execute.

But here we encounter a real problem: Your experienced players work at exploiting these missiles. Making these missiles good against them is important but causes problems for untrained novices.

Going the other way around, the missiles are too easy to evade for experienced players which is also not good. Novices will still complain :)

So, the solution isn't a simple tweak to missiles. A reasonable training 'course' in missile avoidance needs to be included in the DCS manual, and the missiles need to be dangerous.

IRL the most effective countermeasures would be tailored to the specific system, pre-briefed and pre-set ... this is not possible in DCS, and maybe it will never be possible.

In any case, I suggest there are ways to make other missiles more lethal, to tweak how missiles work over-all, and provide training.

It's big work, and I would be sad if the answer was simply to lower the lethality of missiles.

So, the solution isn't a simple tweak to missiles. A reasonable training 'course' in missile avoidance needs to be included in the DCS manual, and the missiles need to be dangerous.

...

 

In any case, I suggest there are ways to make other missiles more lethal, to tweak how missiles work over-all, and provide training.

 

It's big work, and I would be sad if the answer was simply to lower the lethality of missiles.

Да, соглашусь с тобой. Помню, с Flanker 2 шел отличный напечатанный мануал страниц на 200. И там вроде был довольно таки хороший раздел по противодействию ракетам. Всё новое - это хорошо забытое старое :)