Jump to content

Consistently losing lock at 20nm in F-15.


AJ.eightFive

Recommended Posts

It's definitely challenging, especially if you need to maneuver! When you see the target come close, just switch to STT, save yourself the trouble.

 

I don't know if the 63 will be improved. I -suspect- at some point in time it may be, if ED decides to port the 15 into the new 'pit tech and AFM, and the new sensor/systems tech that would undoubtedly come with the F-16.

 

I certainly hope that will happen :)

 

It would be suitable and logical to go along with the Su-27 in an eventual (and hypothetical) Second addon to the F-16 SIM. :)

It would increase the games lifespan as with LOMAC :)

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, at 10nm you want STT :P

 

Not if you have more than one bandit, you don't. And having more than one bandit is the main reason for TWS in the first place. Lack of warning is secondary to multiple engagement capability, IMO.

 

The proper modeling was not possible. So, ED chose to take the time to under model it rather than to leave it over modelled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 10 miles you better not loose any time trying to keep a lock on 2 bandits at the same time (unless it doesnt break all the way from greater distances), just go for bore mode, shoot one, and then point to the other one, shoot and keep watching both visualy. I do this and I make sure at least one of them has 2 AMRAAM's timely shot at him so theres good chance that I will only deal with just one survivor (or none).

 

Anyway you do it, is extremely dangerous for multi engage WVR .

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED Fixed a bug.

 

The proper automation would have no less trouble keeping multiples in the zone if they decided to split at close ranges.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the first designated target would be prioritized?

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly ... the scan zone would be centered on the PDT. If the secondary (And any other) targets exited the scan zone at that point you would lose them.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were TWO bugs:

 

1/Radar cone doesn't follow PDT

&

2/TWD tracked outside scan cone.

 

Now there is only one: Radar cone doesn't follow PDT.

 

One bug fixed, one bug remaining.

 

Upside: one less bug & one more step towards accurate modelling.

Downside: increased pilot workload till the other bug is fixed too.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't a bug ... it's a missing feature, there's a difference.

 

The radar tracking beyond its anglular limits IS a bug. That should be pretty obvious.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that is funny GGT!

 

Next time I get an upgrade to Word and MS remove the carriage return feature but don't fully implement the replacement I should be happy! All my docs become one long paragraph ... but its not a bug!

 

Well, this is one paying customer that is not impressed ... sorry! 1.12 was not a good vintage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, this again ...

I online, tracking a target in a 15 ... I've locked the target at 40ish miles and I'm manually following the target closing head-on, with the cursor, noting the alt and keeping the cone centered ... and still the lock drops at 20ish miles.

Target closing headon ... Im on the 169th so watch target on external ... not changing course at all ....

Anyone? Is there something else you now have to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

along these lines... The TWS mode in the RF planes.. there is no altitude or speed info- not even on the PDT. Obviously it's quite useless for multiple engagements with no ARH missiles,I understand that- but I can't help but wonder- is it really lacking all this info in RL? Same with the datalink.. hard to beleive there isn't more info available to the pilot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...