SU27 and F15 bvr issues

[Kunze13]

im no stranger to ED games ive played fc1 and 2

 

i just got the SU27 and F15 and now when i slew the td over a target i can spam enter and nothing happens, it will occasionally dissappear and re-appear.

 

this is when the target is either flying head on at me or somehow unaware of my presence?(ive yet to actually have a target A. evade or B get bvr lock on me?)

 

also when i get a lock using vert scan/boresight/hms and try using the 27 er or et it just tracks a second then goes off on a magical trip to alaska or searching for jimmy hoffas grave, something of that nature and flys off to the side and goes straight(havent had the 120s do that at least)

 

so im wondering whats going on :crash:

Edited July 30, 2015 by Kunze13

[tovivan]

Yeah, I have problems locking in Russian planes as well. Too many times it won't lock.

 

Added to that, IRST was castrated this year and is barely usable anymore (doesn't see planes right in front of me and so on) and the airbrake is so bad now that I am half tempted to start carrying anchors with me!

[DarkFire]

Yeah, I have problems locking in Russian planes as well. Too many times it won't lock.

 

Added to that, IRST was castrated this year and is barely usable anymore (doesn't see planes right in front of me and so on) and the airbrake is so bad now that I am half tempted to start carrying anchors with me!

 

I wouldn't say that the IRST was castrated as such - it may be much more accurately modelled now than it was. The lock-at-50km version that we used to have was some sort of fantasy sensor from the far future. The present version, at least in the Flanker, happily finds and locks targets out to 15-20km which, according to German Fulcrum pilots (I think the MiG-29 and Su-27 share the same IRST unit) appears to be fairly realistic.

 

Fair comment on the radar though, the Phazotron radar modelled in FC3 does appear to be quite sensitive to being beamed, though again, this may in fact be realistic as the version modelled appears to be the earliest Flanker radar type which in terms of performance was likely rather behind the AN/APG-63 of the F-15.

[Kunze13]

so any ideas as to why its happening?

[feefifofum]

Kunze, if your target is coming at you head on, you need to make some adjustments in order to see them at the maximum possible range.

 

You can't get a lock because your RADAR can't collect enough information on the contact with its current settings. It only sees the contact for a moment when the auto mode cycles through high PRF and the beam sweeps across the target.

The lock disappearing and reappearing is a function of this.

 

For a head-on target, reduce your scan zone to 60 degrees and manually set your pulse range frequency to high. This should let you see small fighters out to around 40 miles, and larger aircraft even farther.

Edited July 31, 2015 by feefifofum

[Ironhand]

im no stranger to ED games ive played fc1 and 2

 

i just got the SU27 and F15 and now when i slew the td over a target i can spam enter and nothing happens, it will occasionally dissappear and re-appear.

 

this is when the target is either flying head on at me or somehow unaware of my presence?(ive yet to actually have a target A. evade or B get bvr lock on me?)

 

also when i get a lock using vert scan/boresight/hms and try using the 27 er or et it just tracks a second then goes off on a magical trip to alaska or searching for jimmy hoffas grave, something of that nature and flys off to the side and goes straight(havent had the 120s do that at least)

 

so im wondering whats going on :crash:

Could you, perhaps, post a few tracks of these two issues? I'm not in the Eagle very often but locking up a target in the Su-27 isn't particularly difficult unless I'm online and the target is terrain masking or there's a lot of lag.

 

R-27s and -27ERs track fairly well, while the -27ET can be quite susceptible to flares. But, again, if you could post some tracks of your experiences, it might be helpful in understanding why you're experience is what it is.

[fixen]

When in a head on engagement use high prf as mentioned. Also note that the ET has a lot more trouble tracking head on then when you are on the 6 of an enemy. Especially when the bandit cuts power and emits less heat.

[Ironhand]

Using HPRF will allow him to spot a high aspect target earlier but that doesn't seem to be his complaint...which is why I'm wondering what's going on. Then again, in rereading his post, the reason that his intended targets have never gotten a lock on him is that they are too far away in the first place which would explain a lot.

[tovivan]

I wouldn't say that the IRST was castrated as such - it may be much more accurately modelled now than it was.

 

Now it's less than half usable compared to what it was, like I said it even has problems detecting planes within less than 5km and at same alt. I would say that's castrated. Before that it was actually usable and you could get kills. Now...

 

Plus, this castration happened shortly after the flood of complaints by F-15 pilots (and them only, didn't see any Su or Mig pilots complaining)... Coincidence?

[DarkFire]

Now it's less than half usable compared to what it was, like I said it even has problems detecting planes within less than 5km and at same alt. I would say that's castrated. Before that it was actually usable and you could get kills. Now...

 

Plus, this castration happened shortly after the flood of complaints by F-15 pilots (and them only, didn't see any Su or Mig pilots complaining)... Coincidence?

 

I trust ED not to significantly degrade a system based solely on user complaints. Maybe they did take a second look at the system and decided it was too effective as-was and needed toning down slightly. It's possible that they went a bit too far with the adjustments but I wouldn't necessarily assign the change to a conspiracy by F-15 flyers. If ED were prone to that sort of thing the AIM-120 would have been made totally ineffective by now due to all the disgruntles Flanker and Fulcrum pilots.

 

I'd wait to see what happens when we get DCS World 1.5. Who knows, maybe a number of systems on various aircraft will have been tweaked and I'd rather the dev team concentrate on that than on individual issues with the current software as it's going to be obsolete in the fairly near future.

 

To answer the original question, setting the radar to high-PRF mode will not only give you better detection and lock range against high-aspect targets but will also help the radar to avoid dropping the signal contact every time it does a scan using low PRF, as happens when the radar is set to intermediate PRF mode.

[SDsc0rch]

or.......................... they actually got some real world data and they needed to massage the in-game performance of the IRST

 

or, a subject-matter-expert (aka.. former pilot) spoke with them and they modified the system

 

ED is very data-driven ----- gotta respect them for that

[tovivan]

I trust ED not to significantly degrade a system based solely on user complaints. Maybe they did take a second look at the system and decided it was too effective as-was and needed toning down slightly. It's possible that they went a bit too far with the adjustments but I wouldn't necessarily assign the change to a conspiracy by F-15 flyers. If ED were prone to that sort of thing the AIM-120 would have been made totally ineffective by now due to all the disgruntles Flanker and Fulcrum pilots.

 

I'd wait to see what happens when we get DCS World 1.5. Who knows, maybe a number of systems on various aircraft will have been tweaked and I'd rather the dev team concentrate on that than on individual issues with the current software as it's going to be obsolete in the fairly near future.

 

To answer the original question, setting the radar to high-PRF mode will not only give you better detection and lock range against high-aspect targets but will also help the radar to avoid dropping the signal contact every time it does a scan using low PRF, as happens when the radar is set to intermediate PRF mode.

 

Never said conspiracy. :beer:

 

But what would be nice is if they binned the S version and instead modeled a newer version, such as SM, something that would be more competitive to the US planes, especially those still in development.

 

The 15 is bad enough (along with literal flood of players flying it compared to russian planes... reason I stopped going on combat servers as a jet pilot), but now the US pilots are getting the F-14, the F-18, etc. and I'm getting a seriously bad feeling that with such obsolete avionics and systems Russian pilots will be made into simple cannon fodder and kill ratio risers for US pilots. What is the use flying a Russian plane in combat then?

 

The present situation is bad enough (just look at kill and death scores of F-15 vs Su27), but the near future looks very bleak and, what is worse, there seems to be no playing-field-leveler coming out for Russians at all.

 

Unless I missed something (it's been a while since I checked the list of upcoming modules) there is NO modern Russian fighter with modern systems being worked on at all by either ED, BST or any third party developer, only western tech.

 

Personally, when these modules come out it will be what will stop me visiting combat servers and for me will from then on be only aerobatics on multiplayer while combat only on singleplayer. It won't be worth it, since I fly for my personal enjoyment, not for frustration and to give someone else nice scores. Wonder how many others will either then switch over to Western planes or give up multiplayer combat. Only time will tell.

 

/whining

[winchesterdelta1]

Just played with the SU-27. had no issue's finding and locking people up with EOS and Radar. Only killing them was a bit harder. I even found a EOS target and locked him up at 70KM. But that was probably the B1B lancer flying Recon on the 104th server. But it does seem to be a bit harder to lock people up compared to the F-15. If they are far and low it seems it takes a while to lock them up with radar. You have to try several times.

[Stuge]

Tovivan, if you fly on a public server, getting good scores with the Su27 against F-15s is really not a problem. IRST, vertical scan, R-27ET, R-73, maneuverability, helmet sight. All these are great advantages.

[Kunze13]

i agree they need to add the SU-27SK or something newer (SU35S maybe or SU37 or the regular SU35)

 

can somebody give me an explanation on how to adjust the prf?

[DarkFire]

or.......................... they actually got some real world data and they needed to massage the in-game performance of the IRST or, a subject-matter-expert (aka.. former pilot) spoke with them and they modified the system

 

ED is very data-driven ----- gotta respect them for that

 

Absolutely. I actually respect them for their slow-and-careful approach to development. It's the absolute antithesis of release-then-patch with 50-part DLC that's typified by COD development. Ultimately I play DCS to have an as accurate as possible recreation of the aircraft involved, with FC3-level fidelity a good balance between usability & simulation detail. I'll continue to buy stuff from ED as long as they continue to make it :thumbup:

 

 

Never said conspiracy. :beer:

 

But what would be nice is if they binned the S version and instead modeled a newer version, such as SM, something that would be more competitive to the US planes, especially those still in development.

 

The 15 is bad enough (along with literal flood of players flying it compared to russian planes... reason I stopped going on combat servers as a jet pilot), but now the US pilots are getting the F-14, the F-18, etc. and I'm getting a seriously bad feeling that with such obsolete avionics and systems Russian pilots will be made into simple cannon fodder and kill ratio risers for US pilots. What is the use flying a Russian plane in combat then?

 

The present situation is bad enough (just look at kill and death scores of F-15 vs Su27), but the near future looks very bleak and, what is worse, there seems to be no playing-field-leveler coming out for Russians at all.

 

Unless I missed something (it's been a while since I checked the list of upcoming modules) there is NO modern Russian fighter with modern systems being worked on at all by either ED, BST or any third party developer, only western tech.

 

Personally, when these modules come out it will be what will stop me visiting combat servers and for me will from then on be only aerobatics on multiplayer while combat only on singleplayer. It won't be worth it, since I fly for my personal enjoyment, not for frustration and to give someone else nice scores. Wonder how many others will either then switch over to Western planes or give up multiplayer combat. Only time will tell.

 

/whining

 

Understood, all cool :beer: and I agree that it would be really nice to have something to balance against the forthcoming F-18C and EF-2000. Having say a MiG-35 and Su-30Mki would be a great way of satisfying flyers who favour the Russian designs. I can only imagine that maybe ED would unfortunately be prevented from simulating them to the required level due to most of the systems and avionics being highly classified. I'm sure that we'd all dearly love to see the F-22 and F-35 facing off against the MiG LMFS (MiG-29 replacement) and PAK-FGFA but realistically at lease one of the baseline Su and MiG upgraded models with glass cockpits etc. would be a great addition. Plus of course the Su-34 for the air-to-mud fans amongst us :D

 

 

i agree they need to add the SU-27SK or something newer (SU35S maybe or SU37 or the regular SU35)

 

can somebody give me an explanation on how to adjust the prf?

 

I'm pretty sure that right-control + I steps through the PRF modes on the radar. I think it goes high - medium - interleaved. It's either right-control + I or right-alt + I.

[Svend_Dellepude]

ED is not making a balanced game, they are doing modeling of A/C they can get info on and apparently there is no info to get on russian hardware.

[tovivan]

i agree they need to add the SU-27SK or something newer (SU35S maybe or SU37 or the regular SU35)

 

I would love the 35 (either Su or MiG), but there's sadly no way we're ever gonna see them in DCS as official planes, only mods. They're still highly classified and will be for a long time to come, not to mention still in development. Same goes for the PAK-FA, which would make my heart sing to fly. :D

 

On the other hand the Su-30 IS being exported and I'm sure Americans have already gotten their hands on one by now, if only borrowed for testing then gave it back.

 

As such, it's not really a secret anymore and since there already is a Su-30 in the game it wouldn't have to be created from scratch.

 

And since we're supposedly getting multicrew before even the youngest of us die of old age, it would be magnificent plane to have to have, the Russian analogue to the Tomcat, even if only at FC3 fidelity. Dat thrust vectoring... :love:

 

A good friend of mine has abandoned DCS months ago and always responds to my invitation to fly with "When we get multicrew"...

Understood, all cool :beer: and I agree that it would be really nice to have something to balance against the forthcoming F-18C and EF-2000.

 

Leatherneck are developing two planes they refuse to name, but I seriously doubt one of them is Russian, even though they've made MiG-21. Reason being most Russian stuff is classified and the other is that, if you look at polls and forums, most players are clammoring for Western planes or choppers. At least on the English side of the forums, sadly can't read cyrillic to check the Russian side.

 

Which is a sad irony... I'm flying a Russian made game, but all too soon Russian modules will be seriously outnumbered by Western.

 

Having say a MiG-35 and Su-30Mki would be a great way of satisfying flyers who favour the Russian designs. I can only imagine that maybe ED would unfortunately be prevented from simulating them to the required level due to most of the systems and avionics being highly classified.

 

Agree and for good reason. They ARE facing real and immediate danger, so it makes sense to want to keep the enemy in the dark as to the capability of their defence forces. It's just plain common sense.

 

But maybe, just maybe, an FC3 plane would be possible without giving away any secrets, even if it meant it wouldn't be totally accurate in portrayal. Honestly, I would be okay with some inaccuracies and FC3 fidelity instead of L39 fidelity, just to have a Russian plane that would hold it's own against it's enemies.

 

at lease one of the baseline Su and MiG upgraded models with glass cockpits etc. would be a great addition. Plus of course the Su-34 for the air-to-mud fans amongst us :D

 

Oh, man, I would TOTALLY rock the 34! :worthy: While I love fighters, experience has shown me being a better mudder instead (even if I have problems visually recognising targets) so such a strike plane would be god-sent.

[pr1malr8ge]

So my take on things. Bit of a background. I have my own personal access to an SME a.k.a former f15c driver circa ~1985-1998. Those who claim that DCS has given the f15 any major advantages over the RU birds is about as hogwash as believing that the f35 is able to replace the a10c in CAS for ground troops.

 

First thing is that in any doctrine of war concerning the f15 it will never be in the air with out ground and or AWACS support. So taking into account that in the supposed era that the su27 was released it had data-link [mind you it is no where as good as what the game depicts it to be]. Second the RU AWACS at that time was nothing in compatible as to that of the US at that time. Data-link while it does give the SU a passive outlook via data-link along with its passive eos the fact remains so did the f15 -irst. It would not be airborne with out AWACS support and would not need to have it's radar on to be guided to an engagement. In all probability with both sides having AWACS and the SU having both EOS and data-link, a flight of f15s would still be aware of the SUs presence well before the SU flight would know of the F15s.

 

Second the fact remains that the aim120 and aim7 is severely hindered compared to its real life counterpart. My SME claims confirmed launch at a much greater distance then what is capable in game against an evasive target[drone much smaller then that of a SU27] with a kill. [i'm not talking about launching in game at suposed max range. Im talking about probability of kill in game which seems to be 5-10nm respectively]

 

Third, the flight envelope of the f15 is off also. My SME has clearly stated that the f15 will not depart flight unless PRO controls are deliberately held

[i.e. High AOA and maximum opposite controls rudder/roll/aleron]. The plane according to him is highly forgiving and even in departure of flight just letting go of the stick 99.9% of the time would return to controllable flight. This 200*ps roll in the flight levels is absurd and frankly a major issue.

 

So to make claims that ED has given the F15 an advantage against the flankers is a bit absurd.

Edited August 2, 2015 by pr1malr8ge

[*Rage*]

So my take on things. Bit of a background. I have my own personal access to an SME a.k.a former f15c driver circa ~1985-1998. Those who claim that DCS has given the f15 any major advantages over the RU birds is about as hogwash as believing that the f35 is able to replace the a10c in CAS for ground troops.

 

The F15 has real and simulated in game advantages over the Su. TEWS, active missiles, better acceleration etc..

 

First thing is that in any doctrine of war concerning the f15 it will never be in the air with out ground and or AWACS support. So taking into account that in the supposed era that the su27 was released it had data-link [mind you it is no where as good as what the game depicts it to be]. Second the RU AWACS at that time was nothing in compatible as to that of the US at that time. Data-link while it does give the SU a passive outlook via data-link along with its passive eos the fact remains so did the f15 -irst. It would not be airborne with out AWACS support and would not need to have it's radar on to be guided to an engagement. In all probability with both sides having AWACS and the SU having both EOS and data-link, a flight of f15s would still be aware of the SUs presence well before the SU flight would know of the F15s.

No and why? In what conflict? What makes you think the Su27 is not operating over its own integrated ADN? Would you like to educate us on the intricacies of the flanker datalink? Are you aware that the most useful component of the datalink is not yet modeled in game? Are you aware of what it is i'm talking about?

 

Second the fact remains that the aim120 and aim7 is severely hindered compared to its real life counterpart. My SME claims confirmed launch at a much greater distance then what is capable in game against an evasive target[drone much smaller then that of a SU27] with a kill. [i'm not talking about launching in game at suposed max range. Im talking about probability of kill in game which seems to be 5-10nm respectively]

Which version of the missiles are you talking about? A? B? C4? C7? What launch parameters? Would you like to provide some hard data that is contrary to EDs modelling? Do you sense your argument coming apart at the seams? It is without any useful context. Except that 7/120 should be uberleet.

 

So to make claims that ED has given the F15 an advantage against the flankers is a bit absurd.

It has some real life advantages which are modeled to a reasonable extent in game relative to the nature of the module. Similarly some of its weakness are also modeled. And?

[pr1malr8ge]

The F15 has real and simulated in game advantages over the Su. TEWS, active missiles, better acceleration etc..

Last I checked that was how it was in real life. There are others on here claiming DCS has delibertly hindered the SU. Thus is not the case.

No and why? In what conflict? What makes you think the Su27 is not operating over its own integrated ADN? Would you like to educate us on the intricacies of the flanker datalink? Are you aware that the most useful component of the datalink is not yet modeled in game? Are you aware of what it is i'm talking about?

You would have to be pretty ignorent to think an allied nation flying f15s into an engagement would not use awacs. Your point on that is invalid. Regardless the datalink first introduced into the flanker in 1982 did not have the capabilities you think it does. What you're talking about with the datalink being able to guide a missile with out radar emission from the launching platform. in 1982 it is highly unlikely to have had the bandwidth and reliability to do such a thing. Don't kid your self on that.

 

Which version of the missiles are you talking about? A? B? C4? C7? What launch parameters? Would you like to provide some hard data that is contrary to EDs modelling? Do you sense your argument coming apart at the seams? It is without any useful context. Except that 7/120 should be uberleet. Again you're grasping at straws. This Excert was direct from a former eagle driver. I did not ask specific launch perameters when he was talking to me about it. The numbers were greater then 20nm against If I remember right he said F4 drones that were in evasive maneuvering. With the current sim the furthest you can launch an aim120c against a maneuvering target is <10nm. Compound that with the fact that it seems 10-20% of first shot aim120s deciding they want to track straight up as if launching for a satalite in game is a MAJOR issue. I have YET to see one RU Missile in any tac view I've watched do this. Hell [i cannot prove as replay file is corrupted] I've managed to kill my self with my own aim120 going vert and then falling back down and hitting me some time after I launched it. If only I could replay that and provide the tac file.

 

It has some real life advantages which are modeled to a reasonable extent in game relative to the nature of the module. Similarly some of its weakness are also modeled. And?

 

With that you're arguing that ED has magically made the f15 so advantageous against the su/mig when truly it is not. Subsequently I have direct access to an actual former pilot of that era f15c. You and obviously I cannot say with certainty do not have access to an actual pilot of neither plane and are only responding with exactly what you think is correct which probably isn't..

 

The arguments is only to be compounded when the f18 is released and it includes j2j datalink jhmcs & aim9x.

 

Again the direct statements that ED has buffed the f15 and nerfed the SU/MIG for unfair advantages is plainly outrageous.

Edited August 3, 2015 by pr1malr8ge

[*Rage*]

1) ED have modeled the F15 and Su27 to a level consistent with FC3. They have done a reasonable job. There are things missing in both aircraft but they are well matched.

 

2) What conflict are you talking about? This argument is nonsensical since we are not fighting a real war. Are we using satellites? nukes? 007?

 

3) Im not talking about buddy guiding a radar missile. The capability i'm referring to is perhaps even more important. I believe it is on the developers 'to do list'.

 

4) Are you serious? You're yet to see a RU missile misstrack??? Have you ever played DCS? Feast your eyes on this:-

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7su8ges5gefzpfu/AADqkiSXQnYX-ZokjpZIDclca?dl=0

 

I've been testing ER tracking for years now, with almost every patch. After you've watched the tracks and searched for and read my posts in the missile thread about missile tracking and guidance we can talk some more about it. Anything else your mate Dave the pilot told you?

 

5) No one with a rational thought process would believe that ED has deliberately buffed the F15 and nerfed the 27. There are bugs, there are discrepancies in modeling but overal they are modeled to a similar degree. You however seem to think the F15 is deliberately undermodeled. Nonsense.

Edited August 3, 2015 by ///Rage

[pr1malr8ge]

1) ED have modeled the F15 and Su27 to a level consistent with FC3. They have done a reasonable job. There are things missing in both aircraft but they are well matched.

So says the expert who aptly points out to a level consistent with FC3. This right there says it all.

2) What conflict are you talking about? This argument is nonsensical since we are not fighting a real war. Are we using satellites? nukes? 007? This is a sim. But the complaint about ED purposely making the f15 better then the Su27 is the current argument. Therefor stop grasping at straws.

 

3) Im not talking about buddy guiding a radar missile. The capability i'm referring to is perhaps even more important. I believe it is on the developers 'to do list'. You keep tossing about a capability but refuse to name it. Get over your self. Datalink serves as SA. It will show where Buddies are, what they see and possibly what they have bugged what you see [to them and bugged] what awacs/gbr sees as a threat or Friendly and the ability to buddy launch missiles. Not much else can be shown on a datalink sept say the ability to que a friendly for current load out etc but nothing that is game changing. BTW I watched a slew of random tacviews of yours and none have just went stupid straight off the rail and went into the virtual stratosphere. Maybe I got "unlucky" and selected only those perfect but 10+ that I viewed never had that issue.

 

4) Are you serious? You're yet to see a RU missile misstrack??? Have you ever played DCS? Feast your eyes on this:- Again I have not seen any RU Missle in any of my tacviews immediately after launch go straight up. Get over your self. below I will post a tacview I'm talking about look at the 1hr mark

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7su8ges5gefzpfu/AADqkiSXQnYX-ZokjpZIDclca?dl=0

 

I've been testing ER tracking for years now, with almost every patch. After you've watched the tracks and searched for and read my posts in the missile thread about missile tracking and guidance we can talk some more about it. Anything else your mate Dave the pilot told you?

Again not my mate and get over your self. You could be testing civilian sim based anything all you want for since the dawn of time and blue in your face doesn't make you an expert. Until you have fired the real thing you DON'T KNOW JACK. Dave the pilot as you so aptly claim isn't my mate he is my relative and has over 2500hrs in the eagle!

 

5) No one with a rational thought process would believe that ED has deliberately buffed the F15 and nerfed the 27. There are bugs, there are discrepancies in modeling but overal they are modeled to a similar degree. You however seem to think the F15 is deliberately undermodeled. Nonsense.

It is undermodeled m8. The rudder authority is off, the plane wants to depart controlled flight in the flight levels is WRONG[200+dps roll]. The fact is if you read above comments there seems to be people who believe the f15 is buffed and the su27 is nerfed. WTH are you bringing that comment in here anyway since it's blatantly obvious there is people who believe it is so! Again you can argue NONSENSE all you want. But when an actual former eagle pilot says NO thats not right then I will believe him over your virtual unequivocal knowledge any day.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8KiatNmckBIV01QeU5XNzRCc2c/view?usp=sharing

 

1hr mark watch first aim120 go vertical straight off the rail. This is common with aim120c. I've never seen any RU missile do that. [minus those trying to do it and have a nose high launch]

Edited August 3, 2015 by pr1malr8ge

[SinusoidDelta]

The eagle flight model has issues. You could say it is 'under modeled' but not deliberately.

 

It is actually an incredible achievement on the part of Belsimtek and ED that we have a flight model capable of issues like transonic roll off. It should also be considered the F-15C FM actually is over modeled in some respects. No, I'm not an eagle driver IRL but the -1 is publicly available.

 

The most frustrating thing on this forum in general are complaints about underperforming this and overperforming that but it's just hearsay. Show us your data, get technical, support your arguments, cite references, post tracks. You might just find the F-15C is *over-performing* in some areas!

 

Also, I haven't seen a post actually detailing the TRO problem or where it even earned that moniker. Yet everyone knows it's a problem. There is hardly any technical discussion here overall aside from the wonderful research put together by IASGATG regarding missile performance. Threads quickly devolve into never ending arguments that accomplish absolutely nothing aside from further dividing the community.

Edited August 3, 2015 by SinusoidDelta

[Kunze13]

didnt expect to come back to this xD

 

seriously ED could just add the SU27SK with its R77s and possibly R27EP's to level the field, they should at least considering the eurofighter coming up, cause its going to be a tad ridiculous if it shows up and all we have is MIG29A and S, SU27S, MIG21 Bis

 

while the SU35BM or an SU37 or such would be epic, i doubt they can get data on either, maybe the original SU35 however could be an option, but the SU27SK would be best for the game IMHO and maybe add china with a J-11 cause well, itd be cool if we could get a J-11 and an F-15J, and maybe an F-2A and F-16C(im all for the F-16C cause it will give the Mig29S a fair opponent)