No one escapes in front of the Russian aircraft

[karambiatos]

Exactly. And it's really funny that he's talking about 'east missiles', too.

The thread is kind of about east missiles you know.

[tovivan]

Exactly. And it's really funny that he's talking about 'east missiles', too.

 

What they should be called then?

 

Should I call them Soviet missiles or Russian missiles or maybe by the name of the workers that put them together?

Edited January 30, 2016 by tovivan

[Iceman1987]

As soon as western missiles get fixed it'll back to the same whining from the east flank ;)

 

The Western missles are better 'fixed' then the Russian ones.

 

If you fly Flankers/Fulcrums then

-You 27ER doesn't guide that well

-Your 27ER has its range reduced

-Your datalink is turned off/kept broken/won't be fixed/whatever

 

You almost think their is a conspiracy against the Flanker/Fulcrums...

 

I have played From Flanker 1.0, to Lock-on till now. But it is getting harder and harder to fly the Flanker.

So don't accuse us of whining like if we are a bunch of children. If most Flanker pilots (even the one from the 51st) are complaining then they ED should take it a bit more serious. And not call it ''whining from the east flank''.

ED is just counting on the love and loyalty of the Flanker community that it is still been flown. They are the same people who where flying Flanker 1.0.

[GGTharos]

It's really not. All missiles use the same basic code. There's a countermeasure rejection capability which is parametric, and it so happens that one missile is quite good at this rejection thing.

 

So no, it's not about east missiles, even though the initial complaint was regarding someone flying a flanker.

 

The thread is kind of about east missiles you know.

[tovivan]

So don't accuse us of whining like if we are a bunch of children. If most Flanker pilots (even the one from the 51st) are complaining then they ED should take it a bit more serious. And not call it ''whining from the east flank''.

 

Exactly.

 

If there was any other flight sim where I could fly Su-27 and other Soviet jet fighters, I would've been long gone, DCS is not such a good sim that I would stick around unless I had no other options.

 

And the attitude we get for supporting the company is even worse than patronizing.

[karambiatos]

It's really not. All missiles use the same basic code. There's a countermeasure rejection capability which is parametric, and it so happens that one missile is quite good at this rejection thing.

Stop trying to make it a vs thing for the umpteenth time.

 

Everytime.

 

"Hey Russian radar guided missiles are kind of broken?"

"BUT YOU SEE THE AIM120 BLAH BLAH BLAH"

[tovivan]

Stop trying to make it a vs thing for the umpteenth time.

 

Everytime."

 

Well that's the best way to discredit the topic and even derail the thread.

 

Then it can be swept under the rug as "those East players are whining again" and gratefully ignored by devs and mods, something that makes F-15 drivers grateful too.

 

Either that or posting idiotic pictures with even more stupid captions on them and pretending to be smart. Aka trolling.

[GGTharos]

The Western missles are better 'fixed' then the Russian ones.

 

If you fly Flankers/Fulcrums then

-You 27ER doesn't guide that well

-Your 27ER has its range reduced

-Your datalink is turned off/kept broken/won't be fixed/whatever

 

You almost think their is a conspiracy against the Flanker/Fulcrums...

 

If you fly eagles then

- Your TWS isn't working properly

- You don't have the correct navigation stuff on the VSD

- Your AMRAAMs don't guide like they ought to

- Missiles are far too short ranged

- You should be able to launch a slammer well before an R-27 platform can, but that's not the case

- The RWR is missing a lot of functionality

- There's no radar memory/tracks

- AWACS doesn't do the job it ought to

- The ECM doesn't do the job it ought to (but yay for chaff ;) )

 

You almost think there's a conspiracy against F-15s, all kinds of Russian bias.

 

Two can play this game.

 

So don't accuse us of whining like if we are a bunch of children. If most Flanker pilots (even the one from the 51st) are complaining then they ED should take it a bit more serious. And not call it ''whining from the east flank''.

I point you to that attitude being dished out from the other side, and heat and kitchens and stuff.

 

Stick to talking about what needs fixing, not about how everyone else has it good because things are bad for you.

[GGTharos]

Which part of 'all missiles use the same basic code' was particularly vs?

 

Stop trying to make it a vs thing for the umpteenth time.

 

Everytime.

 

"Hey Russian radar guided missiles are kind of broken?"

"BUT YOU SEE THE AIM120 BLAH BLAH BLAH"

[tovivan]

and it so happens that one missile is quite good at this rejection thing.

 

Hm, I seem to recall you stating in another thread not so long ago that ER problems are just a symptom of a deeper problem within the game.

 

I'll only post this once to keep OT at a minimum.

 

I've already said before there's a problem and it's not an R-27 problem. ( ... or a SARH problem ... though that's where you see it right now)

[GGTharos]

I haven't said anything to contradict that. The only reason the 120C specifically appears to work better is because it's CM rejection threshold is set very high, but it actually runs the exact same code. The underlying issues are still there, they're just hidden.

 

Hm, I seem to recall you stating in another thread not so long ago that ER problems are just a symptom of a deeper problem within the game.

[tovivan]

I haven't said anything to contradict that. The only reason the 120C specifically appears to work better is because it's CM rejection threshold is set very high, but it actually runs the exact same code. The underlying issues are still there, they're just hidden.

 

And they appear only with R27/SARH that WE know of.

 

I asked in that thread, but the last time I checked (2 pages have been posted since my post) I never received an answer. Where else are the symptoms of this problem be seen and what exactly is the problem. What is ED doing to fix it, what priority does this problem have for ED, when can we expect a fix and all those lovely questions.

 

One of the biggest problems that those flying East fighers see is that our issue is not even being acknowledged.

 

Instead we are being accused of whining and exaggerating and simply making bugs up, alongside of being accused of childish behaviour, from one side and from another side we are being actively TROLLED in order to prevent any fixing. Yet everyone is noticing these problems, many prominent members of this community have openly pointed them out in interviews.

 

It would also be nice if mods would do their work and clean threads of trolls and their posts, like the certain member and his "contribution" a few posts below.

Edited January 30, 2016 by tovivan

[GGTharos]

No, you see them also in 120B and R-77, and possibly MICA RF, but to a lesser degree.

 

The ECCM capability goes like this: 120C > ARH > SARH.

[tovivan]

No, you see them also in 120B and R-77, and possibly MICA RF, but to a lesser degree.

 

The ECCM capability goes like this: 120C > ARH > SARH.

 

It's not about ECCM, it's about the fact that many missiles don't guide/lock off the rail. And this thread and other similar deal with problem that is mainly seen in Russian planes (since this is a Su-27 side of the forum, something which CERTAIN OTHER community members seem to forget...) are focused on these problems.

 

The thing with 120B is that it's not that much used, while the 27ER is supposed to be the premium, main missile for Soviet fighters.

 

other questions still remain unanswered, like what is being done to fix the problem, priority, etc.

 

Btw., I added to that post since I last wrote it.

 

R-77 is also known as problematic, but more because of horrible speed loss than lock/guidance problem (which it also has). TWS2 also doesn't seem to work as it's supposed to.

 

This sim/game focuses a lot on air combat. The problem is that one side has such bugged/problematic missiles that it's BVR is many times non-existent.

 

EDIT: I don't have M2000, but I've heard that even it's devs are unsatisfied with how MICA performs.

Edited January 30, 2016 by tovivan

[Sweep]

Lets put it this way: Everyone here thinks there's an issue, but we have NO DATA to compare it to - we can get as many tacviews and tracks and videos as we want, but it doesn't prove anything.

 

I want this chaff stuff fixed too, but I also want your radar to drop track and never come back when I turn my jammer on. :lol: (half joking)

[tovivan]

Lets put it this way: Everyone here thinks there's an issue, but we have NO DATA to compare it to - we can get as many tacviews and tracks and videos as we want, but it doesn't prove anything.

 

I want this chaff stuff fixed too, but I also want your radar to drop track and never come back when I turn my jammer on. :lol: (half joking)

 

Trolling again? SEriously, don't you have anything better to do?

[Sweep]

Trolling again? SEriously, don't you have anything better to do?

 

I do, I can go fly a Flanker on 104th. :)

[tovivan]

I do, I can go fly a Flanker on 104th. :)

 

Your wit keeps developing I see.

[ShuRugal]

As soon as western missiles get fixed it'll back to the same whining from the east flank ;)

 

I can't speak as to the rest of the denizens of these forums, but I know that I am getting rather tired of reading this same condescending remark from you every time there is a thread about the absolute rubbish state of the R-27.

 

I, personally, could care less how magical the 120C would become if it were modeled the way you want it. I say "go for it", really. Give the 120C it's Wiki-ganda specs, and the R-27 family the same. From where I sit, the 120C won't be notably better than it is now, and I'll get my teeth back in the Flanker.

 

I am confident enough in my piloting ability to say that, with an R-27ER performing at its published capability, I would be able to survive the majority of 1v1 engagements with F15s while maintaining a reasonable chance of a kill. If you are so confident in the 120, then why do you feel the need to drop into every conversation about the R-27 and remind us how superior you are?

[GGTharos]

I don't know about that, the knowledge is there ... but it's been hard to find the right documents, I only have so much time to go through a mountain of stuff in order to find these things, and it tends to be a needle in the haystack.

 

But yes, tacviews and feelings don't prove anything. Studies do.

 

Lets put it this way: Everyone here thinks there's an issue, but we have NO DATA to compare it to - we can get as many tacviews and tracks and videos as we want, but it doesn't prove anything.

 

I want this chaff stuff fixed too, but I also want your radar to drop track and never come back when I turn my jammer on. :lol: (half joking)

[Sweep]

You mean an ER in a chaffstack?

 

:D

 

But anyway, I suppose I meant that myself and a few others don't really have the data to compare it to; I understand that you and ED have more data though, right?

[GGTharos]

I can't speak as to the rest of the denizens of these forums, but I know that I am getting rather tired of reading this same condescending remark from you every time there is a thread about the absolute rubbish state of the R-27.

 

You could also read what that was a reply to, too.

 

Or you could go through the entire history of the entire missile thing and see what a huge joke it all is. This isn't the first thread of its kind, and it won't be the last.

 

You can change the names names and the missiles, but it'll be there. :)

 

And I don't really care what you're tired of. All I see is people being 'tired of remarks', while doing nothing but making remarks, but in the end there's one person poring through studies and other materials to see to it that such things get fixed right - that's me.

There's others working on other aspects, and I know you aren't one of them.

[Frostie]

If you fly eagles then

1- Your TWS isn't working properly

2- You don't have the correct navigation stuff on the VSD

3- Your AMRAAMs don't guide like they ought to

4- Missiles are far too short ranged

5- You should be able to launch a slammer well before an R-27 platform can, but that's not the case

6- The RWR is missing a lot of functionality

7- There's no radar memory/tracks

8- AWACS doesn't do the job it ought to

9- The ECM doesn't do the job it ought to (but yay for chaff ;) )

 

You almost think there's a conspiracy against F-15s, all kinds of Russian bias.

 

 

1-TWS scan zone is overmodeled, allowing too much acquisition of altitude seperated bandits apart from that nothing has been degraded since LOMAC.

2-Nav modes, Ok still no backwards step though.

3-4-this is for all missiles, though granted AMRAAM is missing some key features but they have never been implemented since day 1.

5-Objection your honour, that is classified territory, R-27R yes but 27ER is classed as a longer stick even by USAF officials. This is without mentioning deception jamming techniques. Who's got the best jammer, I have cos I say so. ;)

6-7-8-9-true but nothing has been removed since LOMAC and the same can be said for all fighters.

 

The difference here is that you mostly require features adding which have never been part of the sim, where as Russian birds have had features removed or ones added which don't work in mp, with the addition of missiles that not only have reduced range but now are more attuned to chaff and flare than they have ever been.

 

The only positive for Flanker pilots is that he can cobra at 30g without breaking his wings, just a shame he can't crash into F-15 without breaking because missiles miss from 3km Taran would be the best solution, unfortunately F-15 wins that duel too but at least MIG drivers have that option, probably because they can't cobra like a boss.:D

[Cik]

to be honest, i don't see how you have time to do anything but come to these threads and snidely snipe at people who critique your holy missile model (which you constantly admit is horribly flawed, yet continue to defend for some bizarre reason)

 

yet if the flaw is recognized, then why have these problems persisted for literal years? what's taking so long, and if this is in the works why don't you just say so and stop making snide remarks?

 

i don't know if you're defensive or just have nothing better to do, or what.

[ttaylor0024]

to be honest, i don't see how you have time to do anything but come to these threads and snidely snipe at people who critique your holy missile model (which you constantly admit is horribly flawed, yet continue to defend for some bizarre reason)

 

yet if the flaw is recognized, then why have these problems persisted for literal years? what's taking so long, and if this is in the works why don't you just say so and stop making snide remarks?

 

i don't know if you're defensive or just have nothing better to do, or what.

 

I don't really see where he was ever defending his missile model. He's mentioned more than once it's a problem in their underlying code that effects all missiles, HOWEVER due to the capabilities of the 120C you don't see it in that particular missile as much. We all know it's not working the way it's supposed to. We all know the ranges are horribly wrong too. DCS's stance on the missile range is they need hard data in order to change the model (even though their current model has no resemblance to the real missile).

 

I've said it before in this thread a few times, and he mentioned it somewhat as well, if you want it changed then do something about it. Don't complain on the forums for weeks on end, go try to find the information yourself (from a reputable source) and submit it to ED.