In your opinion (hypothetical) what would make LOMAC more realistic?

[Pilotasso]

The only way to balance the game would be to intruduce the Su-30MKKI India has. WAFM considering what GG said about AMRAAM and R-77. 10 R-77's on the flanker would make for it.

 

Without more information like an MFD flowchart and instruments its not possible. Beleive me I want it.

 

Untill then there is not much sense to believe fighting 1 on 1 VS the eagle at low altitude (because I wont do that) will be a balanced game.

IF you want that, better get a space SIM. I do have wing commander and freespace 2 for shooting arround. But for smart AA tactics with a degree of challenge and intelligent, stimutaling realistic combat you have to bow to facts and studied play.

[GGTharos]

The latest R-77 missile has practically the same dual propulsion system as the Kh-31P (rocket/ramjet).

 

The Kh-31 features a unique dual propulsion system designed by the Soyuz Design Bureau in Turayevo near Moscow. First the missile is accelerated by its solid-fuel rocket engine to a speed of Mach 1.8, then the engine is discarded and the interior of the missile is converted into the combustion chamber of the missile's jet engine. The latter accelerates the missile to a speed of almost Mach 4.5, while four air intake holes on the sides of the missile body open up.

 

I'd rather be in an R-77 armed Fulcrum than in a AMRAAM armed F-16 or F/A-18. :D

 

My 2 cents....

 

I need to depreciate your 2 cents sadly... your version of the R-77 doesn't actually exist as an operational weapon. In fact, does it even exist as an /experimental/ weapon, or is it still just a paper tiger? ;)

 

Besides which, both Europe and USA have their own ramjet propelled AAMs lined up for R&D. If you want to talk 'future missiles' vs. 'future missiles', I'm pretty sure FMRAAM/BVRAAM will be better than your paper tiger R-77. Oh,t he meteor, too :D

[Pilotasso]

The latest R-77 missile has practically the same dual propulsion system as the Kh-31P (rocket/ramjet).

The Kh-31 features a unique dual propulsion system designed by the Soyuz Design Bureau in Turayevo near Moscow. First the missile is accelerated by its solid-fuel rocket engine to a speed of Mach 1.8, then the engine is discarded and the interior of the missile is converted into the combustion chamber of the missile's jet engine. The latter accelerates the missile to a speed of almost Mach 4.5, while four air intake holes on the sides of the missile body open up.

I'd rather be in an R-77 armed Fulcrum than in a AMRAAM armed F-16 or F/A-18. :D

My 2 cents....

 

The ramjet R-77 has been on hold for years, there are only rumours that its still in development. Its possible that Russia may decide for an entirely new missile in the mean time. The new R-77 may or may not materialize. Untill then it shouldnt be treated as a weapon ready for combat that has not officialy entered service because its still too early for that.

[TucksonSonny]

Besides which, both Europe and USA have their own ramjet propelled AAMs lined up for R&D.

 

The only country with Ramjet missiles AA or AG on paper is the US.

 

My 2 cents….

Plaaf (China) already have their reversed engineering version.

[walmis]

meteor has ramjet engine, no?

[D-Scythe]

Of course it does.

[TucksonSonny]

meteor has ramjet engine, no?

 

I mean Europe and Russia already develop ramjet missiles.

 

Meteor ramjet was already successfully tested and is near to production phase.

 

Russia their R-77M scramjet test model in mid 90s was a metre long accelerated by rocket to mach5 and 30000m the scramjet burned for 133secs and accelerated the missile from m5 to m6 before hitting the ground 180km downrange.

 

For a period Vympel was marketing a 150km-range ramjet-powered R-77M-PD. A ramjet powered version was reportedly flight tested in 1995.

The R-77M is already in test and has been quoted as having an a-pole range in excess of 85nm (155km). The N-011M/R-77M weapon system has been credited with being able to attack any aircraft with RCS larger than 1.5 square metres from a distance of 80nm (148km), the R-77M (the missile is twice the weight of an AIM-120B, and has greater G capabilities)

 

Of course there was also a rumour that a black aim-120-Ramjet version was tested during the 1st gulf war but later it appears that it was all BS.

[Ardillita]

The only way to balance the game would be to intruduce the Su-30MKKI India has. WAFM considering what GG said about AMRAAM and R-77. 10 R-77's on the flanker would make for it.

 

Without more information like an MFD flowchart and instruments its not possible. Beleive me I want it.

 

Untill then there is not much sense to believe fighting 1 on 1 VS the eagle at low altitude (because I wont do that) will be a balanced game.

IF you want that, better get a space SIM. I do have wing commander and freespace 2 for shooting arround. But for smart AA tactics with a degree of challenge and intelligent, stimutaling realistic combat you have to bow to facts and studied play.

 

 

This turns the thread into the old discussion: russia vs US? Definitly in no way the sim is "unbalanced". The f15 is no way superior to the s-27 or the mig. There is no weapon that can be considered superior to all of the rest, anf the F15 is far from that. If the eagle fans think they are superior because of their aim-120... well, it seems yuo have been flying against too much IA... The famous aim-120 can easily be beaten usewing the far much superior s-27 great capacity of fuel wich gives him a wide range of maneouvers to defeat the f15 till he will be force to disengage and if you are saying you will be fighting at high altitudes against the SU-27 and that way you will be safe, you are very wroing, any missile of the 27 series well used can perfectly be used to force you to go down, in every sense.. So in the end, it all about the pilot. Nor the F15 rules the sim nor the su-27 or the mig.

 

The sim is not "unbalanced", both sides have their good and bad characteristics

[D-Scythe]

I mean Europe and Russia already develop ramjet missiles.

 

Meteor ramjet was already successfully tested and is near to production phase.

 

Russia their R-77M scramjet test model in mid 90s was a metre long accelerated by rocket to mach5 and 30000m the scramjet burned for 133secs and accelerated the missile from m5 to m6 before hitting the ground 180km downrange.

 

For a period Vympel was marketing a 150km-range ramjet-powered R-77M-PD. A ramjet powered version was reportedly flight tested in 1995.

The R-77M is already in test and has been quoted as having an a-pole range in excess of 85nm (155km). The N-011M/R-77M weapon system has been credited with being able to attack any aircraft with RCS larger than 1.5 square metres from a distance of 80nm (148km), the R-77M (the missile is twice the weight of an AIM-120B, and has greater G capabilities)

 

Of course there was also a rumour that a black aim-120-Ramjet version was tested during the 1st gulf war but later it appears that it was all BS.

 

There is no such thing as an a-pole "range" - a-pole is a tactic to maximize the distance between you and the target before you're missiles can go active.

 

Secondly, you better have some sources to back up your "facts."

 

Thirdly, this has NOTHING to do with the topic.

 

This turns the thread into the old discussion: russia vs US? Definitly in no way the sim is "unbalanced". The f15 is no way superior to the s-27 or the mig. There is no weapon that can be considered superior to all of the rest, anf the F15 is far from that. If the eagle fans think they are superior because of their aim-120... well, it seems yuo have been flying against too much IA... The famous aim-120 can easily be beaten usewing the far much superior s-27 great capacity of fuel wich gives him a wide range of maneouvers to defeat the f15 till he will be force to disengage and if you are saying you will be fighting at high altitudes against the SU-27 and that way you will be safe, you are very wroing, any missile of the 27 series well used can perfectly be used to force you to go down, in every sense.. So in the end, it all about the pilot. Nor the F15 rules the sim nor the su-27 or the mig.

 

The sim is not "unbalanced", both sides have their good and bad characteristics

 

Are you even reading what you are saying? And what OTHER people are saying?

[TucksonSonny]

There is no such thing as an a-pole "range" - a-pole is a tactic to maximize the distance between you and the target before you're missiles can go active.

 

Secondly, you better have some sources to back up your "facts."

 

 

I mean while using a-pole tactic the missile could reach the target which was in 85nm range.

Of course a missile can not go active at 85nm range.

 

Source: http://www.Eurofighter.com and Vympel (Russia) and Soyuz Design Bureau in Turayevo near Moscow!

[GGTharos]

The A-pole /is/ a range. So is the E-Pole and the F-Pole. People often name tactics the same way, but originally these terms refer to distances.

 

Yes Tucksonsonny, that's right, but that missile is still a paer tiger. The US has made some ramject engines, but only for large applications (specifically aircraft) and so far they have failed AFAIK. But ramjet engines aren't new things. The 'new' part here is miniaturization.

[D-Scythe]

I mean while using a-pole tactic the missile could reach the target which was in 85nm range.

Of course a missile can not go active at 85nm range.

Source: Vympel and Soyuz Design Bureau in Turayevo near Moscow!

 

So...the missile has a range of 85 nm when it's a-poled? Again, a-pole is a tactic maximize the distance between the target and the shooter as the missile is in flight - it doesn't increase the range of the missile.

 

If you mean 85 nm is the range where the shooter can cut the strings to it's missiles, then you're dreaming - the R-77 would have to sustain a speed of 6200 kmph for 90 seconds for that to happen. Even the SA-10/Patriot can't do that, and they have MUCH more propellant and MUCH bigger and more powerful rockets than the R-77.

 

The A-pole /is/ a range. So is the E-Pole and the F-Pole. People often name tactics the same way, but originally these terms refer to distances.

 

Yes Tucksonsonny, that's right, but that missile is still a paer tiger. The US has made some ramject engines, but only for large applications (specifically aircraft) and so far they have failed AFAIK. But ramjet engines aren't new things. The 'new' part here is miniaturization.

 

So...what's the A-pole range of the AIM-120 in LOMAC?

[Guest IguanaKing]

I can't really pick any of the poll choices, since most of those are either based on classified information or are going to be based on...yes I'm going to say the "N" word...nationalistic bias. But, in the mean-time, what we could use is more immersive COMs. LOMAC is pretty sterile in that respect and even ATC is still dumb as a box of rocks. Standoff jamming ability on the part of either side is complete BS, unless of course they have dedicated EW aircraft...which neither side does, to my knowledge. The SAM ability to shoot down a short-range AGM such as the AGM-65 is also complete BS, but a theoretical capability, so I'll go along with it. Its actually not all that hard to avoid having your Maverick shot down, its just a matter of playing chicken with the SAM. The closer you can get and get him to focus on you, the less chance he has of hitting your missile. :D

[GGTharos]

The A-Pole range is the distance between your aircraft and the enemy aircraft when the seeker goes active.

 

You want to maximize this distance, and -this- is the tactic ;)

[Pilotasso]

I have been defyed by well known online players (you know who you are!)

to show how we know so much about AMRAAM missile perfomance should be.

 

I replied I had no classified data but something is avaiable to the public.

 

Heres some good examples (I have alot more):

 

1) My sources- my aviation bible 500 A3 pages "Great book of Modern warplanes"

The magazine is "Airforces monthly"

the other book is "superfighters"

 

2)Combat records of the R-27 in action taken from the same issue of "Airforces monthly" shown on the previous pic.

 

3)Fundamentals of the AIM-120 usage. Taken from the "Great book of Modern warplanes"

A special note here: Remenber the discussion we had on another thread about how missiles accelerate due to acceleration of the combustion gases mass flow and not due to pushing out the gases against the ambient air? (i.e. the least pressure behind the chamber the faster the missile goes) I just stumbled across it! :)

 

4)AA BVR missiles technicals report, taken from "Airforces monthly"

 

5)The Chinese J-10 development update with details on AA BVR missiles.

[Pilotasso]

more source info:

6) Russian radar technology update "airforces monthly"

7)WVR missile technical report from the same magazine.

 

 

So the guy who was so skeptical about how we know this much, I show a small sample of info as it leaks out every month.

Technical details are plentifull as you can even read directly from thse pics.

 

More pics to follow when I erase these for more space.

[Ironhand]

The A-pole /is/ a range. So is the E-Pole and the F-Pole...

OK.

• A-Pole is the range between you and the target when your missile goes active.
  
• F-Pole is the range between you and the target when you blow him up (or when your missile reaches his aircraft, anyway).
  

So, is E-Pole is the range between you and the target when he blows you up??

 

Rich

[Guest IguanaKing]

more source info:

6) Russian radar technology update "airforces monthly"

7)WVR missile technical report from the same magazine.

 

 

So the guy who was so skeptical about how we know this much, I show a small sample of info as it leaks out every month.

Technical details are plentifull as you can even read directly from thse pics.

 

More pics to follow when I erase these for more space.

 

Well...although I have had my conflicts with the gentleman in question in the past, he's actually got a point. What we read on the internet, or in books is often going to be swayed, one way or another, by what we understand about the subject at hand. We are a community of varying experience levels, but I'm quite sure none of us here would be at liberty to discuss weapons capabilities with any authority. If any of us had insider knowledge about such details, we wouldn't be able to comment on those here. BTW...what do cockpit pictures and pictures of a plate prove as to what we can accurately comment on? Just so everyone knows, a phased-array radar plate is used in modern radars more often than old ladies use suppositories...its not a new or secret technology. :smilewink: I'm perfectly happy to confine my criticism to the dirty aspects of the sim, such as COMs, NAV, and SSR operations. Individual missile behavior is just guess-work for the ED team, as it is for ANY of us. Realistic weapons loadouts, along with realistic logistics would be nice. We've got to keep the fun factor though, so your damaged aircraft can be repaired in minutes...the logistics should just effect what weapons you have available to hang on it.

[GGTharos]

OK.

• A-Pole is the range between you and the target when your missile goes active.
  
• F-Pole is the range between you and the target when you blow him up (or when your missile reaches his aircraft, anyway).

So, is E-Pole is the range between you and the target when he blows you up??

 

Rich

 

E-Pole is the distance at which you can defeat the missile kinematically. You want to maximize your E-Pole (making it easier to dodge his missile) and minimize his (your missile will have more energy to maneuver with him)

 

All tactics are -basically- geared to maximizing and minimizing these distances for BVR.

 

That's wthout getting into jammers etc.

[D-Scythe]

I know I'm nitpicking, but technically A/F/E-poles are distances (between target and shooter) rather than ranges :harhar:

[GGTharos]

Haha you got me :P

[SUBS17]

Some Stats showing R27s from SU27s vs Mig29As

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_192.shtml

 

An R77 kill?

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_301.shtml

 

A few more R27 kills

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_404.shtml

 

There have been R27 kills but maybe the pk for export missiles to some countries was low because they bought the cheapest available.(probably old missiles sitting in storage)

[SUBS17]

This turns the thread into the old discussion: russia vs US? Definitly in no way the sim is "unbalanced". The f15 is no way superior to the s-27 or the mig. There is no weapon that can be considered superior to all of the rest, anf the F15 is far from that. If the eagle fans think they are superior because of their aim-120... well, it seems yuo have been flying against too much IA... The famous aim-120 can easily be beaten usewing the far much superior s-27 great capacity of fuel wich gives him a wide range of maneouvers to defeat the f15 till he will be force to disengage and if you are saying you will be fighting at high altitudes against the SU-27 and that way you will be safe, you are very wroing, any missile of the 27 series well used can perfectly be used to force you to go down, in every sense.. So in the end, it all about the pilot. Nor the F15 rules the sim nor the su-27 or the mig.

 

The sim is not "unbalanced", both sides have their good and bad characteristics

 

Actually whats not modeled or what we don't know is the F-15Cs capabilities in particular its multi-target tracking and engaging ability. Because if you look at the F-14 it has the ability to launch multiple Aim54s at multiple targets. The F/A-18E Aesa radar also has this capability and I'm wondering if the F-15C Aesa radar also has this capability. Surely the F-15 must have this ability:music_whistling: , another thing is I suspect the F-16s radar in AF is probably closer too the F-15s IRL in functionality. Lockon is unbalanced because of these features which is why the only aircraft ever to shoot down an F-15C is another F-15C:smilewink: .

[Guest IguanaKing]

Good post Subs. Hmmm...so in one link there are no kills for the R-27, in the next there are 4, but they seem to strangely coincide with unconfirmed kills from the same aircraft, on the same day, and the final link shows unconfirmed kills by the R-27. AARs don't lie...the R-27 is an unproven missile as of yet. :)

[GGTharos]

Actually, it's closer to operation ... as for functionality ... the F-15's radar does the job much better and yes, we actualyl do know that the F-15 can track multiple targets without an AESA radar. You don't need AESA for this - AESA just works better.