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

[VapoR]

The only realism upgrade Lomac REALLY needs is having hot models as weapons loaders in the parking area . . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:D :music_whistling:

[Guest IguanaKing]

Ardillita, how do you figure the Su-27 is superior to the F-15 in range? Maybe its a metric vs. imperial conversion problem...but you're incorrect. I must hand it to Russia for creating something that has the long legs the Flanker has...but the US has been mastering expeditionary warfare for years. The Eagle STILL comes out slightly ahead in range in all categories, and it has been capable of this since 1972. Not a dig toward the Russians, just reality, expeditionary warfare has been a focus of US doctrine since the early '50's. :)

[Guest IguanaKing]

The only realism upgrade Lomac REALLY needs is having hot models as weapons loaders in the parking area . . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:D :music_whistling:

 

Wow! She could uncage my sidewinder anytime. :D Heh...reminds me of the movie "Deal of the Century".

[D-Scythe]

Wow! She could uncage my sidewinder anytime. :D Heh...reminds me of the movie "Deal of the Century".

 

HAHA! Priceless!

[SUBS17]

F-15 radar brochure

http://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/public/documents/content/cms04_017911.pdf

[Rhen]

F-15 radar brochure

http://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/public/documents/content/cms04_017911.pdf

 

That's the (v)3 radar, which isn't modeled in LOMAC - wish it was... :D The one in LOMAC should be the APG-63(v)2 after the MSIPII multi-stage improvement program, which improved the radar's ability to track targets at a greater distance, made it more resistant to ECM, and allowed it to talk with the AMRAAM.

 

BTW, if you're trying to figure out how many targets the Eagle can track and engage simultaneously, all you have to do is ask yourself "How many AMRAAMs can the Eagle carry?" That should give you an idea of how many targets it can engage SIMULTANEOUSLY. Which, of course, it CAN'T in LOMAC, obviously...:( (i'm merely quoting a reputable website and NOT providing classified information... notice I didn't mention a specific number nor did I confirm or deny that that's the min/max number. :music_whistling: )

[GGTharos]

Any comments on the new Chinese modelling in this thread, Rhen? ;)

[Rhen]

Are you talking the J-10 - the jet made with Israeli "assistance"? If you are, well, that thing's bigger than the Lavi, less capable than it's smaller "cousin", uses the engine out of a Su-27, not that there's anything wrong with that... The biggest thing wrong with the J-10 is that the only western tech in it is stuff gotten from european countries willing to sell it to the PRC. The Lavi is a much more capable bird, with regards to radar, ECM, sensors, etc. It's not a constest there. I'd much rather fly the Lavi, or the Eurofighter for that matter. Up against the Su-27/33 class of aircraft, well... I'd probably take the Su-33, a good radar & a decent missile and I'd toast that thing. Any multi-role single-engine aircraft (sorry all you virtual viper drivers out there...) is already an emergency.

 

Despite the fact that the engine's been modified for a single engine aircraft and makes it to 1,000 hours -barely before it needs overhauling, well I'd rather not have to BFM in that thing. I'd probably take it over the Fulcrum, because it "supposedly" has a more capable radar in the class of the Su-30 newer gens. First look, first shot, first kill's much more important.

[GGTharos]

I was talking about that chick up there, but this is pretty informative too! :D

[Rhen]

Oh, yeah... that is a chinese model, now isn't it?:D Nice aerodynamics, built in dual air bags, convertible top, nice analog gauge, I like silver. Looks like a nice ride....:P

[SUBS17]

That's the (v)3 radar, which isn't modeled in LOMAC - wish it was... :D The one in LOMAC should be the APG-63(v)2 after the MSIPII multi-stage improvement program, which improved the radar's ability to track targets at a greater distance, made it more resistant to ECM, and allowed it to talk with the AMRAAM.

 

BTW, if you're trying to figure out how many targets the Eagle can track and engage simultaneously, all you have to do is ask yourself "How many AMRAAMs can the Eagle carry?" That should give you an idea of how many targets it can engage SIMULTANEOUSLY. Which, of course, it CAN'T in LOMAC, obviously...:( (i'm merely quoting a reputable website and NOT providing classified information... notice I didn't mention a specific number nor did I confirm or deny that that's the min/max number. :music_whistling: )

 

I suspected that might be the case considering the Superhornet can do that.

[Pilotasso]

APG-70 can 73 can do that. They are much more capable than the APG-6x generation stuff we see printed in the books all the time.

 

Unfortunatly firing all missiles in 1 go is not a good policy you can get caught unarmed.

[D-Scythe]

APG-70 can 73 can do that. They are much more capable than the APG-6x generation stuff we see printed in the books all the time.

 

Unfortunatly firing all missiles in 1 go is not a good policy you can get caught unarmed.

 

Who cares if you're unarmed? Chances are you fired all 8 of your Slammers simultaneously because you were vastly out-numbered anyway - you're just trying to survive in such a situation.

 

BTW, the APG-63v1 is a more capable radar than the APG-70. It goes APG-63V0 < APG-70 < APG-63V1 << APG-63V2 < APG-63V3.

[Pilotasso]

Was talking about APG-63, 65, 66 baseline. About 8 AMRAAM capability, If your going to shoot all 8 chances are you can only designate them well beyong WVR at wich if you missjudged waht the target is going to do, retreats and doubles back you misiles will fall short and you can end up merging misiless, always keep at least 2 do defend yourself. ;)

[D-Scythe]

Was talking about APG-63, 65, 66 baseline. About 8 AMRAAM capability, If your going to shoot all 8 chances are you can only designate them well beyong WVR at wich if you missjudged waht the target is going to do, retreats and doubles back you misiles will fall short and you can end up merging misiless, always keep at least 2 do defend yourself. ;)

 

If you and your wingman need to shoot all 16 AMRAAMs being carried by your F-15s, why would you risk the merge once you cut the strings to your missiles as they go active? You're winchester, so...RUN!

[SUBS17]

If you and your wingman need to shoot all 16 AMRAAMs being carried by your F-15s, why would you risk the merge once you cut the strings to your missiles as they go active? You're winchester, so...RUN!

 

A soviet tactic that is modeled in Falcon is for a 4 Ship Mig flight to split either vertical or horizontal with the two rear aircraft launching against you. If you were to lock the closest mig then you would wind up missing as the aircraft turns away from you as a decoy while the other two migs launch missiles. Its a very effective technique so in such a scenario the F-15 pilot has to use TWS to determine the enemys reaction to his approach and then counter it.

[D-Scythe]

A soviet tactic that is modeled in Falcon is for a 4 Ship Mig flight to split either vertical or horizontal with the two rear aircraft launching against you. If you were to lock the closest mig then you would wind up missing as the aircraft turns away from you as a decoy while the other two migs launch missiles. Its a very effective technique so in such a scenario the F-15 pilot has to use TWS to determine the enemys reaction to his approach and then counter it.

 

Yes...and? Again, if you had to launch all your AMRAAMs at 8 separate targets, it's ALREADY a bad situation. In such a scenario, where you actually have more targets than you can shoot at, you're sole objective is to survive; the AIM-120s you just launched, even if they were fired with the intention to kill, is merely something to screen/cover your retreat.

[mitch789]

Honestly, several months ago I thought to see some great changes into incoming BS, but at present day I'm resigned ... I've renounced to think about AFMs, clickable cockpits, better AI traffic management near to airfields, realistic comms, dynamic weather, naval improvement for Su-33, etc.

So, at least I really BELIEVE in these little 'plasters':

- minor graphic enhancements for sky and weather (like IL-2 series);

- runways and carrier's deck always lighted (for approach and landing);

I think this should be an easy work for ED Team. Best regards.

[SUBS17]

A good point for refuelling is in AF the AI form up on the right wing while you refuel and then move to the left wing of the tanker and wait until No4 is fuelled.:thumbup: Another thing is getting a TACAN chanel from the AWACs to help locate the tanker.

[169th_TomAce]

How pilots and groups choose to fly in it.

 

Deaths should count as a minus to your score.

[Pilotasso]

I would like for the fellas from the russian forums to pay a visit. Right now Pro-US-fixes totaly own the this poll.

 

Keep voting!

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Personally, I think they ought to remove the F-15 from the sim as a flyable.

So I'm back to my first statement. Get rid of the F-15.

 

Well, it is not about F-15, it is about AIM-120. In reality, AIM-120 was not in active service at the time Flanker entered service. Actually, at that time F-15 just started going through MSIP. Six years after Flanker entered service, in the Gulf War, F-15’s were scoring kills with AIM-7’s, not with AIM-120’s.

[Pilotasso]

Actualy you are wrong. The AMRAAM was put into service in 1991 in f-15's.

First combat Kill was in 27 December 1992 shot from an F-16 against a mig-25.

 

The games time frame is fictitional ranging from 80's to mid 90's hardware and the AMRAAM fits in nicely in that time frame.

 

Asking to remove the AMRAAM is asking for easy kills. The AIM-9 is uselsess in this game and the AIM-7 is more equivalent to the R-27 leaving it as the only valid weapon for the eagle. Given the fact the flanker can outshoot an AMRAAM with a heat seeker in certain circuntances in this game and that the ER/EM's have virtualy twice the range of the Sparrow, removing the AMRAAM would only satisfy those without talent whilling to shoot f-15's as if they were merely target drones.

 

Flankers are given yet one more chance by uber ECM already (forces 1 on 1 fights down to 15 miles), we dont need to make their lives even easier.

 

Im sorry to say this but "AMRAAM out" is for those with training weels in the flanker and is not the way this SIM should aim at if it aspires to be the the precursor of realistic SIM's by ED.

 

I can think of R-77 out of this game for lesser reasons than those you pointed out for the AMRAAM, but will you be coherent with your own arguments and want it gone? No of course not.

[GGTharos]

Pilotasso is exactly right - besides which, the R-27E versions entered service at about the same time as AMRAAM (about 1990 when R-27E's became operational) and they were already obsoleted by the AMRAAM!

 

AIM-7 was already out-performing R-27R/T!

 

So you want no AMRAAMs for the NATO side, no R-27E's for you! ;)

[Pilotasso]

I just re-read the whole thread after Hadjuk's post, and stumbled across something I missed. I just cannot leave this reply to my post unnanswered.

 

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...

 

You are completely and utterly wrong and missinformed about me and the F-15/AMRAAM.

 

The thing about me, is that I have flown about 99.9% of my time VS humans online. I havent even had time to play any solo campaigns. BTW my intention is not for bragging but its a pitty you didnt look at VVS 504's stats server before they reset it days ago. It would be pretty enlightening how much far off you went on your baseless assumptions about me and the missiles correct employment. Do you even have a clue mate?

 

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.

 

Have you tried to dogfight in a Su-27 with more than 60% of fuel? Fill it up and then try your superior kinetic dogfighting/dodging manuevering capability against an F-15...oh boy...

The far superior R-27 you talk about has been fired at least a dozen times in combat and only one is rumoured to have even only damaged its target. That makes about 5-10% of kill ratio, only if had destroyed the aircraft but it did not, the plane made it back to base and was written off due to lack of repair.

If you count the number AIM-120 launches and kills youll get to the figure of 60% PK. BTW none of your mighty precious Mig-29's ever managed to shoot R-27's much less outrange any combat VS an AMRAAM capable fighter. Not even when those AMRAAMs were shot just above 10 miles.

 

FYI my statistics on the 504 server had more than 600 AMRAAM kills under my belt (more than any other weapon), I can say that way way more than half of those were under 5 miles due to botched up, half realistic missile modeling and unifective tactics on the part of oposing Migs and Su's. I had plenty of Su experience as well, so if you care to step on HL to see how litle experienced I am against humans, be my guest.

 

One hint: if you try to shoot anyone in an F-15 with real online experience with an R-27ER/EM thinking you will succeed with their greater range alone, I can tell you: you might as well order some fine textured virtual daysies in advance. :D