F-15C + AIM120 So Unfair!

[firesoldier845]

Trop, I had some computer issues and took a break from LockOn for over a year. I got a new compuer last month and just started playing again. I flew Mig-29/vanilla SU-25 for years and recently about 2 weeks ago when I started playing again I decided to switch to 27. Man, I got pwned first few times but it just takes practice. I'm starting to get kills now and surviving, u just gotta practice and learn keep on trying. Read the forums and get tips most of all just keep playing. No, people that fly the F-15 are not noobs and it's not easy mode either. Just keep on playing you'll get the hang of things. Just try to enjoy the game experience and don't base your happyiness on how many kills you got online. There are always going to be people playing that are more experienced than u and you've only been playing 2 weeks man. I'll try to look for you in hyperlobby and maybe we can team up now and then, just have fun man, it's just a game and don't be one those people who get caught up in all this realism trap cause the game is not realistic and it's still sold in walmart next to grand theft auto. It's all about having fun and you won't have fun argueing with people on the forums or game chat so get in game and practice - don't take things too serious. cheers

 

firesoldier845

[Rhen]

Trop,

 

You might also consider what your goal will be while online. You can either make your goal to survive (which is a good goal, but kind of funny when you look at the environment you're flying in - it's a game, right), or you can go for the kills.

 

If your goal is to survive, then don't push a tactical situation that you have no skills to win. Reset/disengage and reengage at a time/place better suited for your skills and also that of your aircraft. This is a hard goal to stick with - your fangs are hanging and you're concentrating on that easy kill.... BAM! Hit by the guy you didn't know was there or the heater he fired. The natural urge will be to press a into a situation and bite off on something that may/might/perhaps be a trap. However... this goal will teach you when and where to engage and how to evade/escape and when your exit window is closed.

 

If your goal is to get max kills, then prepare to die regularly and often. Regardless whether it's a spammer's missiles, the sneaky bastard who knifes you in the back, or the missile you didn't see, you will die on a consistent basis. This is not only annoying but kind of hard on the ego initially. But, you'll learn how to increase your situational awareness and defend against missiles - because they're gonna be all over the place!

 

Personally, i agree with you - the missiles make this a pain in the ass. However, where we differ is in the respect we give the missiles in LOMAC. While you don't agree with me and others in this thread when we say the missiles suck and perform poorly - it's also the reason why many people continue to remain engaged in a poor tactical situation. The missiles are easily kinematically defeated and bite off on chaff too easily - IMO. This allows people who have lots of experience in LOMAC move from a BVR position to a WVR position, where the flankers and fulcrums have a decided advantage. Perhaps this is a combination of user error and missile modeling in LOMAC, but most people have very little respect for missiles because they're easily defeated. That's not to say that I don't regularly get shot down, boy that sure does happen! It's to say that if we all had greater respect for missiles, then perhaps the tactics used on the servers might mirror RL more closely.

 

What I'm saying is stick with it, learn what you can, and you too can be a back-talking holier-than-thou fanboi of our respective aircraft like the rest of us.:music_whistling: :smilewink:

[S77th-ReOrdain]

Tropikal,

 

Taking it all in, in a short span of time is overwhelming. Know that first. Many have offered valid advice and opinions. Do your best to consider what is being said by those whose opinion you value. Although I am far from being one of the better pilots in this game/sim, I am willing to assist you with what I know about the Su-27, as others have either already done or have offered to do. Good pilots are what we all hope to encourage in this fantistic virtual world.

 

And yes, at some point, during our exploration, most of us have felt exactly the way you do, hoping to hone our skills enough to come out on top the majority of the time. Hopefully, time spent exploring its nuances will put you on the road you need to travel.

 

At this point, it seems you are concentrating far too much on the advantages of the F-15. Yes, the F-15 in the hands of the right pilot (be he a fanboi or otherwise) is a lethal aircraft. Nevertheless, as has been said, the same holds true for the Russian planes. You're just not as familiar with them yet, and they take slightly longer to realize, learn and hopefully master.

 

The best, still get shot down by newer pilots if they abandon technique, fail to maintain situational awareness, fly into missiles dumb and happy and don't communicate with whomever else is online to improve their chances. These things are essential. What I'm really saying is, you have to use every single advantage you have, every engagement, to come out the victor and fly home alive the majority of the time. Kills are not automatic. They require the proper approach. Getting shot down, is not automatic. You have to abandon what you know works, ignore the proven tactics of successful air combat engagement (including the Dicta Bolke's) and fail to make a serious effort to avoid getting shot down. It is true that it is far better to stay alive and live to fight another day (or in LOMAC another sortie), than to have to spool your engines up again with an additional digit in the losses column.

 

Let the spammers spam. When you learn to avoid their missiles it means they have less to threaten you with. If you still think the AIM-120 is that great, try to realize that it is so because you have not understood yet how to avoid them. Flying in like a wild banshee (not necessarily saying this is what you do) rarely works against a skilled adversary, no matter how many missiles you fire, or at what range, if this is the only tactic employed.

 

And one final comment. The Russian birds have a substantial advantage that has been mentioned here a couple of times. It is known as the IR heat seeking missile, and it can be fired without your enemy knowing it is even coming. Learn how to use them. Learn how the EOS works, and learn how to be sneaky instead of predictable. And while you're learning, I'll catch you online.

[pho3nix]

Iam only speaking from AI offline, but i find it is easyer to defeat a slammer shot that it is a 27 shot because during the last stage of flight, on the russian RWR i can gauge its distance precicley

[Sundowner.pl]

Jeeez.

 

Here in Poland, in our flight sim community, most of people fly Su’s and MiGs, almost nobody fly Eagle – to be precise only 6 people fly them. That’s mainly because we fly WVR all the time, and Russian jets have advantage of having Shlem and R-73. The rules here are to have only 3 close range weapons, so the AMRAAMS, Sparrows, Alamo and Adder are out. The Eagle is left with old AIM-9L, and cannon, so the Eagle drivers are using the Gatling gun, and the rest is just firing Archers from 7 miles away, from any angle they want. Now this is unfair ;)

 

The truth is - this game is about Russian jets, Eagle and the Hog are just for show.

Have you guys seen Eagles from 493d FS at RAF Lakenheath? These are the one which would take part in a such campaign as presented in this sim. Those Eagles have state of the art EW suit, they were the first front line unit to have AIM-9X and JHMCS, the new improved Fighter Data Link, ALE-50 Towed Decoy, and many more. Non of those systems is present in this game. The LockOn Eagle is in late 80’s, while everything else is shown how it looks today.

 

Well I’ll tell you this, if you complain about how tough it is to fight with the Eagle as it’s right now, than think what would be when it had things I listed.:D

[Pilotasso]

Cali, pilotasso , gg... be more gentle with those that are not as skilled like you. There is no need to be sarcastic right?

Pilotasso i noticed you always try to be very smart and yours to be last well **** off man leave hajduk alone he has right on his opinion and yes hes right even tough if russian SU27 cant cary actives

Plz pilotasso don't try to be too smart and leave others alone if they think differnt from you.

 

I have alot of respect for new people. I havent been sarcastic, only persistent enough with those who moan and want to keep/turn the game into wing commander arcade, when they could easely refrain from taking veterans head on and do their own games in their own terms, with the difficulty level they wish. Reality bending wont earn any points for their cause. Im not here to beat a dead horse or bullying anyone. If Im persistent, its my way of beeing trying to sweep away stuburn and obviously wrong views of things.

Hadjuck is as stuburn as I am, dont pitty him. He himself will think he doesnt need it anyway :)

 

it has been proven that that particular airframe CAN cary active, so who cares i can imagine i am flying god damn Indian SU?

Or you will tell me now no we are flying russian version??

Well how do you know?

U work in Sukhoi plant?

You have all details about su what can and can't do?

U know exactly how in SU 27 radar works into details?

Are you teling me russians are so stupid to make active for india and China while they don't equip yourself with same?

 

Dont take this the wrong way but when you obvioulsy are talking without knowelege such as the quote above, it is easy to pass as a smart a$$ for you when obviously I am not.

 

If I kept shut up (me or the other people you mentioned) it would either mean I would be pitty of you and let your dream away or simply dont care att all.

 

I wouldnt be honest to anyone nor myself if I did.

 

How do I know? check pics. Do some reading on your free time. Its interesting.

 

The third pic enlightens how stupidity had litle to do with the fact Russia hasnt R-77 capable Su-30's.

[Floyd]

The LockOn Eagle is in late 80’s, while everything else is shown how it looks today.

 

Well I’ll tell you this, if you complain about how tough it is to fight with the Eagle as it’s right now, than think what would be when it had things I listed.:D

 

Strange to see the Aim-120C when that model was delivered in fiscal year 96?!

 

Presently, there are three series of AMRAAM: AIM-120A, AIM-120B, and AIM-120C.

AIM-120A. First production AIM-120A, delivered by Hughes in 1988 to the 33d TFW at Eglin AFB, Florida.

AIM-120B and AIM-120C versions are currently in production, the latter with smaller control surfaces to permit increased internal carriage capability in the F-22. AIM-120B deliveries began in FY 94, and AIM-120C deliveries began in FY 96.

 

Realism? Hodgepodge! Btw how do the SU-25T and KH-50 fit to that timeframe?

[Frostie]

Trop, if your still getting downed by spamrams:joystick: you could always look on the BRIGHT side ,in the future some missiles will probably be moved a step closer to realism ,meaning them pesky AMRAAMs will be even hotter than a freshly laid curry bomb ,and 'old faithful' the much abused R27ET will get its balls chopped.:cry:

You better get training padowone and hard.

 

http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27_var.htm

 

Variant Overview

1. Development/Pre-Production Prototypes:

BACK TO TOP

T10-1 factory designation for first Su-27 prototype. NATO ASCC codename FLANKER-A

 

T10-2 second T-10S revised design with redesigned wings, fuselage nose section, gear placement and tail section. NATO ASCC codename FLANKER-B 2.

 

Basic Su-27 family:

BACK TO TOP

 

Su-27S standard version based on T-10S design, with original air-to-ground capability. Often designated Su-27 without -S.

 

Su-27P standard version but without air-to-ground weapons control system and wiring.

Often designated Su-27 without -P. <<<YOU ARE HERE-Hadjuk, i think

 

Su-27PD the one Su-27P prototype with inflight refuelling probe> Later hadradar and weapons removed and used by the ‘Test Pilot’ aerobatic displayteam.

 

Su-27UB basic training two seater version

 

Su-27SK export version of Su-27S, N001E radar, payload upgraded to 8,000kg, strengthened front wheel. Different ECM options (Gardenia or Sorbitsya). Also with various localization options. Chinese built version called J-11.

 

Su-27UBK export version Su-27UB, with payload and wheel strengthening improvements idenitcal to the Su-27SK

 

Su-27SMK based on the SK variant with IFR. 12 hardpoints. Supposedly fitted with Zhuk-27 radar. Actual prototype is the same as the SK with the IFR probe. Planned to have multirole capability and R-77 support. planned but never realised upgraded version of Su-27S, one demostrator built in 1995, but it was basic Su-27S only with retractable air refueling probe.<<<PIPE DREAMS ARE HERE

[F15CEagle]

Well,actually I like very much the way F-15C Eagle flies in Lock On.The control is very stable,I think each pilot should just master the control of it's various state-to-art integrated weapon systems,I mean all those Visual,RWS,Flood modes and other options.I'm the very big fan of this aircraft,and it's the only plane I do pilot in this game.It's just amazing!:thumbup:

[Ogami Musashi]

Hello,

 

Trop,

 

I understand your point, as some said, i think you're a bit missleading on the subject of a sim.

But at the same time, you're right, when a sim is developped attention is paid to level the forces.

This is done not by tweaking planes but simply by the choice of the plane.

The problem here trop, is that when it was decided that LO would go with several planes a lot of issues came out and i shall tell you some of them:

 

-the documentation for russian planes was near non exitent especially the SU-27 and the one for US plane very few so by that time only press sources where aviable to the team.

The documentation and sources became aviable during the developpement and after de release.

>> This led to a lot of incomplete modelisations that were filled latter.

-There was not enough people to encode hardcore avionics. The lock on project switched rapidly from a SU-39 add on to a mutli planes sim. Considering the timeline at this time, this is was unrealistic to hope for and harcorde simulation.

>> the simulation , despite what was adversited by ubi was not in a shape to be realistic enought, that was not possible with that numer of planes.

-The mutli plane project went because Ubisoft wanted to attract casual simmers and the planes choosed were, in russian clan, the one in flanker, on USA, one the most popular planes.

 

Thus the choice of planes that affects the leveling of forces was made part on the heritage of flanker (after all, lock on was intented first as a flanker follow on) and on commercial needs.

Thoses needs and the ressources aviable were not enough so that the result was a bit extrapolated I.E: the level of performance for the plane was a bit guessed by dev.

Later as information arrived they tweaked the planes to better reflect the reality still there're a lot of shortcomings for the reasons i explained.

 

What all that fuss mean? when the choice was made, according to the data aviable for ED, this was a level choice with both planes having their strenghts and weaknesses but overall easy to overcome, but that was not realistic.

As many said, in real life, the avionic suite and weaponary of the flanker system is on decade behind the F-15C one.

 

So, as ED made it closer to reality, the balance switched a bit.

 

THAT SAID, nobody in this post mentionned the big and major difference between a SU-27/mig-29 and an F-15.

The flanker and fulcrums in russian service were NEVER meant to go outside russia!!

This reflect in a very simple fact that unfortunately ED never modelized and this is where it comes short: the datalink.

Both plane and especially the flanker fly under what was(is??) a pretty big and complete datalink system, providing them a lot of information, possibility to be remotely controlled, having a lot of information on target type, share informations from CGI, awacs and other planes etc...

 

In such context, with the datalink missiles could be lanched withtout radar activated and on the flanker there was special modes to enhance the performance(the datalink was the same for both flanker and fulcrums, but the flanker had more modes and precise datalink functions).

 

Now this could have leveled the thing, but that datalink is pretty complicated to modelize And i'm not quite sure this is will done in the future unfortunately.

 

Now however you have to face something, when sU-27 came out, compared to F-15A it was the same level, the problem is that, one plane had upgrades (the eagle) not the other...

 

As many said, you can still win over F-15 by exploiting the specialities of the flanker, this is hard for sure, but flying a fighter is always flying in his strong points, if you fly where it is low...you've lost.

 

I hope you understand the situation better with my post.

[GGTharos]

You will see that ED's products will progressively tend more and more towards realism, not away from it.

[tflash]

I think many issues are a little mixed up here. I'ld like to say the sim is brilliant, and to me very enjoyable. There are few very specific things that many wish should be adressed:

 

- Look-down in the F-15C doens't really work out leading to unrealistic tactics

- Amraam has some curiosities

- chaff is uber, the whole world wants to buy ED's chaff, man the missiles do like it!

- R-27ET can be maddogged

 

Let's just hope the next patch (BS?) will fix these issues.

 

In NO way, imho, this affects:

 

- the fairness of the game: the game is as fair as it can be: first of all nobody forces you to choose a particular plane ;

- the fun of the game. On the contrary, the fact that BVR shots often miss makes the game much more flyable. OK, I always end up shot down and only seldom can practice my landing skills, but most of the time I have evaded many missiles before getting hit. Where BVR missiles to work as designed, the game would be much dryer and maybe to lethal for fun.

- the place of the game in my personal ranking: right on top!

[GGTharos]

This reflect in a very simple fact that unfortunately ED never modelized and this is where it comes short: the datalink.

Both plane and especially the flanker fly under what was(is??) a pretty big and complete datalink system, providing them a lot of information, possibility to be remotely controlled, having a lot of information on target type, share informations from CGI, awacs and other planes etc...

 

In such context, with the datalink missiles could be lanched withtout radar activated and on the flanker there was special modes to enhance the performance(the datalink was the same for both flanker and fulcrums, but the flanker had more modes and precise datalink functions).

 

F-15C has had datalink since '84 - FDL (AFAIK) rathern than fully blown integrated datalink which is being equipped only now.

 

Now this could have leveled the thing, but that datalink is pretty complicated to modelize And i'm not quite sure this is will done in the future unfortunately.

 

Actually it can and will be done as well as can be.

 

Now however you have to face something, when sU-27 came out, compared to F-15A it was the same level, the problem is that, one plane had upgrades (the eagle) not the other...

 

The actual fact is that when Su-27 came out, the F-15C was already going through upgrades ... forget F-15A.

 

As many said, you can still win over F-15 by exploiting the specialities of the flanker, this is hard for sure, but flying a fighter is always flying in his strong points, if you fly where it is low...you've lost.

 

I hope you understand the situation better with my post.

 

Very good :)

[Pilotasso]

I think many issues are a little mixed up here. I'ld like to say the sim is brilliant, and to me very enjoyable. There are few very specific things that many wish should be adressed:

 

- Look-down in the F-15C doens't really work out leading to unrealistic tactics

- Amraam has some curiosities

- chaff is uber, the whole world wants to buy ED's chaff, man the missiles do like it!

- R-27ET can be maddogged

 

Let's just hope the next patch (BS?) will fix these issues.

 

In NO way, imho, this affects:

 

- the fairness of the game: the game is as fair as it can be: first of all nobody forces you to choose a particular plane ;

- the fun of the game. On the contrary, the fact that BVR shots often miss makes the game much more flyable. OK, I always end up shot down and only seldom can practice my landing skills, but most of the time I have evaded many missiles before getting hit. Where BVR missiles to work as designed, the game would be much dryer and maybe to lethal for fun.

- the place of the game in my personal ranking: right on top!

 

:lol:

 

Best post in eons.

[Ogami Musashi]

F-15C has had datalink since '84 - FDL (AFAIK) rathern than fully blown integrated datalink which is being equipped only now.

 

Not to the extent of the russian planes one, but anyway, good point, this would need to be implemented.

 

 

Actually it can and will be done as well as can be.

You and me know that if it's one day implemented it will be in years and you know why because you're a beta tester.

 

 

The actual fact is that when Su-27 came out, the F-15C was already going through upgrades ... forget F-15A.

my bad, this adds even more disparity.

 

 

Thank you.

[GGTharos]

Not to the extent of the russian planes one, but anyway, good point, this would need to be implemented.

 

Yeah, the F-15's had an FDL and possibly AWACS datalink but no GCI control like the Russian planes.

 

You and me know that if it's one day implemented it will be in years and you know why because you're a beta tester.

 

I know that once they move into the fighter project, datalink will receive a nice 'pick me up'.

The real problem might be how to code up the GCI target assignement.

 

my bad, this adds even more disparity.

 

 

Thank you.

 

 

No prob, good discussion :D

[Ogami Musashi]

You're right about the complexity of the datalink and also i'm quite a bit affraid that the more qualissified nature to the SU-27 datalink features poses problems but well ,we'll see!

 

As a personal point of view, i have to admit i consider lock on strenghts to be the FC SU-25's and BS KA-50.

This latter really represents a big step forward. so the ka-50 itself is suffisent for me.

 

But seeing as the KA-50 takes time to modelize , well...that's why i'm pretty sure even after with the F-16 project we won't have still the Russian datalinks BUT hey i now things are always moving at ED so who knows!

I'd be pleased to be wrong, as the flanker with EFM and Detailed avionics is definitevely on my top wishlist.

[GGTharos]

You are right, Ka-50 is a very big step, and, you may have noticed in the video ... it includes a datalink. It is a datalink that requires a lot of manual operation. In the case of FDLs this operation is automatic, so as you can see the basic code is now 'there' for future development :)

 

There is a Su-27 manual with a good description of Su-27 datalink, and ED has it :)

[TucksonSonny]

Simple online su-27 vs F-15C tactic guide:

 

First of all you need to guess ranges only with reading your RWR.

 

1 vs 1 engagement?

No, then don’t engage and get out there (try to find 1on1)

Yes, when range is about 50-60 then not yet burn-through (ECM on)

You can override and fire 1st ER HOJ (range about 40-50) to force enemy not to approach you straight.

Range about 30-40: F-pole (use left or right radar limit corner but keep lock) and use the other 3 ER’s to get his nose away from you! (Keep doing this)

If you have burn-through make sure that you turn ECM off and you can start to chaf.

At the end you can kill the bastard with your ET’s.

 

Shortly: You have 4 ER’s to put him in defense and you have 2 killer missiles (R27 ET) to finish him (Don’t expect an ER kill)

.

 

A variant is to approach him with your radar off and use the surprise element but this tactic is trickier!

 

Another tip: Just go for 1 kill. Return to base and reload for another kill!

[Pilotasso]

My guide for Su VS Eagle: climb higher than him before launch. When beriosa is full but to the last 2 leds let go 1 ER/EM off. Do F-pole and be prepared to loose altititude if he fires. Once you reach burn through turn to face him and fire another. Do F-pole again and descend moderatly at the same time, while observing if he turns away. If he doesnt, and aproach rate is high swich to ET, as soon as you have range send it off and be preprared to dodge his AMRAAM's, dive hard, and dump chaff. when that one is spoofed climb gently for higher speeds in thinner air. Get out of there and ask for cover. If cover arrives look back over your shoulder and see if he turns away from your tail, as soon as he starts turning, do 180º U turn yourself and re-engage him. You should have some R-27's left wich will give you the advantage in a chase.

 

Good luck.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The required radar upgrades were not paid for. That's all there is to it - period.

If you don’t mind, can you please elaborate little more on what you said.

 

Here are the questions. What is the difference between the radar requirements for providing data for a single ARH and single SARH missile? Or, why was Mierch N-001 unable to provide a firing solution for a single ARH such as R-77?

 

Let me emphasize, I am not talking about multiple target – multiple missile engagement.

[D-Scythe]

Here are the questions. What is the difference between the radar requirements for providing data for a single ARH and single SARH missile? Or, why was Mierch N-001 unable to provide a firing solution for a single ARH such as R-77?

 

Lotsa things. First of all, to integrate any new weapon (let alone a new type of weapon), the weapons computer must be updated to accomodate all the "needs" of the weapon prior to launch - i.e. things like downloading targetting information, software compatibility, etc. Second of all, firing solutions are different for every each weapon - the firing solutions calculated for the R-27ER are next to useless for the R-77. The computers/processing units must be configured to provide firing solutions unique to the R-77, and it can't come up with these R-77 specific firing solutions if the missile itself isn't programmed into the computers. Third of all, the R-77 just operates differently as an ARH missile - this raises huge issues in software and hardware compatibility. The radar doesn't need to change its PRFs (like it does for an SARH missile like the R-27), the datalink must be compatible, information being transmitted to the missile's datalink must be unique to the R-77 (can't use the "normal" information that the radar would provide to the R-27ER) etc.

 

I'm certainly no expert, but weapons integration into an airframe is a LOT more complex than you'd like to believe.

[GGTharos]

You mean technically speaking?

 

Potentially:

 

- New wiring

- New datalink format which -may- require a new processor

- New datalink hardware

 

To add to this, we have non-technical (aka political/financial) reasons:

 

- Paying for an upgrade just to fire a single R-77 isn't hugely cost effective ... may as well wait until you can launch several

- R-77 is 'export only' and IIRC not even domestically produced

- same story as R-27EA, IIRC

- With collapse of USSR, competition in this area was no longer a priority

- Money was scarce at the time

- R-77 lagged well behind AMRAAM in development ... AMRAAM took at least a year, IIRC, to properly integrate with F-15C and they had everything 'ready' from the start.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

You mean technically speaking?

 

Potentially:

 

- New wiring

- New datalink format which -may- require a new processor

- New datalink hardware

- It takes two wires to carry communication over the network. We know that those two wires existed because they were used for Alamo missiles. So while potentially, new missile does require new wires, it is hard to believe that the wires did not exist in the original Su-27 frame.

 

-Datalink is a similar story. We do know that datalink existed. It might be that the communication protocol had to be changed. I even doubt that because MiG-29 happily talks to AMRAMSKI and ALAMO at the same time.

 

-Datalink hardware would be the same as the datalink protocol. Networking protocol actually defines software and hardware requirements. So, we know it existed.

 

My point is that I do not know if Su-27 could launch ARH. However, I don’t see any reasonable explanation on why not.

[Pilotasso]

Hadjuk instead of asking us "how the hell we know this much" or making supositions show us your sources, and for the sake of it avoid the term "would be armed" from 10 year old books. I have a pic posted on page 6 of this forum showing how some of these "would be" deals had so much difficulties that Russia couldnt even build enough Su-30 airframes to export, let alone fully equiped aircraft.

 

India and china have the best russian airframes arround with R-77 capability, wich they built themsleves under licence, and/or with french/israeli equipment. Russia kept its Fighter industry much thanks to exports, because they will not fund some for their own advanced Su-30's or 35's.

 

And that includes the R-77 missile.