GGTharos Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Radars change signal strength with modes and types of operation, so the RWR shouldn't be giving you anything along the lines of range - rather, it should be an indication of wether the emitter is in 'lethal range', but this isn't modelled in LO propely. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I mean...it (SPO-15) even has an estimated range feature, which US RWRs don't have.Both, Russian and US RWS’s have signal strength indicators/measurement as modeled in Lock On. Russian SPO-15 has a series of lights representing signal strength. And US AN/ALR XX (where X represent the model number) shows the signal strength by the distance of the emitter source to the center of the TEWS display. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Terrorism can and should … ”terrorism [térrə rìzzəm] n political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.” Draw your own conclusion. Now this is going far too political. Not good. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
GGTharos Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Both, Russian and US RWS’s have signal strength indicators/measurement as modeled in Lock On. Russian SPO-15 has a series of lights representing signal strength. And US AN/ALR XX (where X represent the model number) shows the signal strength by the distance of the emitter source to the center of the TEWS display. However the REAL one only shows you inner ring/outer ring. No 'distance' of any sort. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
nscode Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 he means distance on the instrument ;) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Both, Russian and US RWS’s have signal strength indicators/measurement as modeled in Lock On. Russian SPO-15 has a series of lights representing signal strength. And US AN/ALR XX (where X represent the model number) shows the signal strength by the distance of the emitter source to the center of the TEWS display. If LOMAC players are using their SPO-15s to accurately get range information on threat emitters, then LOMAC doesn't quite model the system correctly. I agree. ;) As I have also already pointed out, the LOMAC SPO-15 doesn't seem to give a warning until you have been detected and are being tracked...I hope for the sake of RL Russian pilots that this is not the way the real thing works. Its not much good if that's really the way it works IRL. In this area, the in-game AN/ALR-69 actually appears to work a little more accurately in comparison to the SPO-15. It goes a little goofy in relation to attitude sometimes, which it doesn't have a problem with IRL, but overall it seems to be modelled a little better than the Russian system.
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 he means distance on the instrument ;) Only on a very coarse level. Its not a fluid television-like display like it is in LOMAC. ;)
Ardillita Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Sorry but I think there is a great wrong asumption here: we all think that every kind of radar is perfectly modelled in FC, each one with it own real characteristics. But this has proven to not be tru: if you do tests in the sim with each type of radar, you will see that there is almost no difference between them. The only diference between them is the detection ranges. The S-300 sam site has a detection range modelled... and in the sim it will detect anything inside that detection range, regardeless it is a f117 or a A10. Don´t forget that we still have "ubber" radar that can see through the mountains (that hasn´t been corrected yet). In general, we have to remember that we don´t have advanced modelling in the sensors area in the sim.
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I completely agree with you Ardillita, and I have proven that its true of LOMAC. :D
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Correction...the same radar, the 1S91 (Straight Flush), reacts differently to different aircraft in exactly the same location. I just tried the F-117/A-10 experiment against the 1S91. F-117 Detection range: Unknown, since the "F-117 with A-10 cockpit" mod I tried earlier had undesirable effects, so I uninstalled it. I'm still convinced the SPO-15 is broken in the Su-27 pit that normally is there with the F-117. Engagement range: Approximately 6km. This was also where the SPO-15 finally woke up and came out of stupid mode. A-10 Detection range: Approximately 50.62km (30.1 miles from waypoint 1 which I placed on the 1S91 radar). It was totally against my instincts to keep driving toward the radar with the detection warning going for almost 20 miles. Engagement range: Approximately 18.7km (11.1 miles from waypoint 1). So...I guess the S-300 is just a super nasty SAM system.
ED Team Groove Posted December 30, 2006 ED Team Posted December 30, 2006 @Groove: there we no serbs dancing around crashed plane, you watch too many american movies. EDIT: Check screenshots @ http://www.serbnews.com/f117.html Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Instead...there were red Xs dancing around the plane. :D Can we just stick to the topic, please? :smilewink:
ED Team Groove Posted December 30, 2006 ED Team Posted December 30, 2006 Instead...there were red Xs dancing around the plane. :D Can we just stick to the topic, please? :smilewink: Sorry i was OT. Wont happen again ! Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 The links don't work either. OT is OK in my view, its just that this political stuff over Yugoslavia gets everybody pissed off at each other. :smilewink: Edit...just saw them by following the main link. I don't see anybody dancing. Just 3 people posing for photos.
ED Team Groove Posted December 30, 2006 ED Team Posted December 30, 2006 Okay im wrong. There are no civilians at the plane. I photoshopped it. Sorry they dont dance. Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 But, you didn't say "civilians at the plane", you said "farmers dancing". ;) BTW...have you done any research into the problem presented in this thread? BTW...it doesn't have anything to do with Yugoslavia...just relative numbers in a computer program. That site is funny, BTW. I loved the part about "Western media says the pilot was rescued, but the truth is that the seat was so close to the plane that he either died or was captured by our forces". All these years later, and they still post that BS, which not only demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of the ACES II egress system...but they still can't prove that they captured anybody. In case they don't know, if the seat stays with the plane and the pilot didn't eject...he doesn't magically vanish into thin air. On the other hand, the pilot's family has had their father/husband back for some time. But, again its an American lie, that "man" is actually a cyborg. :D
ED Team Groove Posted December 30, 2006 ED Team Posted December 30, 2006 In my first post about this incident i recalled pics from my memory. Yes i wasnt exact in my posting. It went down on a farmers field. Where i come from (Poland) farmers fields are usually owned by farmers and so i called the farmers. Okay, i should have used the term "civilians" instead of farmers. I dont know why this bothers you but ok. Cheering ( as i recall the Tv pictures) is for me similar to dancing - but this might by my opinion. I just googled for some pics about this incident. Its obvious that a serbian propaganda site is - now the surprise - slightly biased towards the serbian side of the conflict. As any other countries site would be biased towards their own side. No i did no research so far as i dont have lomac installed at the moment because of a HD crash i had recently. Can i answer you some other questions? Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Groove, the only thing that "bothers" me is that you have continued the OT discussion about farmers dancing around the plane, when Suntrace already told you it wasn't true. His "American movies" comment was based on the media always going for a dramatic angle. Their camera crews don't get career advancement unless they get that really dramatic shot. ;) Quite frankly, I didn't see much drama in those pics, just a small group of guys (yes, they were all male, BTW...if they were all farmers...well...I guess the sheep were all a little nervous) posing by a plane crash site. There is no indication of their profession in the photos, except for the few with military uniforms, and the mood certainly doesn't seem all that festive. So, I think "dancing" is a little dramatic as well. :D
Vekkinho Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 I tried the mod that allows you to fly the F-117 with an A-10 cockpit, and the RHAW once again picked up Big Bird as soon as I came above the radar horizon. Once again, I was engaged at pretty much the same distance from the S-300 site, about 40km...and they continued to fire at me some 45km out, in the weeds. Yes, but be aware that if you take a cockpit from A-10 to fly F-117A you'll get everything related to A-10 even it's RCS and flight model. So you'll be "radar visible" in flyable F-117A just like in default A-10. You'll be detected and engaged by SAMs at the same distance... I tried testing default AI F-117A. Just to see how it's modelled. And I can say it's poor. I thought there might be an argument in Nighthawk's 3D model that controls RCS. In fact, how is RCS determined in LO, anyway?! There is obvious RCS difference between IL-76 and F-16 so there must be something in MEInit that controls it and RCS of F-117A should be reduced to...let's say...slightly bigger duck! It might solve the problem here! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 It's kept in an internal, encrypted table. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Did you see the post I made at the bottom of this page http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=20482&page=6? I haven't realigned coalitions yet to see if its truly the RCS of the Su-27 that is 1/3 that of the A-10...but I'll be trying that next.
Vekkinho Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 In case they don't know, if the seat stays with the plane and the pilot didn't eject...he doesn't magically vanish into thin air. On the other hand, the pilot's family has had their father/husband back for some time. But, again its an American lie, that "man" is actually a cyborg. :D Guys, guys...the F-117 pilot is a complete idiot who jumped out of the burning F-117 instead of ejecting. That's why you have ACES attached firmly to the airframe. And the pilot didn't vanish into thin air, he dug him self momentarily 6ft under so they couldn't find him. Or it was RC model of F-117 without any humans onboard and controlled from ground by that guy in thiose pics sitting in the ACES seat! Like groove said:" Farmer boys with expensive toys!" OK...I hope I didn't insult anyone with my jokes but I'm glad the pilot survived. We all should be! It's just a man who likes flying! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 OK...I hope I didn't insult anyone with my jokes but I'm glad the pilot survived. We all should be! It's just a man who likes flying! Exactly!!! Words to live by!!! :thumbup:
Vekkinho Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 IguanaKing: Did U test the mission I uploaded?! Remember to use AI F-117 and make sure it has bombs in payload window (no matter of type). Then start the mission. When AI pilot opens weapon bays, place F2 camera under the aircraft to see if there are any bombs inside. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Yup...just tested it. The weapons AND the trapeze are invisible when the bay doors open. Bombs finally DO get dropped, but in spite of GBU-27s having been the original load, the AAR shows GBU-10s. :doh: It looks like you have done everything correctly Vekkinho, its once again the game that is screwed up. That editor sure acts funky when the F-117 is being loaded. Yes...it IS a term we commonly use in avionics when we can't quite explain WTF is going on. :D I'm going to try the coalition realignment to test your theory about cockpit vs. RCS with the Su-27.
Recommended Posts