olli Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 I disagree. And you know why ;) It works, not as IRL but it does. But it requires you to be extremely skillfull in searching with the radar and a specialized HOTAS profile to do for example, picking up enemies at 15 miles with an altidure displacement of more than 30000 feet. I know perhaps only half a dozen online pilots who do this regularly. EVERYONE else doesnt. Thats is why tactics are very poor, and thats why 80% of the people will fly low knowing contacts will be also found flying low. I blame finger lazyness for that. :D What do you mean with the specialized HOTAS profile? (I often fly at Angels 40-44, very nice missile range, but you're right, detection of a 15 miles bandit is not easy at this altitude...)
Pilotasso Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 What do you mean with the specialized HOTAS profile? Specialized HOTAS profile means, no fancy views buttons on the stick or other ornamental commands that are not needed in the midle of combat. Mine is a radar command center at my fingertips. Unfortunatly suplying it to anyone else would cause them to be confused by such alien profile, you better do it yourself. (I often fly at Angels 40-44, very nice missile range, but you're right, detection of a 15 miles bandit is not easy at this altitude...) If you lock TWS he wont take evasive untill the AMRAAM goes active or no warning at all, Migs and Sues have more restrictive blind RWR spots. .
bSr.LCsta Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 13,000m in a Mig gives you a good buzz, saves fuel too! is this ok?
EricJ Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Man if there's one thing I enjoy about these forums, ask one question, get five hundred replies... moving on... :thumbup: Homepage | Discord | Linktree | YouTube 'Nearly everyone felt the need to express their views on all wars to me, starting with mine. I found myself thinking, “I ate the crap sandwich, you didn’t, so please don’t tell me how it tastes.”' - CPT Cole, US Army
Alfa_Kilo Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 The Su-30 is the Su-30 :) ....i.e. the original interceptor version(based on the Su-27UB) for which armament and radar is the same as the Su-27......in fact given its interceptor role(for PVO service) I don't think it even had unguided a2g capability. The export version of this is called "Su-30K" Only later multirole variants - with "M"("MK" for export) suffix and the upgraded "Su-30KN" are R-77(and guided a2g) capable. So since the "Su-30" in Lock-on was given these capabilities, it should really have been named "Su-30KN" :) . The baseline Su-30 & Su-30K carry the same weapons as the -27 and seem to have similar avionics too. Is there any difference between the Su-27S/UB & Su-30/K, Su-33 IRST, as the optics are offset from the centreline on the latter?
TucksonSonny Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Man if there's one thing I enjoy about these forums, ask one question, get five hundred replies... moving on... :thumbup: I like it even more if somebody mentions the "F22" pawn all word :D DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster |
Alfa Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 The baseline Su-30 & Su-30K carry the same weapons as the -27 and seem to have similar avionics too. Is there any difference between the Su-27S/UB & Su-30/K, Su-33 IRST, as the optics are offset from the centreline on the latter? Good question Alfa_Kilo :) The Su-30/Su-30K and Su-33 have the same EOS, which is a newer(longer ranged) version than the one of the Su-27S/Su-27UB. JJ
Alfa_Kilo Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 Thanks Alfa. Is this difference simulated in LOMAC, to me the -27S's & -33's IRST seemed to be the same, though its been a while since I flew last.
Force_Feedback Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 OLS-29K or something (or was it ols-27K), I thought that it was 'navalized', I know it's newer, but never knew it had better performance. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Alfa Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 Thanks Alfa. Is this difference simulated in LOMAC, to me the -27S's & -33's IRST seemed to be the same, though its been a while since I flew last. No I don't think it is :) . JJ
GGTharos Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 How significant of a difference is it, especially in front quarters/low signature cases? :) (Not to mention LO does not simulate attenuation and scattering due to atmosphere, clouds etc) [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
Alfa Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 OLS-29K or something (or was it ols-27K), I thought that it was 'navalized', I know it's newer, but never knew it had better performance. Actually I think it was called OLS-30 - but I wouldn't be surprised if the same system was called OLS-33(or -27K as you suggested) when fitted to the Su-33.....those designations kind of follow the aircraft :) Anyway, I don't think it is "navalised" FF - AFAIK it is simply a newer version fitted to newer(than the original) Su-27 variants....namely Su-30 and Su-33. You can find a very quick mention of this here at NIIP's website: http://www.niip.info/main.php?page=raz_sky_su ....as "enhancements to the thermal cuer" for WCS-30 and WCS-33. JJ
Recommended Posts