Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Foka1]

We have been laughing at the Red pilots that frequently fire their air to air missiles in a head to head merge, hoping for that all aspect hit that they were used to before.

 

Seriously, no wonder the stats look like that when, even the experienced Red simulator enthusiasts, fire in that kind of angle.

 

Keep it cool and wait for the right moment, that’s at least what we teach in the Devils.

 

There is one aviator that we dont laugh at and that is SAS6007, his R-3R are frikken deadly.

 

Have a chat with him.

 

Frankly this is so condescending and silly that I don't even know what to say.

 

First of all you again talk out of nowhere, considering how much time it took for your response to that (10 minutes), means you didn't do research to confirm your words. If you want do some work and check tacview for how many front aspect shots were made and calculate how much it affected overall accuracy I would take you seriously.

 

I can confirm I've seen people launch front aspect as soon as they hear tone. But I wouldn't have impudence to generalize all RED or BLUE pilots without checking how many these shots took place and how they affect overall stats.

 

But since you proceed to just "LAUGH AT" all RED pilots, I mean this is so bad manner so I don't think anyone will take you seriously anymore.

 

Understand please that data is BIAS free, it shows average for all pilots. And I personally believe that skill in average on both sides is close to same and I don't "LAUGH AT" any "aviators".

 

You literally showing middle finger to good chunk of community instantly without even checking anything by yourself? People fly both sides RED and BLUE and a lot of people on cold war server are doing DCS for a long time. Of course there are couple guys who shoot as soon as they hear tone, but you need to actually check how many are those before running your mouth basically telling all RED players are trash and "your devils" are masters of the universe (formed less than 6 month ago?). This only shows your bully nature and BIAS, nothing else.

 

Ridiculous

[NELLUS]

I don't think you have even the slightest idea how the weapon system works in MiG-21. You're simply lying. This discussion is pointless.

 

Lying.. :megalol:

 

I simply said that you should talk to SAS6007, he really knows the systems and how to kill with the R-3R. We got a few screens of him doing it on our facebook group. Poor Viggens.

 

There are a few active Red enthusiast checking out the posts frequently to see what we are all about.

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/201669484520294/?ref=share

[NELLUS]

Frankly this is so condescending and silly that I don't even know what to say.

 

First of all you again talk out of nowhere, considering how much time it took for your response to that (10 minutes), means you didn't do research to confirm your words. If you want do some work and check tacview for how many front aspect shots were made and calculate how much it affected overall accuracy I would take you seriously.

 

I can confirm I've seen people launch front aspect as soon as they hear tone. But I wouldn't have impudence to generalize all RED or BLUE pilots without checking how many these shots took place and how they affect overall stats.

 

But since you proceed to just "LAUGH AT" all RED pilots, I mean this is so bad manner so I don't think anyone will take you seriously anymore.

 

Understand please that data is BIAS free, it shows average for all pilots. And I personally believe that skill in average on both sides is close to same and I don't "LAUGH AT" any "aviators".

 

You literally showing middle finger to good chunk of community instantly without even checking anything by yourself? People fly both sides RED and BLUE and a lot of people on cold war server are doing DCS for a long time. Of course there are couple guys who shoot as soon as they hear tone, but you need to actually check how many are those before running your mouth basically telling all RED players are trash and "your devils" are masters of the universe (formed less than 6 month ago?). This only shows your bully nature and BIAS, nothing else.

 

Ridiculous

 

No one said ALL Red pilots, read it again.

[NELLUS]

There you go, been carrying multirole all day today. Mavs, rockets, bombs, all good fun and progresses the mission.

 

 

Can you confirm the damage modelling on the MiG21 extends to flap overspeed situations? Suspect we're seeing some MiG21 pilots using flaps and airbrakes to slow down rapidly from high speeds.

 

Good point :thumbup:

[m4ti140]

Lying.. :megalol:

 

I simply said that you should talk to SAS6007, he really knows the systems and how to kill with the R-3R. We got a few screens of him doing it on our facebook group. Poor Viggens.

 

There are a few active Red enthusiast checking out the posts frequently to see what we are all about.

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/201669484520294/?ref=share

 

 

Nice, advertising your ebin group, I wonder if that is allowed.

 

You can talk to Yink, he had 8 R-3R kills in that round LazzySeal used as reference. Didn't count kill ratio but it was around 3/4, most of them was rear aspect though. The problem is: I know how he does it. He uses fixed beam mode to target and lock on to them with boresight. The problem is, it's very debatable if the RP-22 can actually do that and if it's not a mistake in modelling. So I refuse to use it until Hiro obtains documents that confirm or deny it. If you insist to turn this server into a circus where we compete who uses exploits more efficiently, then you can totally do that, but I'd rather just go play Ace Combat instead of ruining the experience here, like you insist on doing with the Viggen. We can e.g. map manual ARU controls to stick and do 14G turns.

 

I actually wasted an hour of my life to watch all missed shots with heat seekers on the red side in the source tacview file and found a grand total of four front aspect attempts, FOUR, out of 118 launches. That changes nothing with the statistics. All of those are cases where the missile actually produces tone (i.e. gives launch permission - again, fly some MiG-21, you will see how the weapon systems work in MiG-21 yourself), despite no chances of hit due to aerodynamic constraints. Other missed shots were either missile going for other heat sources after launch or missing after enemy turns into it, at angles at which Rb-24J comfortably scored hits in testing.

 

We can make an experiment if you want: we grab all the Viggens and you switch to MiGs. For a week. We'll see how you do.

Edited July 19, 2020 by m4ti140

[Foka1]

No one said ALL Red pilots, read it again.

 

And here you are contradicting yourself.

 

If you are not talking about ALL red pilots while responding to OVERALL statistics, that means deeds of those pilots that you are talking about (did not specify how many) are not affecting overall statistics that much.

 

But, again in my book laughing at even single red pilot because them doesn't know something is low and shameful.

 

Also same thing about you saying you know someone who know everything about MiG-21 systems... He is single guy and frankly thinking that everyone else on red side don't know same systems is bold. Why ALL? Because if its not all then its not an argument in discussion about overall picture. There is world exist outside yourself and your group you know. Discussing overall average picture is different from tales about slaying windmills.

 

Beam mode that is used for shooting R-3R this way is really questionable, and its not proven that it is accurate to how 21 can use it in real life. Some people don;t use it because they want as much less bullshit in sim as possible. etc. Before judging people do a research for more than 10 minutes for god's sake.

[NELLUS]

I don't think you have even the slightest idea how the weapon system works in MiG-21. You're simply lying. This discussion is pointless.

 

Calling someone a liar is insulting, these kind of comments are a bannable offence on this forum btw.

[m4ti140]

Calling someone a liar is insulting, these kind of comments are a bannable offence on this forum btw.

 

I didn't call you a liar. I said you were lying. It's not an insult, it's an accusation, which I proceeded to support with proof in the next post (which you ignored) and you did not refute that proof so far. If you can't tell those concepts apart, then it's a conversation with a wall.

[NELLUS]

Also same thing about you saying you know someone who know everything about MiG-21 systems... He is single guy and frankly thinking that everyone else on red side don't know same systems is bold. Why ALL? Because if its not all then its not an argument in discussion about overall picture.

 

Read my comment again: I did not say that SAS6007 knows everything, he might know allot about the R-3R because he has taken out myself and others in our wing that way.

No one said that everyone dont know the system on the Red side.. seriously :megalol:

Edited July 20, 2020 by NELLUS

[NELLUS]

I didn't call you a liar. I said you were lying. It's not an insult, it's an accusation, which I proceeded to support with proof in the next post (which you ignored) and you did not refute that proof so far. If you can't tell those concepts apart, then it's a conversation with a wall.

 

Call it what you want :smilewink:

[m4ti140]

Call it what you want :smilewink:

 

 

No, I call things by their names and stick to facts, because unlike you I don't operate in a fantasy bubble disconnected from reality.

 

I'm done. I hope you'll be happy when you kill the cold war community again.

[rossmum]

Can you confirm the damage modelling on the MiG21 extends to flap overspeed situations? Suspect we're seeing some MiG21 pilots using flaps and airbrakes to slow down rapidly from high speeds.

 

I can tell you right now we use airbrakes to dump speed. That's what they're for. That's why they're called airbrakes.

 

Use of flaps is normal at low speed and I have seen it done during multiple IRL demos of the aircraft. The mechanism driving the flaps is, to the best of my knowledge, resistant to damage when deployed in flight - the airflow simply pushes them back up against the wings when reaching higher speeds. This is not uncommon on Soviet fighters of the era and was also commonly seen with their fighters in WWII. The biggest problem here is that if the flaps are pushed up past a certain point the microswitches controlling the BLC system trip even though you still have some flap deflection.

 

I have tested the MiG flaps at various speeds ingame, and they are indeed modelled as floating flaps. Above about 450km/h they will be mostly retracted and if you go much faster than that they're forced back against the wing. By 600km/h (near maximum permissible gear extension speed), flap position reads 0-1% on the F2 telemetry and the flaps are visibly flush with the wing. By the way - I don't remember seeing a prohibition or limit on flap extension speed in the pilot's operating handbook, though there are extensive limits listed for the gear extension, landing weight, etc. and a flap extension restriction for specific, mostly air-to-ground, loadouts with a specific amount fuel remaining.

 

For the reasons outlined above, "using the flaps to slow down from high speed" is not a thing that exists. At those speeds the flaps are pinned against the wing by air pressure and will not extend no matter how hard you want them to, and regardless of whether you even try to set them to their landing position.

 

I'm not sure how the Viggen's flap system works mechanically, and the thing is - dropping the gear to get the canard flaps down is an unconventional tactic but somewhat understandable within the context of the game, since it lacks a ground safety. Obviously if you're in a situation where this seems like a good move, you're in trouble already. The biggest actual problem I have with this is seeing people claim not to do it when several people have witnessed them doing exactly that - and in the first instance I saw it done months and months ago (by someone who doesn't post here) it didn't work because it was badly timed. The attitude they reveal is the real problem, not the flaps...

[Yink]

most of the benefit of locked beam for air targets is the low altitude performance, quick ranging, and the occasional r3r max gimbal emergency launch in vertical bfm. a lot of the time you can easily lock someone near the deck but have very low chance of having a consistent r3r track on them after using locked beam.

just for everyone's information, you can also lock people on radar without ever getting them in search mode by fidgeting the tdc distance and holding down the lock button while rocking/rolling the aircraft, treating it like a ranged vertical scan, because that's all it is. doing this disables the search function because the dish is a little busy. this will pretty much work anywhere not completely on the deck, and if you merge with someone with a bit of altitude it can be pretty consistent.

 

r3r is definitely a nice tool to have but it's not like there isn't simple counterplay. the 4 60s + r3rs was a bit much and I enjoy the current setup, and people usually pull the trigger a bit too soon on heater shots when they're used to ninja ass r60. people need to realize that we only have so many options for missile/aircraft setups and are limited by what the devs are willing change/add, so do your best to learn to deal with current adversity. whether it be difficult to intercept viggens, or not paying attention to rwr when cruising at metric 5k in an f5, or what have you, Its not the end of the world to have some disadvantages sometimes. Just report what you can to the devs and just try to live with the reality of not having simulator/irl quality systems/mechanics/results

Edited July 20, 2020 by Yink

[Hiromachi]

Can you confirm the damage modelling on the MiG21 extends to flap overspeed situations? Suspect we're seeing some MiG21 pilots using flaps and airbrakes to slow down rapidly from high speeds.

 

I have checked manuals but cant see any airspeed restrictions for the flaps being mentioned. Technical description of the aircraft construction indicates that jocks (hoists) design allows to adjust the angle of flap deflection depending on aerodynamic forces working on flaps during change of airspeed. As such, for example during landing approach with flaps in "Landing" position (switch), flaps will not deflect to full 45 degrees, but only when airspeed of the aircraft will drop below 400 km/h. In case of a go around, increase of airspeed causes flap retraction.

 

So as much as I find it silly to lower flaps for that one turn, since you literally dump all your energy which MiG-21 does tremendously fast on its own, I dont find any construction reason that flaps should be damaged in that way. At high speeds they just wont lower at all.

 

This guy is comparing an all aspect missile to the rest of the rear aspect ones. Good going..

 

The R60M’s were aimed to help the SU25 out, incase you missed it.

 

You also keep forgetting that the 21 has the only radar lock-on all aspect missile (R-3R) on the cold war server.

 

The Viggens are doing both Air to Ground and Air to Air work incase you have missed that. Ever wondered what fast mover keeps taking out the secondary runways, carpet bombs or rocket strikes the Farp’s, Gun Pod cutting the Mi8’s and KA50’s in half, Maveric strikes long range SAM’s and RB05 the Ships? All of these weapons take 2-4 pylons which leaves only 2-4 pylons for Air to Air missiles.

 

Please get your ducks in a row.

All my ducks are in a row, thank you very much for your concern.

 

The idea that you can just split missiles to all aspect vs rear aspect ones, shows that you don't seem to know the difference between available missiles at all. AIM-9P / Rb-24J are far more than just "rear aspect" missiles and you have pretty solid chance to hit a maneuvering target perpendicular to you. Thats only a bit less than R-60.

 

Now the purpose of the R-60Ms remains the question about as much as the purpose of Viggens. But R-3R more recently lost a lot of its value due to Alpens mission design. 2/3rds of the time we fly in storm / rain, with heavy overcast at 2 - 3 km. Locking anything in such conditions is rather hard if not impossible. So we're back to R-13 and R-3S :)

 

Yes, I've missed that. Every tacview I watch, I see a bunch of Viggens flying at Mach 1.2+ around Queshm or other area rich in targets and engaging into turnfights (or not) with MiGs. Viggen became the primary air to air platform of the server, whether its because of its performance, fun or amount of meme stuff that can be done with it. But the sight of Viggens performing air to ground is so rare that I do miss that :megalol:

[Foka1]

most of the benefit of locked beam for air targets is the low altitude performance, quick ranging, and the occasional r3r max gimbal emergency launch in vertical bfm. a lot of the time you can easily lock someone near the deck but have very low chance of having a consistent r3r track on them after using locked beam.

just for everyone's information, you can also lock people on radar without ever getting them in search mode by fidgeting the tdc distance and holding down the lock button while rocking/rolling the aircraft, treating it like a ranged vertical scan, because that's all it is. doing this disables the search function because the dish is a little busy. this will pretty much work anywhere not completely on the deck, and if you merge with someone with a bit of altitude it can be pretty consistent.

 

r3r is definitely a nice tool to have but it's not like there isn't simple counterplay. the 4 60s + r3rs was a bit much and I enjoy the current setup, and people usually pull the trigger a bit too soon on heater shots when they're used to ninja ass r60. people need to realize that we only have so many options for missile/aircraft setups and are limited by what the devs are willing change/add, so do your best to learn to deal with current adversity. whether it be difficult to intercept viggens, or not paying attention to rwr when cruising at metric 5k in an f5, or what have you, Its not the end of the world to have some disadvantages sometimes. Just report what you can to the devs and just try to live with the reality of not having simulator/irl quality systems/mechanics/results

 

 

First sane and respectful response on the data, I've seen here in a while.

 

I would do a question back. "we only have so many options for missile/aircraft setups and are limited by what the devs are willing change/add". Indeed but why not explore all variations before deciding which setup is better? Also, can split missions on different setups, one chunk of missions runs advantageous setup for one option, and other chunk run setup with advantage for different option. I see more options, than just sit on one thing before checking every option first.

[Yink]

go ahead, not saying at all that this should be the final setup. variation and trying out new things is always fun and interesting B), at least personally. If alpen wants to add mission specific restrictions and loadouts im all for it

Edited July 20, 2020 by Yink

[NELLUS]

r3r is definitely a nice tool to have but it's not like there isn't simple counterplay. the 4 60s + r3rs was a bit much and I enjoy the current setup, and people usually pull the trigger a bit too soon on heater shots when they're used to ninja ass r60.

 

:thumbup:

[Alpenwolf]

A private message has been sent...

[Yink]

Another note on difference in apparent missile performance might also be attributed to the variance in each aircraft's launch permissions. I dont have much experience with p5s in the f5, but if you can get tone with a 24j there's usually very little chance that it wont track, and the lock on after launch capability is another useful feature. a lot of the time with missiles like atoll b and d the DCS 21 will give you 'tone' and launch permission, but unless it is actually a good shot, it has little bearing on whether it tracks off the rails or not. long story short is getting tone with a caged missile usually implies some attempt of the missile to track, but that's obviously not always the case here.

 

I think nellus said something about red players trying to shoot head on shots with RA heaters, probably because the DCSism of the 21's launch authorization and players expecting a tracking missile from a solid tone. I dont know how in DCS/21 scripting the launch authorization ties in with missile tracking, whether the seeker sensitivity value/algorithm to track are pulled from the same set of values or are calculated separately, but that kind of discrepancy will mess with the heads of players that are used to caged missile always tracking when you get tone, e.g. the aphid. so my advice to red players for "RA" heaters would not to trust the 21's tone and to take better shots, constraining themselves to better aspects and let the positioning and pilot skill do the work, not the missile/system, just like how the shoot queue for a fox1/3 in any 4th gen is basically worthless. as noted in the thread the R3S does have good initial turn performance and comparable energy to R13/60, and can do some work if employed correctly :^)

Edited July 20, 2020 by Yink

[Sideburns]

I have checked manuals but cant see any airspeed restrictions for the flaps being mentioned. Technical description of the aircraft construction indicates that jocks (hoists) design allows to adjust the angle of flap deflection depending on aerodynamic forces working on flaps during change of airspeed. As such, for example during landing approach with flaps in "Landing" position (switch), flaps will not deflect to full 45 degrees, but only when airspeed of the aircraft will drop below 400 km/h. In case of a go around, increase of airspeed causes flap retraction.

 

So as much as I find it silly to lower flaps for that one turn, since you literally dump all your energy which MiG-21 does tremendously fast on its own, I dont find any construction reason that flaps should be damaged in that way. At high speeds they just wont lower at all.

:

 

Thanks for this overview, my question was genuine and I appreciate a genuine answer. Was not aware this is how the flaps work on the MiG21. So there is no flaps overspeed and flaps can contribute, albeit minimally, to braking effect at higher speeds. I had observed a MiG21 loosing speed incredibly quickly while travelling in a straight line hence my original question. I will probably take out my MiG21 module to see if I can recreate.

 

On the earlier points of missile effectiveness the stats posted earlier are interesting, but bear in mind these numbers are the combination of both the missiles base effectiveness and their employment. I still see MiG21's try to evade missiles in AB, presumably emergency AB and I know that within my group we do hold back shots until the aspect and/or target speed is favourable. We also co-ordinate together in dogfights to create these favourable conditions as wing pairs. When a missile is fired upon we practice an IR missile defence, maximum performance turn with engine to idle (often resulting in an overshoot of the enemy). Also in comparing the MiG21 and AJS-37 ability to dodge missiles don't forget that the AJS-37 also has a turbofan which helps reduce IR signature vs the MiG21 turbojet.

 

On the comment that the AJS-37 do mach 1.2+, well that is what they are designed to do. The MiG21 can also go fast if you want to, but not as fast as the AJS-37 at low level, probably faster at high level. Once more if you are fighting the enemy at his advantage you are not doing it right.

 

Having said all that I do still think the RB24j, aka aim9p3, is arguably the best heatseeker available in the cold war server at the moment. I would not be against the Aim9p5 and R60 (base model not R60M) making a return to the server to address balance concerns. But a return of the R60 for MiG21 should probably mean a removal of the R3-R and ideally, if feasible, denying the R60M to the MiG21 if it is present for other planes in the mission.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Sideburns
Typo correction

[NELLUS]

Interesting tracking..

Edited July 20, 2020 by NELLUS

[Alpenwolf]

Interesting tracking..

The R-60's are often underrated which is why I'm very reluctant to add them. Let's just hope the next update arrives soon and brings some fixing with it for the R3S and R-13M missiles. Otherwise, I'd have to figure out something.

[rossmum]

On the comment that the AJS-37 do mach 1.2+, well that is what they are designed to do. The MiG21 can also go fast if you want to, but not as fast as the AJS-37 at low level, probably faster at high level. Once more if you are fighting the enemy at his advantage you are not doing it right.

 

The Viggen being 'fast' at low altitude is relative. Remember we're dealing with 60s and 70s tech here; 'fast' means slightly supersonic at low level, and the technology and materials science of the day only went so far. The Viggen per Swedish AF documentation is limited to 1,350km/h IAS - this is 50km/h higher than a MiG-21 and on par with a MiG-23. I'm still not sure what the specific limiting factor is, but put it this way: VNE is there for a reason, and exceeding it should be something done only in absolute desperation and would usually result in either a lot of maintenance, or a written-off airframe upon returning to base. DCS doesn't simulate VNE very well and so for instance in the MiG-21, we have engine flameouts, in the Mirage your wings inexplicably fall off, etc. In the Viggen there's nothing. We're not just talking short bursts of speed but rather sustained sprints at M 1.3 or even 1.4 - a few months ago one was spotted doing 1.45 (!!!) on the deck.

 

Ultimately the difference in speed right now is 2-300km/h higher than it should reasonably be, which allows Viggens to engage and disengage at will and simply outrun any threat in the server, even the MiG-29.

 

Most of the 'fast' reputation the Viggen has is from the combination of low supersonic flight combined with good avionics and very well-trained pilots running one-pass interdiction sorties - the aircraft might only be barely supersonic, but if it comes in skimming the trees and makes a single pass on the target before egressing at speed, that's your 'fast' right there, nothing on the ground has time to react and intercepts are difficult even if you can match his speed.

 

I seem to recall HB saying in the past that sustained overspeeding would cause damage to the aircraft, but it's just not there. Maybe (like the MiG's problems over the past few years) it's just something that's there in the code, but no longer works properly after successive patches to the base game. It doesn't really matter what's causing it though - the aircraft is doing things it shouldn't be, and people of course look at the speed, the missiles, and the fact the thing looks so cool and choose it, an interdictor, over the F-5, an actual fighter. I know this well - I was that person earlier this year while waiting for the MiG to get fixed :joystick:

 

Having said all that I do still think the RB24j, aka aim9p3, is arguably the best heatseeker available in the cold war server at the moment. I would not be against the Aim9p5 and R60 (base model not R60M) making a return to the server to address balance concerns. But a return of the R60 for MiG21 should probably mean a removal of the R3-R and ideally, if feasible, denying the R60M to the MiG21 if it is present for other planes in the mission.

 

There are some problems here, and one of which was why I originally suggested the R-60 be removed from rear aspect weapon sets months ago. The DCS R-60 is not rear aspect. It is limited all-aspect, but the all-aspect bit is still there - if you can get a relatively minimal nose offset on the merge and fire as soon as you get tone, the missile has just enough room to turn and smack the guy in the nose. Obviously this doesn't work against more experienced pilots who know it's coming, even a fairly sedate evasive manoeuvre will be enough at such a short range, but most people on the server don't read this thread and a lot of them aren't familiar with their own missiles much less anyone else's (hence the ongoing problems of MiG pilots trying to fire head-on R-13s, and F-5 pilots expecting their 9P5s to turn like R-60s and firing them way too close in a dogfight). If two blues get swatted in the merge for every one who knows to evade the expected R-60 hipshot, you guys are going to lose air superiority pretty fast and it's not going to be particularly fun for anybody.

 

On the other hand, the R-3R is dramatically underestimated in DCS but I don't think it is good enough to warrant removal by any measure. We'll deal with the fixed beam trick in a minute, but for now, its proper employment: very few people fly high enough to see, let alone lock, on the RP-22. Those who do regularly end up being screened by cloud, or they dive into ground clutter as soon as they're locked... or they're Mirages, and we need any help we can get against them. The missile doesn't have the best Pk even off an in-parameter shot and it can quickly run out of energy and hit a brick wall for snap-up shots, which constitute a large portion of shots we're able to make with them. The ideal R-3R target is a guy sitting above 10,000ft, flying directly at us, who either has his RWR off or isn't paying attention to it, and thinks dumping flares, going to flight idle, and making a gentle aileron roll is going to save him. In almost all cases, those missiles hit.

 

Manoeuvring targets are a bit more difficult as the R-3R loses energy very quickly once the motor burns out. I hit maybe half the shots I take on them. Normally I fire one when the gates are half the max range indication, then fire another at a quarter - by this point I can usually clearly see the guy. There are other factors, including the fact that it is in fact possible to notch the MiG's radar as it is not a pure pulse set. It can't filter out ground clutter but the weather filter does interfere with low-speed target tracking.

 

Now for the fixed beam. As I've noted, I'm pretty sure this isn't something the radar should be able to do - not only does it make Groms trivial to use compared to the real thing, but it also behaves like a very shoddy boresight mode. You still have to catch the target aircraft against the sky to be sure you've locked him and not the ground beyond him. It's not immediately apparent if you've successfully got the right target or not. The fixed beam is quite narrow and it can be difficult to do this against a distant or hot aspect (small surface area) target, and if you're both at low level and closing at a high rate you're basically wasting time trying to manipulate the lock button and point the nose while he's setting up for his first turn.

 

I almost wonder if it wouldn't just be easier having R-3R/R-3S (once the latter is fixed!) vs RB 24 vs GAR-8, but then you run into other problems - no missiles for the A-10 or Su-25, and probably a lot of people freaking out about why their missiles wouldn't hit. I'm not sure if that's the right way to go, but given the mismatch between missiles between teams swinging dramatically red or blue based on time period and the inconsistency in performance between HB missiles and ED missiles, it might be interesting to try out at some point.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

- The number of MiG-29A's and M-2000C's has been reduced from 10 to 6 and from 6 to 4.

- R-73's were added to counter the Magic missiles of the Mirage.

- MiG-29A's and M-2000C's will slowly but surely leave the server. It's a mere extreme change that is eventually coming to an end.

- In the mission Prince of Persia, Su-25's were moved from Khasab airbase to Abu Musa island next to the MiG-29A's.

- A total of 40 x R-60M's are available for the Su-25's. Use them for self defence purposes ONLY!!!

- If MiG pilots start exploiting that, the R-60M's will be removed and the Su-25's are again defenceless.

- 4 x Viggens are now available instead of 6 or 8 as it has been the case in many missions.

- The only exception is the mission Swedish Delivery which is currently offline.

- The number of R-24J missiles has been reduced.

- More changes are possible.

- The new mission Hold The Line will go back online in the next 1-2 hours. I will launch it manually.

[m4ti140]

On the comment that the AJS-37 do mach 1.2+, well that is what they are designed to do. The MiG21 can also go fast if you want to, but not as fast as the AJS-37 at low level, probably faster at high level. Once more if you are fighting the enemy at his advantage you are not doing it right.

 

 

The Vne in Viggen is 1350 km/h indicated. At sea level in ISA conditions that translates to Mach 1.1. To go faster you need to go higher, or risk damaging the aircraft (and this risk simply doesn't exist in DCS right now, load factors are taken into account but Vne not so much).