Is high altitude BVR simulated in a right way?

[falcon_120]

Is it now? I'm not sure if there is right now a certain gap in the simulation whether it is the manoeuvrability, drag or any other area which leads to mainly low to medium range BVR combat.

 

Please correct me if i'm wrong, but i have always thought that pure air superiority fighter like the F15 and F22 normally operate and are trained to combat at high altitudes, such that normal combat operations altitudes go from 30K up to 40k easily in the case of the Eagle and up to 50K in the case of the Raptor.

 

The reasons are diverse, hugely increase missile range, better fuel efficiency, long range radar detection... However when it comes to DCS and actually also in any other simulator I have experience myself little to no advantage from flying over 30k. mainly because, even when you go fast (M1.2-M1.5) you plane is absolutely sluggish and cant turn at all, which makes any missile evasion almost impossible. To validate this feeling, from my MP experience I can see how almost no one ever fight at these altitudes, so even the F15 are nowadays flying at low to medium altitude (and not to mention those low fliying Su and migs you find in any server) and almost never over 25k which is quite representative of my feeling.

 

My question is, is the current simulation fairly good? Or is it lacking in any aspect? Obviusly i'm aware of the reasons that makes maneuvering at high altitudes difficult, my concern is about the current degree of implementation. I don't know if its needed to be improved somehow or is there any underlining issue causing this behavior (Too much drag for high to low missile shots maybe?).

Edited July 9, 2018 by falcon_120

[Cik]

no

 

 

combination of factors:

 

 

drag too high

missile loss of speed too high

missile maneuvers lack efficiency and deflect fins too much, leading to too much loss of speed

CMs are so effective that F-pole is basically meaningless with 90% of in-game missiles (save maybe AIM-120C) though you can theoretically hit a target at ~70km you never will because 2 chaff bundle and halfhearted maneuver decoys missile nearly 100%

missile off-rail PN allows small corrections on part of target to bleed missile speed more than is probably correct

ground clutter too effective(?) flying low actually sort of matters, especially for missile defense.

in online servers contrails are always at 23000-35000 and so flying at 30k is death as you will get picked off by EO flankers who can see you a thousand miles away

 

 

you can still gain a moderate advantage from flying just below trails though, especially on servers which remove the 120C, which is a missile that is so much better than everything else you can get away with playing dirt eagle because even though you lose half your range the seeking and F&F is good enough that you can win anyway.

 

 

i almost exclusively fly at 20-40k and do pretty well, whether in flanker or hornet. granted you usually have to shotgun 80% of your BVR missiles and most of the time what gets you a kill is a nose-on sidewinder shot at <5nm but whatevs.

[Drag80]

In my limited experience, air density is the thing that makes plane responsive. In higher Altitudes Air in thin with less resistance therefore more speed. but lift is not enough which increases angle of attack and makes plane sluggish.

 

I find the simulation acceptable.

 

However, I do feel that missile range does not increase with inccrease in altitude.

[falcon_120]

Why has this been moved to bugs and problems? This is not a bug just a question about RL tactics and their application to the game. I was hoping for some tips or discussion, but not to report a bug.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[jojo]

That’s just my thinking, but I think in MP most people are flying nap of the Earth because there isn’t enough ground threat.

 

In another sim (I can’t name here) dynamic campaign, you think twice before going low, because you will take ground fire.