Today I fired 20 amraams =(

[vadIL]

The problem is, Fixing amraam behavor wont sell another copy of lockon :noexpression:

[D-Scythe]

Why not?

Economics?

Buerocracy? (spelling please =)

copyright rules?

 

Because it CERTAINLY cannot have anything to do with the code itself in this case. I'm thus trying to push all other points I find.

 

Ask programmers/software engineers. I bet if you explain this problem to them the answer will be close to unanimous.........(I certainly have got that answer)

 

And don't come with stuff "Little boy, you don't know what you're saying. Wait until you grow up and see how it all is." It feels really bad for the person receiving it and most often is just an easy way out when you have run out of arguments.

 

Trying to push for improvements in lomac forum.....:

- Hey why don't we do this?

ED: .........(blank)

ED supporters: - lol , who do you think we are?

 

I think team ED(incl testers) needs to visit fighterops forums.

 

Hey, we're all on the same team here, and nobody's trying to speak down to you. If one of the senior members of this community does give you the "you're too young to understand" response, it's simply because we've heard it from ED a hundred times. Seriously.

 

More on the topic, I really hope you're right, and that ED only needs to alter the parameters of a few values/variables to fix this. It's not that everyone wants you to be wrong, but rather, well, some "simple" fixes had been presented to ED in the past, and stuff has turned out to be anything but.

 

What's best here would be to determine what issues the community thinks are most important and needs to be fixed, so that ED can put the minimal amount of time and effort address them.

[GGTharos]

No... but I plan on building one when I have some time :D

 

LOL. I built a laser guided one a decade ago on top of a model rocket, with some servos from an RC for the guidance and a custom made circuit board with a programmable logic array to make it all work! IIRC the single most expensive component was the light filter :D

 

The whole thing kinda sorta worked ... it was a pure pursuit thing - reaaally simple ... and a huge waste of money :D

[hitman]

Should, yes...but even there are limits.

[RvEYoda]

What's best here would be to determine what issues the community thinks are most important and needs to be fixed, so that ED can put the minimal amount of time and effort address them.

 

Yes!

Exactly. So they go out and add a chopper when we're trying to fly the _simulator_ competitively =/. We're clearly not getting through (at least not the ones I've talked to)....Well to be more on the serious side(yes I understand BS is a economic and lifespan project, but the fixes we are asking for are so incredibly small in terms of effort compared to the development and testing of a full expansion release).

 

Suppose you do make a quick fix. Suppose you do NOT realease it freely. Suppose instead you bring together some good pilots of the community and some of the more knowledgable persons for fighter aviation like yourself and GG. You ask them to test this fix for a wk or two and before even starting you require them to send replies/forms/comments/reports/whateverhaveyou. You don't put the normal Beta boys on this full time because they probably already have to much work on their hands. Most important :

Suppose you let the community know exactly what fixes are planned and in development.

 

GG: I know you work with them. THAT is why It would be great for you to ask them what kind of process they would need to go through to develop and test a fix. An estimate of the work required!

[D-Scythe]

decrease signal (RCS) + increase noise (chaff) :)

 

That would only get you so far with the doppler radars of AMRAAM, R-77/27, AIM-7...

 

 

Since chaff clutter can be considered ground clutter (on the basis that neither has any radial velocity), you can see from the above diagram that you can add as much chaff (noise) as you'd like, but because the noise generated by the chaff decoys don't have the same doppler as the target, chances are the missile/radar won't be fooled by the chaff.

[GGTharos]

It would get you pretty far ... under the right circumstances. But the 'right circumstances' are getting harder and harder to produce, since missiles now come equipped with 'special trajectories' to help them look around chaff and so on ;)

[RvEYoda]

I want it to be as real as possible, but none of us knows how they really work. I hate firing a 120/27ER at someone flying 10 feet off the ground and having them miss. No one in there right mind would be doing that anyway.

 

As long as we feel it's more real, and we always try to make it more towards what we believe is real - I think that is good enough.

 

oh btw I'm pretty sure you would hit something flying 10 ft off the ground. I'm pretty sure you could hit someone running towards the emitter if you put your mind to it just adding some software to the 120. Frequency precision should be the main limitation afaik when it comes to hot look-down radar targets. Perhaps running isnt fast enough, but I'm sure I heard a story from GG about an aim7 locking a truck or whatever it was :)

[GGTharos]

No we don't, but we can make educated guesses - we'll obviously get a bunch of stuff wrong, which is why things should be kept as simple as possible, and add complications as they're confirmed in one way or another.

[GGTharos]

Yep, though I'm uncertain as to whether that story is really true - but we -do- know that AIM-7's were fired at MiG-25's while they were landing, and although they did not score direct hits, they detonated nearby! None of this 'not gonna track nuthin' business!

 

Incidentally, the funny thing is that heaters are programmed to nail you down on the deck....but heaters too have issues with the aircraft's IR signature being reflected off the ground, and especially water!

[centermass]

I was partially correct and partially incorrect.

 

Jammer (ECM), depending on the type, is used to deny a lock. In most cases jammers are used to hid your position by flooding the frequency the radar is using and giving false returns. This is what LOMAC attempts to model, as far as I can tell, except that it knows your rough altitude by placing a target box on you, if in the HUD (I'm not sure if the Fire Control System (FCS) should know your altitude or not).

 

If you turn your jammer on in range of burn though then yes you may force the radar to lose lock but then your signal is very strong and are inviting a HOJ shot.

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-RWR-ECM.html

 

You will notice that the source in the bottom of the article is old, we can assume the technology has improved since 1980's.

________

volcano vaporizers

Edited January 24, 2011 by centermass

[GGTharos]

OKay, and I'm telling you that for some of these 'burn through' may not exist at a useful range, and you might not be able to switch to HoJ either, because there'll be little to no indication you're being jammed.

[GGTharos]

And ... it's not about us 'feeling' its more real, or us having some belief of what is real ... it's about some actual fighter pilot playing it and saying 'hey, this has a good degree of realism'

 

As long as we feel it's more real, and we always try to make it more towards what we believe is real - I think that is good enough.

[hitman]

Haven't we had a few of those whos suggestions were turned down?

[centermass]

OKay, and I'm telling you that for some of these 'burn through' may not exist at a useful range, and you might not be able to switch to HoJ either, because there'll be little to no indication you're being jammed.

 

What is a useful range?

 

How do you not know that your being jammed?

________

roor bong

Edited January 24, 2011 by centermass

[centermass]

... it's about some actual fighter pilot playing it and saying 'hey, this has a good degree of realism'

 

Does this actually happen, are the Russian pilots only?

 

I do agree that the casual player's feeling of real is not enough and really does not matter.

________

easy vape

Edited January 24, 2011 by centermass

[GGTharos]

^^^^

Yes, this actually happens, and not only from Russian pilots.

[GGTharos]

You might be able to tell you're being jammed if you're unable to get a range, if you have too many targets on the same bearing, if the signal is too broad-band, and other things.

On the other hand, if the signal is very 'clean', ie. it looks to the radar like its own, but it just has an altered closure, you can shoot all the radar guided missiles you like, but they're not very likely to hit (closure is used in the navigation to predict an impact point and steer to it)

 

A useful range? I don't know, these things are classified :D But going by physics alone, your burn-through could be as short at 800 feet.

 

Using various ECCM methods, it might be quite a bit farther ... then again, it might not.

As an example, ranging an aircraft that is operaring a range jammer is possible by kinematic ranging, whereby you execute a certain procedure, your radar does some math, and pops up a range. This takes about 30 sec, and just about every modern fighter has /got/ to be capable of it (I know the F-15, the MiG-29 and Su-27 can, so anything newer should be able to!). But you don't get target range/closure updates like you would against a 'legitimately tracked' target, so your missile shot might have lower Pk.

 

What is a useful range?

 

How do you not know that your being jammed?

[centermass]

^^^^

Yes, this actually happens, and not only from Russian pilots.

 

 

Please do not use them again, the G model is shat! LOL I had to :lol:

________

XS500

Edited January 24, 2011 by centermass

[GGTharos]

The G Modeling has been discussed to painful lengths ;)

The problem might be more with ED not really knowing themselves how these things work, rather than anything any pilot may have said; I know I can't comment on the G-model based on my own experience, that's for sure :P

[centermass]

Roger, same, but I'm glad it's being looked into. All I hope for is real as possible.

________

buy silversurfer vaporizer

Edited January 24, 2011 by centermass

[Boneski]

Here is the problem with all of this... and it's going to sound harsh.

 

1) None of you know what is going on. It's just that simple.

 

2) Most of you have never been in a fighter jet or even a true mil spec sim.

 

3) Most of you have never written a line of Code regarding Air combat simulations.

 

4) Most of you are clueless about how to employ a weapons system.

 

So all this technical rubbish about what is not right with this program is just pure BS. Hate to say it like that . But it's true.

 

You can't compare this program to the real world because a program is not bound by any laws regarding the real world. It would be so nice if people would adhere to that standard as tightly as they adhere to their

so called standards of realism.

 

Also Missile data is classified. Most games are working with published data from the 60's and 70's that states what a system can do. Mix that with published data on what countermeasure can do and you have just about every consumer level air combat program that has hit the market. It's all guess work.

 

The thread starter is pissed and want's an "issue" to be addressed...

The problem was not the missiles...It was the unrealistic way the game was played... Him vs the world... How realistic is that. Bug fixes will never address that issue.

 

SOrry. :(

[D-Scythe]

Here is the problem with all of this... and it's going to sound harsh.

 

1) None of you know what is going on. It's just that simple.

 

2) Most of you have never been in a fighter jet or even a true mil spec sim.

 

3) Most of you have never written a line of Code regarding Air combat simulations.

 

4) Most of you are clueless about how to employ a weapons system.

 

So all this technical rubbish about what is not right with this program is just pure BS. Hate to say it like that . But it's true.

 

You can't compare this program to the real world because a program is not bound by any laws regarding the real world. It would be so nice if people would adhere to that standard as tightly as they adhere to their

so called standards of realism.

 

Also Missile data is classified. Most games are working with published data from the 60's and 70's that states what a system can do. Mix that with published data on what countermeasure can do and you have just about every consumer level air combat program that has hit the market. It's all guess work.

 

The thread starter is pissed and want's an "issue" to be addressed...

The problem was not the missiles...It was the unrealistic way the game was played... Him vs the world... How realistic his that. Bug fixes will never address that issue.

 

SOrry. :(

 

No need to apologize - everyone has an opinion.

 

But lemme get this straight...your position is that there is no point in trying to fix missiles because the data is classified and we don't know all the important details?

 

And despite the fact that a lot of members of the flight sim community have expressed dissatisfaction at missile performance in LOMAC (including some who are actual fighter pilots), we should just adjust the way we play the game and leave things unchanged. On the basis that the stuff needed to make things truly realistic are classified.

[Boneski]

Not at all . If you want the game fixed to make you happy... you have to clearly express what that level of happiness is... It seems for most that level is an aviation career in a box... thats going to be tuff for any developer to pull off.

 

Missile data is classified. Trust me. You won't get too much info outside of the briefing room.... But reading the tread starters post he feels that His missiles are under powered and the other teams missiles are over powered...

 

What would make him happpy? Balance? Winning out right. What? Whos said that this is not the way things really are>?? His missiles need to have the advantage is what it sounds like he is saying. He was flying a missile truck and feels like he should have won...

 

The point about ranges is that he does not know the facts... so should the game be altered to fix the F-15 so that it can be the super jet ? What fun would it be to fly agaist ?

 

The programmers can program balance. It seems that the advantage is programmed the wrong way for this guy.

b\

The problem is that with out first hand facts it's crazy to customize the game for a small group of vocal users... that's all...

 

The guys wants better missile... while this guy wants better taxi lights on the airfield.. what's more important?

 

Maybe one day a sim will come out where the users can mode the database tables and the user can tweak the game to their liking.

 

It would be too sweet if the tables controlling taxi lights could be changed... that would make this sim user so very happy.

[RvEYoda]

Not at all . If you want the game fix to make you happy... you have clearly express what that level of happiness is...

 

Missile data is classified. Trust me. You won't get too much data... But reading the tread starters post he feels that Hiss missiles are under powered and the other teams missiles are over powered...

 

What would make him happpy? Winning right. His missiles need to have the advantage.

 

The point about ranges is that he does not know the facts... so should the game be altered to fix the F-15 so that it can be the super jet ?

 

The problem is that with out first hand facts it's crazy to customize the game for a small group of vocal users... that's all...

 

The guys wants better missile... while this guy wants better taxi lights on the airfield.. what's more important?

 

Maybe one day a sim will come out where the users can mode the database tables and the user can tweak the game to their liking.

 

It would be to sweet if the tables controlling taxi lights could be changed... that would make this sim user so very happy.

 

Ofc winning would make me happy :).

Now even better if I can do this in a way where I use what I believe to be realistic tactics BETTER than the enemy. If he does it better HE should win.

 

Currently we're not seeing this though.

Most data is classified, sure, But I'm pretty sure that ET launches at 75-80% Rmax of the amraam should not be possible in the situation I described in my first post, just like a pitbull amraam with very good energy should not just be swept aside and ignored. Should the amount of classification stop us from what we believe is improving the game? Same goes for VERY high energy ERs where people almost hit E-pole with this sit.

 

"Oh shit it's an ER, better just make two turns" :D