GGTharos Posted April 14, 2008 Posted April 14, 2008 I've looked for records from the other side but I've not found anything :( Perhaps someone else will have better luck. It might be that those MiG-23's were just being vectored by their GCI. The F-14's stayed below their altitude since the MiG-23's had no look-down capability, thus mitigating the MIG-23's ability to engage in any sort of BVR fight, and dealing a blow to their SA probably. [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 April 14, 2008 Posted April 14, 2008 So, fixing speed is quick, but it would be a drag to adjust all the drag :D Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
GGTharos Posted April 14, 2008 Posted April 14, 2008 ^^^^ Funny :D Oh, that was just an MZ simulation - it's not LOMAC :) LOMAC's drag factors are fine as they are I think, the problem is the drag of munitions on pylons, if we talk about drag ... basically when on your plane, your stores are far too draggy. Easy proof: An F-15 with a nominal warload (4 AIM-7, 4 AIM-9, 10000lbs fuel) should be able to get to mach 1.3 easily. Try it in LO ... and its even worse for the flanker. Missiles right now in LO, as long as they hang on your wings, are super-airbrakes. [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
RvEYoda Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 GG I'm not sure the drag numbers are quite correct, especially @ 0 AoA, real amraam should (for example) have better terminal velocity than a free falling human beeing ;). It seems like currently lo missiles are not affected that much in terms of slowdown speed, wether they are pulling a lot or not. I believe you talked about this earlier though, so perhaps what you meant above is something along the line that the missiles in flight modelled drag might be bad, but not nearly as bad as the one modelled when fixed to the wing of a jet. S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse'
GGTharos Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 That is exactly what I meant :) [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
3Sqn_Fudd Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 When I listen to that recording I'm amazed at the F-14 pilot's discipline. Just a small point of clarification... The main guy talking is the radar intercept officer in the back seat (rio)... Transcripts are on the net Please continue with Aim-120 discussion... These discussion should be had from time to time for the new people... and oddly enough, for the old people as well. http://3sqn.com/forum/ Here's to 1.13 -- > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0488djMDBU
RedTiger Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 Just a small point of clarification... The main guy talking is the radar intercept officer in the back seat (rio)... Interesting...I didn't know the RIO would make the Fox call after a missile was fired since the pilot would probably be firing it. And yes, continue the discussion!
RedTiger Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 The rio can fire all radar missiles. I had a feeling that was the case after I posted that. Shows what I know. That seems rather cumbersom seeing as how so much of using missiles depends on where the plane is relative to the bandit, but oh well. Worked well enough in the recording. ;)
GGTharos Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 Actually there's a lot of indications a radar gives you now that it didn't back then. The RIO had to do a lot of stuff in his head - by not having the pilot do this, he was free to fly the plane. [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 April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 Real AMRAAM has lesser range and is less maneuverable then real AMRAAM-ski. Case closed! :) 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
Frostie Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 Ok ... I will concede three points. :) The real one is worse in that: 1. It smokes more 2. It takes a couple sends to launch when you pull the trigger 3. Its scan sector is not atrociously large I think No.3 is a biggie if we get a better AMRAAM in LOMAC than we have now while still keeping the huge seeker cone, then we are gonna have something far superior to any missile in use today. "[51☭] FROSTIE" #55 'Red 5'. Lord Flashheart 51st PVO "Bisons" - 100 KIAP Regiment Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10 https://100kiap.org
GGTharos Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 I think that's only true in some respects ... there's a lot that needs to be done in terms of guidance anyway, with that I agree. [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
X-man Posted April 15, 2008 Posted April 15, 2008 I think that's only true in some respects ... True in only some respect? :lol: You're a funny guy. 64th Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 135.181.115.54
RvEYoda Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 problem is, if we remove that super scan, our current amraam will never EVER hit if the enemy finds a chaff button. =( Same is true for all other missiles as well... I think we need it in combination with other stuff, or we might just as well go back to guns (hey that's not a problem with me, but kind of something that doesn't portrait "modern air combat" :)) I think GG loves his amraam :P S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse'
Pilotasso Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 I think No.3 is a biggie if we get a better AMRAAM in LOMAC than we have now while still keeping the huge seeker cone, then we are gonna have something far superior to any missile in use today. Its not AMRAAM specific and while it should be fixed it will affect all fire and forget russian missiles as well. :) .
Teknetinium Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Its not AMRAAM specific and while it should be fixed it will affect all fire and forget Russian missiles as well. :) I hope it will be fixed for all missiles, so effectiveness drop slightly, it will be more fun and more realistic by my opinion. 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube
D-Scythe Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 I hope it will be fixed for all missiles, so effectiveness drop slightly, it will be more fun and more realistic by my opinion. More realistic? Care to validate that opinion?
RvEYoda Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 imo missiles need to hit more......a LOT more.......to be realistic, but maybe that's just me :P. Currently missiles are statistically about as powerful as vietnam era ones (if even that) S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse'
Red Hammer Posted April 16, 2008 Author Posted April 16, 2008 The AIM-120A is better in every respect than the one in Lock On. AIM-120C and AIM-120B have difference in electronics (I believe some electronics were miniaturized more), I think the fins, and software. Well, why don't we just call it AIM-120A then. They never called it C version in the game any way. Except that it have a C version's engine (very little smoke), which makes it a little weired. So may I ask that what is the difference bewteen the A version and the B version? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
RvEYoda Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Hmm.... I'm curious. Has there ever been a single recorded bvr kill by R-27 in real life? Just an honest question. There probably aren't many records to go by, especially not for statistical certainty. =/ But if anyone knows of one it would be nice to hear. S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse'
S77th-GOYA Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Well, why don't we just call it AIM-120A then. They never called it C version in the game any way. Except that it have a C version's engine (very little smoke), which makes it a little weired. So may I ask that what is the difference bewteen the A version and the B version? The 120 had the reduced smoke motor from the A model. It is indeed called the C model in LO. Regarding the difference between the A and B models: The AIM-120B, which was first delivered in late 1994, had a new WGU-41/B guidance section. It had software in reprogrammable EPROM modules, a new digital processor and other electronics updates. http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html
Red Hammer Posted April 16, 2008 Author Posted April 16, 2008 So in the only different in the missile from version to version is its CPU and auto pilot stuff. By the way, in the Lock on the missile don't have smoke at all. I don't think it is for real. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 There's more differences than that, some electronics components may be replaced, etc. It depends on the upgrade. Software is also upgraded to make th notch smaller, to make countermeasure and ECM rejection better, 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
Pilotasso Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 The 120 had the reduced smoke motor from the A model. It is indeed called the C model in LO. Regarding the difference between the A and B models: http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html the name is irrelevant since nothing that differentiates them is modeled in LOMAC. Given the range it has, I would be inclined to say it looks like it behaves more like the A version. .
Recommended Posts