R27ET Data link

[GGTharos]

That's right, why have any rules at all ;)

[Pilotasso]

So to think of it tactically,

your saying its wrong for a Flanker to fire a maddog ET and run defensively because this is not realistic,

but its totally fine for an F-15 or Mig to fire an ARH in TWS or maddog then run defensively hoping the seeker does all the work for you even though this also is an un-realistic and fantastical tactic.

Common sense? more like a personal biased opinion.:D

 

I speak for myself and at least a few others that I realy dont need to maddog at all. Not because of fair play but because by the time TTA reaches 0 I still have space to turn and run away from any return shots. Thats why I refrain from being any closer than 12 miles and thats why I use altitude (not to just have a good perpective over hills) to extend with the help of gravity.

 

Even if TTA doesnt reach 0 typicaly its within 3 seconds of it. Time at wich there is little room for the target to manuever away from the missiles estimated target position based on last valid data. (at least it works that way IRL).

 

When I fly in mig you have about 5, 6 seconds at 25km from target to guide R-77 untill it reaches range to get active. The retreat that follows usualy gives the impression of being a maddog. Not so. On the other hand R-27ET cant do this with LA, not at that range it wont.

 

Its funny you mention ARH maddogs as more dealy because more often than not they give you warning, and the ET never does. I get spammed by AMRAAM's all the time but I find them easy to dodge.

 

Need proof? While on 169 server I have been killed only 4 times by AMRAAM (all of them at point blank range) while R-27ET has gotten me 27 times and counting (on 1 occasion, 7 consecutive times). Also worth mentioning the R-27ER has killed me more times than the AMRAAM did.

 

Alls servers stats support this, and the russian planes are preferred for their heat seekers in detriment of the Eagle.

[RvEYoda]

if the target keeps steady airspeed and heading, then mid course updates are pretty pointless, wouldn't you agree ;),

at least with non 120-D (where there is 2-way datalink). All you keep saying to the missiles is "Don't change current guidance" x 20

If target maneuvers then mid course updates become a necessity for the missiles INS.

This is at least how I interpret it.

 

The amraam kinetic range now is pretty much within hardcoded pitbull range anyway,

so the maddog factor for amraams are small. However when maddoged the seeker searching out

to max gimbals is absolutely ridiculous and you can even read publicly available

documents which will show you that not even if maddoged will the real thing do this.

 

This can be compared to the ET situation where the real seeker range is far less capable

in the head-on situation than online stats would suggest, and the missile should not

even posses a lock-on-after-launch capability.

[Pilotasso]

The maddog circle is there for a reason IRL, its in LOMAC thats meaningless.

[Geier]

 

Need proof? While on 169 server I have been killed only 4 times by AMRAAM (all of them at point blank range) while R-27ET has gotten me 27 times and counting (on 1 occasion, 7 consecutive times). Also worth mentioning the R-27ER has killed me more times than the AMRAAM did.

 

Alls servers stats support this, and the russian planes are preferred for their heat seekers in detriment of the Eagle.

I can add that ER (not EM) shows the same picture as 120 does, may be it depends on the way you driving your bird. You should fly F15 more polite to avoid the lock break which is very simple on it instead the Su one

[Pilotasso]

I dont think you read my post slowly. :)

[Geier]

I dont think you read my post slowly. :)

Ok, may be I'm wrong but I've sayed not about your very case but on the whole, basing on my experience.:)

 

I should not write it to the quote.

[Frostie]

Need proof? While on 169 server I have been killed only 4 times by AMRAAM (all of them at point blank range) while R-27ET has gotten me 27 times and counting (on 1 occasion, 7 consecutive times). Also worth mentioning the R-27ER has killed me more times than the AMRAAM did.

I'd guesstimate on a server that has [27 and 15] on one side and [33 and 29] on the other with you killing/flying in F-15 almost 3/4 of the time your chances of being killed by a Russian missile far out stretch those of being killed by a US missile, by a long way.:music_whistling:

 

And i'd think the Russian planes are preferred for the Data-link and the fact its predominately a Flanker sim.

And probably also because of the Mig being an easy bird to score lots of kills, because it has the best of both worlds ARH/ET.

[Pilotasso]

I'd guesstimate on a server that has [27 and 15] on one side and [33 and 29] on the other with you killing/flying in F-15 almost 3/4 of the time your chances of being killed by a Russian missile far out stretch those of being killed by a US missile, by a long way.:music_whistling:

 

And i'd think the Russian planes are preferred for the Data-link and the fact its predominately a Flanker sim.

And probably also because of the Mig being an easy bird to score lots of kills, because it has the best of both worlds ARH/ET.

 

I knew I would have to challenge you on numbers. :)

 

Fact is when you looked at my data even though I had flown blue 2.51 times as much as reds (convenient to mention, only on F-15 VS all russsian every time I went red), R-27ET has killed me 650% times more than the AMRAAM did. The results are different from an order of magnitude. And you can see from here the your direct comparison makes one smell a rat in it.

 

 

Here is a more correct analysis:

times F-15 kills: 151 = 71.6% of all kills

Times Mig-29 Kills: 44 = 20.9%

Times Su-33 kils:16 = 7.6%

 

Total Deaths by missiles:52 times

AMRAAM DEaths:4 = 7.7% of total

R-27ET deaths:26 = 50% of total!!

 

Had I flown russian planes as much as the F-15 the current trend would lead to:

 

(44mig+16Su33)=60 kills on red side.

 

60--->4 AMRAAM deaths

151-->X AMRAAM deaths

 

X=10 AMRAAM deaths if I had flown red side as many times as F-15. Still far from the 26 deaths from R-27ET. From this point of view the efecteviness ratio of the ET is 260% that of AMRAAM. Amazing...

 

Another way to look at this is the ratio of (Red kills/AMRAAM deaths) VS (Blue kills/R-27ET deaths), i.e. partial kill ratios.

While on blue I died 18 times from R-27ET. On red I died 4 times by AMRAAM. This gives:

 

Ratios of 60/4=15 for red and 151/18=5.8 for blue.

 

You can translate this to: "right now the R-27ET is killing you on blue side at a rate of almost triple as much as the AMRAAM is killing you at red."

 

While flying only on red side I was killed 8 times by R-27ET VS 4 times of AMRAAM, wich compared to the ratios above gives similar picture.

 

Enlightening isnt it? :)

[Teknetinium]

Because there is more Russian bird flying then F-15s, so simple is that. there is more Ets that are fired at u then AIm-120 I would think.

[GGTharos]

Pilotasso just showed (though has not proven) that this is not the case.

A more correct approach would be to compute the Pk of these missiles from say, tacview data, which would again show that Pilotasso is correct.

[S77th-konkussion]

Enlightening isnt it? :)

 

Enlightening enough so that my eyeballs roll up far enough to face the back of my skull...:sleep:

[Pilotasso]

Enlightening enough so that my eyeballs roll up far enough to face the back of my skull...:sleep:

 

My logic is clarivident! :D

 

Because there is more Russian bird flying then F-15s, so simple is that. there is more Ets that are fired at u then AIm-120 I would think.

 

 

When I get back tonight I will put my stats from april. Judging from the looks of it my usage of russian planes was higher and the AMRAAM death count lower. It will be very interesting to do math with that. :D

[Frostie]

Launch Authorisation ET shots are deadly, and with the poser being maddog ET's are easier to beat than maddog ARH, ...

 

I think your going to have to examine every Tacview and seperate the maddogs from the non-maddogs to give us a true answer.:devil:

[GGTharos]

Maddog ET's started becoming less 'fruitful' the moment certain people (no names) started using them as a standard tactic. For this reason an ET maddog is now expected.

However, regardless of maddog or LA launch, an unexpected ET will be deadly - this is well documented in reality (the one you didn't see coming gets you)

Funny thing is, reality seems to indicate that AMRAAMs were behaving the same way (wouldn't trip RWRs, or would trip RWRs late, in particular older RWRs)

[monotwix]

Stats are a good thing for determining things at the same time it should be cosidered as what is the cause of the things for it to be like that.

So it might be worth looking at it from another prospective to see what factors effecting the stats and what they are.

For example it's a lot easier for some to ambush some one with ET than AMRAAM and the second of what is relevant in a mission in what terrain.

In UBI lobby 1.02 the AMRAAM is more effective and the missions are diferent and it plays diferently not to mention the rest, on the other hand four flankers vs 4 eagles armed to the teeth over the sea in HL, would the ET come out on top?

[Frostie]

In UBI lobby 1.02 the AMRAAM is more effective and the missions are diferent and it plays diferently not to mention the rest, on the other hand four flankers vs 4 eagles armed to the teeth over the sea in HL, would the ET come out on top?

In the LO world it would probably boil down to who's got the biggest gun and Paploo's is huge:D( ahem~ Yoda told me)

[monotwix]

In the LO world it would probably boil down to who's got the biggest gun and Paploo's is huge:D( ahem~ Yoda told me)

Ye but do you see the point?

The diversity is a tricky business.

Paploo and Yoda didn't tell you that?

[GGTharos]

In LOFC? Yes.

It's basically the one you 'didn't see' that'll nail you, and the ET is prime candidate for it.

 

on the other hand four flankers vs 4 eagles armed to the teeth over the sea in HL, would the ET come out on top?

[monotwix]

In LOFC? Yes.

It's basically the one you 'didn't see' that'll nail you, and the ET is prime candidate for it.

Well I'd have to disagree with you on that.

How about those missiles that you can see but can do nothing when in tactical disadvantage whereas ET's easily dodged even with a litle speed and plenty of chaffs?

They're only 2 ET's per plane which are normaly used on the last stages of combat but would that allways come to that? It's realy hard to say.

[GGTharos]

That's funny; ET's don't react to chaff.

Which missiles are those that you can see but do nothing about? No such thing exists in LOMAC.

[monotwix]

In F-15 just come a bit closer and the is a use for AIM-9.

The combination of AIM-9; 120; 7 is a pretty lethal package.

[monotwix]

That's funny; ET's don't react to chaff.

Which missiles are those that you can see but do nothing about? No such thing exists in LOMAC.

No it's not. I ment flares you should've know that better.

About 3 or 4 about 90 degrees for each one.

How do you observe those

[GGTharos]

The AIM-9 is one of the if not THE worst, and easiest to evade missile in LOMAC.

 

You have to be slow or unable to pull more than a few g's, out of flares, or in a protracted in-plane maneuver to be hit by one.

 

There's loads of empirical proof for that one ...

The 120 is pretty poor at its job too. The 7 just barely get a 10% Pk when chaff's in the air.

 

Are we playing the same game here? We ARE talking about LOFC right?

[PoleCat]

Ahh, just shoot the G0D D^%ned missile already! :joystick:

 

One thing is for sure you will win or lose every time.;)

 

Out