correct as-is Sparrows and TWS

[GGTharos]

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

We have F-15C with Amraams C that get it after First Gulf War, but without other improvements in cockpit, like GPS, what is supposed to be APG 63V (1) from 90's performs terrible, but this radar get later improved as well to use amraams for full poential, we have modern amraams, but with 90's radar that is performing like 70's era radar, thare is few years old thread about underperforming radar that is still not fixed.

The F-15C we have isn't any particular F-15C.  It's kinda-MSIP, like the flanker and MiG are kinda whatever model they are.

The radar got about as fixed as it's going to get for FC3, it picks things up at F-15 ranges now.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

In modern it's that big issue as Amraam lethal range in TWS agaisnt even small fighters not reduce effective range, but in cold war Sparrow scenarios that are nearly non existant in SP F-15C experiance, Sparrows under jamming are terrible underperforminng due bad radar modeling.

Hmm, admittedly I don't play against people who game the game, but I find that the 7s can be quite threatening.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

Thats about weapons, another issue is not working autopilot level mode.

I agree, the AP needs to be looked into a bit deeper.  I wonder if there's trouble with the PTC there or if it's something else.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

Now for the flight model, occasional blackouts during landings feel weird, gear is made of glass compered to other aircraft, I also experianced glitches where landing on grass didnt made frame damage, but landing on runway resulted at least in blowing a tire.

The landing gear is rated for 600fpm@36000lbs as per IRL spec and it achieves that last time I tested, which was some time ago.   THe only time I've damaged it or suffered any ill effects is if I drove over some hidden problem on the taxiway/ruway, or if I've taxi'd too fast or took turns too fast.

 

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

I lost wings recently on mp server, in what according to tacview was 1.3G manouver, classic WTF moment.

That implies you had already damaged them or opposition had damaged them.  Ham-fisted flying.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

Thare is also damage model that seems bugged, I had burning engines and voise telling me both engines are on fire, visually 1 engine was on fire, but BOTH engines were worknig like new, just landed plane like nothing happened, at least AB was damaged too, so nice to see this.

Yes, this is bit of a weird issue but I attribute it to the lack of deeper systems modeling and not a huge deal.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

I can make some cold war missions to reproduce how bad STT radar mode is performing in ECM enviroment, hopefully ED either bring F-15C of some version to FF module or fix current issues with F-15C.

All radars in DCS that are offered to players kinda suck as far as ECM goes.  As for the below, the only thing I'd wonder about is your taxi/runway experience but it's easily explainable.

23 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

Of course i dotn have tracks for all those issues I mentioned, hopefully someone will assist in this, and i promise to bring evidence of all those issues if they happen again, but i say again, F-15C is worst FC3 module in terms of FM and avionics modelling. FM itself is ok i think, both performance and behavior, issues are various mentioned glitches

[Pavlin_33]

On 1/4/2024 at 5:57 PM, GGTharos said:

...

Yes, this is bit of a weird issue but I attribute it to the lack of deeper systems modeling and not a huge deal.

...

Eagle has a huge bug where it can fly just fine when severely damaged by cannon rounds - burning engine, missing part of the wing.
I am not talking about limping back to base, but rather still being to dogfight. It has happened to me in MP both as a target as well as an aggressor.

Edited January 12 by Pavlin_33

[draconus]

24 minutes ago, Pavlin_33 said:

It has happened to me in MP both as a target as well as an aggressor.

Save the tracks and report. What else to add?

[Ramius007]

On 1/12/2024 at 1:56 PM, Pavlin_33 said:

Eagle has a huge bug where it can fly just fine when severely damaged by cannon rounds - burning engine, missing part of the wing.
I am not talking about limping back to base, but rather still being to dogfight. It has happened to me in MP both as a target as well as an aggressor.

 

It's much worse than this, becouse there is a glitchy part you mentioned, but also armoured nose, R-60's hitting you from front always destroy radar and HUD, but plane will be flying like nothing happened, 0 effect on FM. As for radar modelling, it's not avarage, not even bad, it's broken, currently radar struggle to lock targets flying close to ground, our Eagle radar is supposed to be from 90's, capable of attacking 4 targets with amraams at a same time, can see targets 100 miles away easily, but this simple thing that was known for Mig 23, is beyond F-15C capabilitis, while FF modules using modification of same radar have no problems with this, too bad we dont have single seater FF Eagle availble, and 2 seater is WIP for God know how long, so basically best NATO fighter in game is glitchy, underperforming mess. Of course there are things that are made well, FM is good, graphics and visual damage model is fine, SP campaign is good, also small things like vibrations at low speed are nice, iirc FF F-15 dont have this, it's a lot given price, issue is that plane selected for this state of the module is rather ankward, becouse we dont have FF alternative for role F-15C is designed, Strike Eagle is 2 seater bomber (with no working AI currently), and other planes are multipurpose fighters with worse range and kinetic performance

Edited February 5 by Ramius007

[okopanja]

11 minutes ago, Ramius007 said:

As for radar modelling, it's not avarage, not even bad, it's broken, currently radar struggle to lock targets flying close to ground, our Eagle radar is supposed to be from 90's, capable of attacking 4 targets with amraams at a same time, can see targets 100 miles away easily, but this simple thing that was known for Mig 23, is beyond F-15C capabilitis, while FF modules using modification of same radar have no problems with this, too bad we dont have single seater FF Eagle availble, and 2 seater is WIP for God know how long, so basically best NATO fighter in game is glitchy, underperforming mess.

Interesting, I thought radar clutter has a rather bad effect on practically any radar?

[GGTharos]

30 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Interesting, I thought radar clutter has a rather bad effect on practically any radar?

And yet doppler discrimination makes hiding at low altitudes pretty much a thing of the past.   F-15s tracking cars on the highway is not a joke.

Also, the F-15 can simultaneously attack with as many AMRAAMs as you have onboard.   Not sure where ED got the 4 targets.

Edited February 5 by GGTharos

[okopanja]

2 hours ago, GGTharos said:

And yet doppler discrimination makes hiding at low altitudes pretty much a thing of the past.   F-15s tracking cars on the highway is not a joke.

Also, the F-15 can simultaneously attack with as many AMRAAMs as you have onboard.   Not sure where ED got the 4 targets.

 

In which year?

[GGTharos]

Same year as they started carrying them.  Actually, before that, in the test trials.

 

Edit:  I cannot post the part of the document, but basically it's in the F-15C -34 page 1-140 states that PDT plus up to 7 other track files can be designated for attack.

Edited February 5 by GGTharos

[draconus]

6 hours ago, Ramius007 said:

It's much worse than this, becouse there is a glitchy part you mentioned, but also armoured nose, R-60's hitting you from front always destroy radar and HUD, but plane will be flying like nothing happened, 0 effect on FM. As for radar modelling, it's not avarage, not even bad, it's broken, currently radar struggle to lock targets flying close to ground, our Eagle radar is supposed to be from 90's, capable of attacking 4 targets with amraams at a same time, can see targets 100 miles away easily, but this simple thing that was known for Mig 23, is beyond F-15C capabilitis, while FF modules using modification of same radar have no problems with this, too bad we dont have single seater FF Eagle availble, and 2 seater is WIP for God know how long, so basically best NATO fighter in game is glitchy, underperforming mess. Of course there are things that are made well, FM is good, graphics and visual damage model is fine, SP campaign is good, also small things like vibrations at low speed are nice, iirc FF F-15 dont have this, it's a lot given price, issue is that plane selected for this state of the module is rather ankward, becouse we dont have FF alternative for role F-15C is designed, Strike Eagle is 2 seater bomber (with no working AI currently), and other planes are multipurpose fighters with worse range and kinetic performance

You're still ranting instead of reporting bugs but at least we know it comes from love and passion. Your only hope is here:

Get to grips with these terms...

Standard Systems Modeling (SSM). A DCS module using SSM is characterized as including just the most essential cockpit systems and using keyboard and joystick commands only to interact with the cockpit. Examples of SSM in DCS include all of the Flaming Cliffs 3 aircraft.

What is DCS World Early Access? Early Access is an option for you to play this module in an early state, but it will be incomplete with bugs. The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. An Early Access module can be played on both the Open Beta and Release versions of DCS World. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version.

...and your life will be easier

The worst thing you can do is wait for something to appear in DCS.

[ARM505]

57 minutes ago, draconus said:

You're still ranting instead of reporting bugs but at least we know it comes from love and passion.

 

Sorry to add nothing of value, but I'm just laughing at this which is (to me) the quote of the week. Thanks.

[Ramius007]

I understand we have SE that even in terms of kinetic performance should be on par if not better than DCS C Eagle, assuming same fuel and wepaon load thx to better engine, what bothers me is that "study level sim" have broken radar moddling for 3rd most pupular module in game, (FC3 is after Hornet and Viper) I understand ED policy, that FC3 is old and maybe i can go as far to say that this level of radar moddling may encourage people to buy other blue FF module, I'm fine with this, but for God sake, we have this plane in multiplayer setup, it's about realistic battlefield, and FC3 is still selling decently afaik, especialy among new players, if ED is really afraid of making C Eagle too good, then dumb it down to A Eagle with only Sparrows, but make radar work as it should, it's already here, any relatively modern 3 or 4th gen fighter can see on ground clutter. Current radar moddeling creates unrealistic battlefield, and this is much moresirious thing than simplified system moddeling lebel from FC3, simplified nav or radio system have no effect on battlefield, not witihn DCS level of simulation and server practice in general, but weapons and sensors related stuff in this state is a no go for product of DCS stature. It's just too "big" plane for this. BTW, I understand SP only crawd that see no problem with this, in SP AI is tooo get killed only anyway, so all battlefield is already simpolified, becouse AI simply not use tactics to take adventage of own plane or weaknes of palyer plane, so inside SP, a lot of radr moddelnig issues will be irrelevant, whatever we can call DCS study level sim vs AI is another topic.

Edited February 5 by Ramius007

[Exorcet]

11 minutes ago, Ramius007 said:

I understand we have SE that even in terms of kinetic performance should be on par if not better than DCS C Eagle, assuming same fuel and wepaon load thx to better engine, what bothers me is that "study level sim" have broken radar moddling for 3rd most pupular module in game

What is the problem? FC3 is not study level. It's not being ignored or abandoned either, it is serving its purpose as a mid fidelity sim. If FC modules bother you, then exclude them from your missions.

Personally I find player preferences a bigger obstacle to realism than module limitations. If a mission is setup to be an air to air scoreboard, it doesn't feel very realistic.

14 minutes ago, Ramius007 said:

BTW, I understand SP only crawd that see no problem with this

No, SP requires as good a radar model as possible. When the F-16/18 had the horrible look down issue it impacted SP as much as MP, if not more, since the AI weren't impacted.

[okopanja]

52 minutes ago, Ramius007 said:

understand we have SE that even in terms of kinetic performance should be on par if not better than DCS C Eagle, assuming same fuel and wepaon load thx to better engine, what bothers me is that "study level sim" have broken radar moddling for 3rd most pupular module in game, (FC3 is after Hornet and Viper) I understand ED policy, that FC3 is old and maybe i can go as far to say that this level of radar moddling may encourage people to buy other blue FF module

Majority of modules has table based detection range modeling. This implementation takes into account range and altitude of both target and launch platform and calculates optical visibility and comparing with thresholds for given situation. However, this is not probabilistic and it also does not take into account s/n, aspect based RCS and many other things that could influence the detection range or even cause detection of false targets. This means specifically FC3 Eagle is not broken as you believe.

Last large change FC3 Eagle received is the range extension some 3-4 months before the F-15E release. This was a simple enough change and nothing will change there anymore. As for competitor Flanker, missing is player-to-player DL and command options which will never be implemented on FC3 level.

So more or less F-15C/F-15E do match when it comes to ~ range, save for the fact that F-15E currently along M2K has the best modeled radar in DCS. Simply put it defined a new desirable standard when it comes to fidelity.

As for F-16C/FA-18C they got the buff in terms of range, but the phase 3 will place them to the more realistic setup, hopefully at comparable fidelity to F-15E.

Last but not least F-15E will get a DL at some point, so average players will not struggle so much 1:1 against opponents (I gather BRA/Bulls calls are simply to hard for majority) with worse radar but advantage of the DL (e.g. viper/flanker/hornet).

 

[Ramius007]

59 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

No, SP requires as good a radar model as possible. When the F-16/18 had the horrible look down issue it impacted SP as much as MP, if not more, since the AI weren't impacted.

I played quite a lot of SP in Eagle, and you are rarely face fighters on purpose flying close to ground, avoiding bvb with Eagle where it's superior, current radar moddeling allow tactics that in RL would be suicidal most of the time (going into deck), this is situation that you see on MP, in SP even helicopters fly higher than real people in superseonic jets, this is battlefield realism part, that is just not here in SP. Ofc there are lements of SP that have more BF realism than MP, but bad ground clutter effect on radar moddeling just impacs MP way more than SP. Btw, Fulcrum and Flanker radar moddeling is equally bad, but Eagle gameplay is more affected by this, i m preety sure FF Mig 29 get this thing sorted out, similar to SE, but it's borader FC3 problem, that is wey beyong simple system moddeling, if we remove any waypoints or remove radar entirely, would this be also "simplified system modeling" lebel correct? If we have radar not automatically chaningg mode to STT while firing Sparrow, then we may call it simplified system modelling, lack of AP or limited AP options is same, but not working AP that is in game is also simplified system moddeling or it's just broken?

Edited February 5 by Ramius007

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Ramius007 said:

bad ground clutter effect on radar moddeling

And what you gonna do about it now? Did you send your data/docs and track files to the devs?

[okopanja]

1 hour ago, Ramius007 said:

current radar moddeling allow tactics that in RL would be suicidal

You think so?

It's much more common then you think, in some cases it was crucial to the success. Perhaps one of the most famous examples are strikes conducted by IAF:

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71T00730R000400220008-7.pdf

[Ramius007]

gong to deck as A2A tactic used against Eagle in DCS would be suicidal in RL, but is fine with current radar moddeling, in game it's magic trick to force merge.

[GGTharos]

IRL you would have distractions from the environment regardless of how good the radar is.  This gazelle video is a perfect example:  It's possible the gazelle would be ignore as 'car on highway' unless someone ran NCTR or otherwise the radar itself picked up the fact that this is likely a heli.

So yes, flying low is no haven from missiles save for reducing Pk (not driving it to zero, but reducing it) due to fuze issues etc, and there that too depends on intercept geometry and whether the target is maneuvering and using CMs.  Clutter shouldn't have NO effect but past a certain technology level it should also not be a safe space, in particular when out of the notch.

No matter what you do here there will always be unrealistic things popping up.

[okopanja]

12 hours ago, GGTharos said:

IRL you would have distractions from the environment regardless of how good the radar is.  This gazelle video is a perfect example:  It's possible the gazelle would be ignore as 'car on highway' unless someone ran NCTR or otherwise the radar itself picked up the fact that this is likely a heli.

For NCTR you would need to STT it first, which implies detecting it at least. However, I think identifying the helicopter probably does not need full NCTR, and basically amounts to detecting reflection with distinct frequency peaks (main body + 2 returns from blades) by applying filters for 2 frequency shifts caused by blades spinning in opposite directions.

However, at this moment I am not aware of any of events where the F-15/F-16 demonstrated capability of shooting down low flying helicopter in clutter as of 1999 (both gazelle and Mi-8 did fly medivac/resupply missions during 1999 unpunished by combining the low level flying with terrain masking + there is at least one known SAR in gazelle for downed 29 pilot, while said aircrafts were still in air within relative vicinity).

Hence the real question is when this capability was introduced and what were the associated limitations? Also the choice of material for blades can likely affect this capability. The capability is allegedly also present in some upgraded Mig-29s (not talking about the most modern radar variants), so I gather this is not really a rocket science in 2024.

For the record DCS Viper/Hornet are capable of detecting helicopter flying below Doppler or even hovering at ranges 10-20km. Tomcat can do this by switching of the filter, but again it should detect the driving vehicles as well (I believe this is not possible at this moment).

[GGTharos]

4 hours ago, okopanja said:

For NCTR you would need to STT it first,

There's probably no need for STT, but this not sure that this is worth discussing.

4 hours ago, okopanja said:

However, I think identifying the helicopter probably does not need full NCTR, and basically amounts to detecting reflection with distinct frequency peaks (main body + 2 returns from blades) by applying filters for 2 frequency shifts caused by blades spinning in opposite directions.

You're basically looking for a slow moving Vc jammer   You can get this off a hit, and display the classification; I have seen radar plots (not kinds we're used to) showing the main body return and the rotor return, and you could similarly classify prop planes as well. 

4 hours ago, okopanja said:

However, at this moment I am not aware of any of events where the F-15/F-16 demonstrated capability of shooting down low flying helicopter in clutter as of 1999 (both gazelle and Mi-8 did fly medivac/resupply missions during 1999 unpunished by combining the low level flying with terrain masking + there is at least one known SAR in gazelle for downed 29 pilot, while said aircrafts were still in air within relative vicinity).

Hence the real question is when this capability was introduced and what were the associated limitations? Also the choice of material for blades can likely affect this capability. The capability is allegedly also present in some upgraded Mig-29s (not talking about the most modern radar variants), so I gather this is not really a rocket science in 2024.

For the record DCS Viper/Hornet are capable of detecting helicopter flying below Doppler or even hovering at ranges 10-20km. Tomcat can do this by switching of the filter, but again it should detect the driving vehicles as well (I believe this is not possible at this moment).

This is all about processing.  The moment you get a digital processor the likelihood that you can distinguish certain things goes up tremendously - detecting moving vehicles is just a matter of them going fast enough to be out of the notch gate.

[Pavlin_33]

On 2/5/2024 at 7:50 PM, Ramius007 said:

gong to deck as A2A tactic used against Eagle in DCS would be suicidal in RL, but is fine with current radar moddeling, in game it's magic trick to force merge.

This is simply not true. It was utilized in '99 where a pair of Fulcrums flew on the deck (<50m) against a pair of Eagles, and neither the Eagles nor the AWACS picked them up on their radars until the MiGs finally climbed.

Edited February 7 by Pavlin_33

[Ramius007]

18 minutes ago, Pavlin_33 said:

This is simply not true. It was utilized in '99 where a pair of Fulcrums flew on the deck (<50m) against a pair of Eagles, and neither the Eagles nor the AWACS picked them up on their radars until the MiGs finally climbed.

 

It's not contradict anything, IRL Mig's could not be spotted simply becouse AWACS was too far away, Yugoslavia is hilly tarrain, so it's easy to hide, also F-15's could just CAP for threats flying hi, rather than scanning ground, it's completely possible they were invisible on radars, point is that current radar moddeling of ALL FC3 modules treat radar as not doppler one, in MP this leads to hillarious scenarios where helicopters and harriers are more dengerous enemies for FC3 modules than Vipers, Hornets, and real air superiority fighters, but again SP only players never notice this, becouse even AI helos fly like few higher than humans, so i repeat again, broken radar dynamics may be not be easy to notice for them, if someone wants to hide from doppler radar, then as mentioned already, you should rather pick busy highway than forest or urban area, becouse radars are too sensitive, in game it's opposite. I would love to provide tracks, but all Blue Flag tracks cannont be opened, game CTD

Edited February 7 by Ramius007

[Pavlin_33]

1 minute ago, Ramius007 said:

... in MP this leads to hillarious scenarios where helicopters and harriers are more dengerous enemies for FC3 modules ...

On the server I play, these things are caused by:

- unrealistic EWR capabilities and reporting

- planes being very unrealistic flying (bricks) dots in the sky

P.S. You forgot to mention the A-10

[GGTharos]

2 hours ago, Pavlin_33 said:

This is simply not true. It was utilized in '99 where a pair of Fulcrums flew on the deck (<50m) against a pair of Eagles, and neither the Eagles nor the AWACS picked them up on their radars until the MiGs finally climbed.

That doesn't reconcile one bit with eagles practicing treetop level cruise missile intercepts, or their attack on (unfortunately friendly) helicopters or the fact that that Mi-24 (or 8, whichever) was tracked in A/A from 50nm until the moment it was bombed (they were ready to attack with an AIM-9, but switched to bombs after they slaved the pod to the radar and realized the heli was on the ground)

[Chaffee]

I think everyone should remember that this thread started with someone not knowing how SARH missiles work.