Maverick Su-35S Posted Thursday at 05:55 AM Posted Thursday at 05:55 AM I've been testing this a lot to confirm. When pre-flaring against AA IR missiles, yes, even after you stop dropping flares, the air to air IR missile might go for the flares, but if a an IR SAM is launched, it will never go for flares that were pre-released. It's simulated that the IR SAM will only start looking for flares only after it gets launched, NEVER before. On the other hand, if an IR SAM is launched, it can go even for 1x flare that you release after the missile is launched at you and it will go for that single flare if you are 3-4kms away from the launch point, which seems pretty plausible from that distance. I don't even need to post a track, everyone can check this out. 1 When you can't prove something with words, let the math do the talking. I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly realistically. Don't underestimate my knowledge before understanding what I talk about! Sincerely, your flight model reviewer/advisor.
Tom Kazansky Posted Thursday at 06:37 AM Posted Thursday at 06:37 AM 37 minutes ago, Maverick Su-35S said: I don't even need to post a track, everyone can check this out. Although that's right, the devs don't like setting up test environments that may or may not match yours and look for issues that you might have. Especially with getting dozens or hundreds of those claims in a week.
Maverick Su-35S Posted 18 hours ago Author Posted 18 hours ago On 10/16/2025 at 9:37 AM, Tom Kazansky said: Although that's right, the devs don't like setting up test environments that may or may not match yours and look for issues that you might have. Especially with getting dozens or hundreds of those claims in a week. So what do you propose? Can I propose you then to put a track here with you flying the Su-25T and avoiding IR missiles with DIRCM alone? Of course, it should work with ZERO FLARES to blind the incoming IR missile, otherwise we misinterpret what it does and veer off realism! When you can't prove something with words, let the math do the talking. I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly realistically. Don't underestimate my knowledge before understanding what I talk about! Sincerely, your flight model reviewer/advisor.
Tom Kazansky Posted 14 hours ago Posted 14 hours ago (edited) I propose setting up a mission on Caucasus map with an aircraft starting airborne at the distance you like from an IR SAM you like and making a short track of what you've described in OP. I'm sure every dev can also manage to do this, but it takes less time to just load a track and jump into the aircraft. There are lots of examples here where devs can't reproduce people's claims, and it's even harder for them to find the issue with searching for a situation matching yours. Imagine devs facing dozens of bug reports without tracks, I guess your chances of getting help are better with a track. Sure, everybody says, "it's easy to reproduce" but often it's not. So if it's easy, why not make a short mission and a track for them? I've no problem if you choose not to follow this advice. I just wanted to show a way to increase the chance to get your report recognised. The fact you got no answer since Thursday from devs or other people supports this, I guess. Edited 14 hours ago by Tom Kazansky 1
Tom Kazansky Posted 14 hours ago Posted 14 hours ago I just want to add that I appreciate what you've found out here and I'm looking forward to reactions from the developers. That's the reason for my advice to make a track.
Ramius007 Posted 14 hours ago Posted 14 hours ago Be awere, that IR SAM's we have in DCS, are on avarage more advanced than system entry date suggest, and more advanced than ir a2a missiles on avarage. Sa-13 is using missile from 1989, Chapparel is mid 80's late upgrade, Avenger and M6 are using Stinger version from 1989 as well, even all manpads we have in game are not first generation either. There should be some flares rejection implemented.
Recommended Posts