Avoiding fighters

[Eddie]

Wouldn't it be possible that the Ka-50 pilot could contact the ATC and request "picture"?

 

No, not really. I know exactly the sort of system you're referring to, I've seen the same thing on a larger scale in an operational role (the whole of western europe). Such systems are not for AWACS purposes, they are command and control tools and are intended for commanders to scramble alert fighters and have visibility of the battle they are commanding.

 

Now I suppose the small scale tactical systems could be employed as ground control, but they are designed as an information system for high level commanders. Ops rooms and Air Tragic Control don't have the facilities to handle the volume of comms traffic that would result from operating their own role and that of AWACS. Besides, these sort of systems aren't often installed in ATC. Air tragic will just use exactly the same sort of approach radar systems seen in civil ATC installations.

 

Also ground bases systems would suffer from comms issues casued by loss of line of sight, atmosphere and the like. It's why we have AWACS platforms. Not to mention that they operate via datalink rather than using their own sensors (all of which I'm sure as a former signaller you're more aware of than I) so wouldn't be an ideal AWACS solution.

 

It may be technically possible for the ops room to act as an AWACS of sorts, but not really practical. If it was, we'd be doing it rather than spending millions on E-3s and other AWACS platforms.

 

Personally, I'd say that BS pilots should be able to speak to AWACS just like FC2 pilots can.

[Case]

unless someone manages to create a simulation that models, apart from aircraft buttons and behavior, real military tactics and the various limitations in unit deployment on the battlefield... this won't change any time soon.

I disagree. Through triggers the FC2/DCS mission editor has the capability to create very realistic scenarios. However, the game itself would struggle to make a scenario for 40+ players because of the calculations involved. Furthermore, the size of the FC2/DCS map will turn any 40+ player scenario into airquake regardless, unless perhaps in an organized events like LOCERF.

 

But to echo what has been said before, taking your chopper to the FEBA when your coalition doesn't have air superiority is suicide. It has been shown in real conflicts and now in simulations.

 

So my advice would be to try out a server where fighters are less abundant or perhaps even absent.

[dooom]

what i would like to see is an ATC and AWACS slot available in the MP missions list - allowing someone to "Man" it and provide info to their side based off of where the current in game AWACS plane is.

[isoul]

...

 

Personally, I'd say that BS pilots should be able to speak to AWACS just like FC2 pilots can.

 

This is acceptable too! I don't know how the hell an attack helicopter pilot get warning/info about the situation in the air BUT he has to get that info somehow, right?

 

The system I 've seen was for command & control purposes, at least in peace-time.

 

@ <51>Case:

 

Triggers are good and can make a scenario more realistic but I wasn't referring to triggers. In RL you can't have constantly 40 F-15 in the air defending the same area. You will have a whole front-line to defend and various targets on the front-line and deep in friendly territory rather than a single/few target area. If you consider hardware/personnel limitations, repair needs, reserves for emergency, combat losses etc, the number of units you can spare to defend a single area at a given is limited unless alarm has been raised. This situation can't be simulated.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Not a chance in hell, not even if you paid me in 19 year old sweedish blondes.

 

 

Blondes Shmondes give me a Redhead any day of the week (Unless its Jerri Ryan or Christina Aguilera). Also I think that since FC 2.0 is pretty simplified, a DCS Jet is going to require a lot more "Hands On" approach and it might not be so easy to smoke a chopper when you have a much larger (due to the fidelity) workload. I mean lets face it alot of systems on FC 2.0 are basically automated for you.

[EtherealN]

Along with larger workload would also come more capabilities. Remember for example that the real AGP-63 has a lot more automation and gives more information than the one in FC2. In certain areas a more "close-to-life" simulation would have less workload.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Yeah maybee per system but I doubt it overall. Maybee your right my A2A XP is limited. I would think maybee you gain some automation but now you have like 7 more things to worry about that were taken care of for you before. Also I think that people that try to handle the planes like they did in FC 2.0 are going to be in for a rude awakening.

[Luke.S]

If only we had a British Apache with the EWS which automatically drops flares.

[EtherealN]

QuickSilver, do you have examples of things that were taken care of for you before? Countermeasure dispensing? Modern jets have automatic threat detection and countermeasure dispensing. There are obviously a lot of things that are indeed "taken care of for you" - but most of these things are not they type of things you'd do during combat. You don't spool your engines or manage your hydraulics in the middle of an engagement unless you've been hit and need to coerce your aircraft to be alive again.

 

Now, there are real capabilities that might take more work to operate, but these are capabilities that go above and beyond what we have in FC2 - stuff like two-way datalinks to missiles, waypointed missiles, datalinks to collate multiship sensor information and all kinds of such fun stuff that while they may take some work to operate are things you would do at a point where in FC2 you are still just sitting there waiting to get closer to your target. (Whereas a real plane with a real AMRAAM might already have launched a waypointed missile on a highly lofted trajectory based on sensor data from his wingman.)

 

Theoretical DCS F15C vs FC2 F15C in BVR: the former would win with extreme ease.

[Eddie]

Theoretical DCS F15C vs FC2 F15C in BVR: the former would win with extreme ease.

 

As would most if not all current western fighters if modelled to DCS standard. Having spent the last 11 years flying study sims (of different fidelity, but not quite up to DCS level) I was simply stunned when I purchased FC2 this weekend by just how restricted the aircraft systems are and how simplistic the models are. I obviously knew FC2 was a lo-fi sim, but I had no idea how lo-fi until now.

 

QuickSilver, you really will be surprised by how much having systems modelled accurately, or even just close to reality makes your life easier rather than making things difficult.

 

For starters, having properly modelled HOTAS functions would reduce the number of button presses to operate the radar nearly in half, then of course you've got data-link, bullseye, and systems that can all be set and programmed to your preference.

 

 

If only we had a British Apache with the EWS which automatically drops flares.

 

We've got more chance of getting just the normal American Longbow. Sadly.

[EtherealN]

As would most if not all current western fighters if modelled to DCS standard.

 

Exception being the MiG-29S, since the FC2 one does gain a lot from having R-77's. But yes, you did qualify it quite rightly with "western fighters". It would be interesting to see a study sim that accurately models the radar modes of the MiG-29S and Su-27S. :)

 

Ooops, did I just set off another flamewar? :P

 

(For fairness, newest-model russian birds might also benefit from a "DCS-standard" implementation, but the difference being relative numbers of airframes in service.)

 

But we are deviating. As far as helicopter detection I'm quite certain that both side fighters would benefit for "DCS-standard" implementation.

Edited June 9, 2010 by EtherealN

[isoul]

I think that the conversation is spiraling off topic.

 

Any good suggestion of how someone can avoid being the prey of a fighter while flying the Shark?

[nemises]

.....don't be within 100 sq miles of an enemy fighter.

[Eddie]

.....don't be within 100 sq miles of an enemy fighter.

 

 

Easier said than done on most public servers :cry:.

 

I think as well as shark drivers adapting to flying with fixed wing assets, mission designers need to consider the rotary assets more when building missions. The main issue at the moment is that most missions on public servers are very restrictive for us shark drivers. Having a single target active and then succesive targets not appearing until the previous one has been destroyed means that we can't plan or adapt to changing threats overhead.

 

If we had missions with a defined FLOT/FLET extending across the battlefied with various objectives along/across said FLOT line it would give us the ability to change flight plans and adapt our attacks to try and avoid air threats by being more unpredictable. And as a bonus it would make the missions more varied and enjoyable and would also mean fewer triggers needed to be placed by mission designers, making their job a bit easier.

[nemises]

..yes, this is good thinking, a flot instead of zones .... hmmm

[Eddie]

..yes, this is good thinking, a flot instead of zones .... hmmm

 

 

Given that in the shark we can create and amend flight plans to suit ourselves this would add more to the missions. And rather than using just waypoint to indicate target locations, missions designers could make more use of the up to 10 target points the PVI-800 can store. Or go all out and make use of the ability to place lines on the ABRIS map by marking out killboxes/battle lines/FLOT lines etc. I do this on missions I make and it doesn't take as long as you might think, given that you only have to do it once for them to be added to all the Ka-50s in the mission. And it looks a lot better when you're in the pit, seeing the thought put into the mission.

 

And if you have 8 or more Ka-50s in your missions, who's to say that they all have to have the same flight plan? You could give seperate 4 ship flight different target areas, and if we decide that 4 isn't enough for a given target area pilot can just re program the PVI-800/ABRIS with the new waypoints.

 

I recognise that this sort of thing takes quite a bit more thought and effort from mission designers, but the end result is much better for it.

 

And besides, having a defined FLOT gives the fighter drivers something tangible to defend (BARCAP/Sweep/AmbushCAP ;)) and the attack jets can patrol the FLOT with the Ka-50s.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Eddie

[fangav]

I think that the conversation is spiraling off topic.

 

Any good suggestion of how someone can avoid being the prey of a fighter while flying the Shark?

 

Stay on comms eg "TS3"with the guys giving you Top cover.

[JasonJ]

Been employing some of the tactics explained in here. Having some good fun hiding in cities while fighters sail overhead. A week ago I was getting destroyed at the first waypoint.

 

Since I don't have FC2 I was wondering how they manage to engage and hit targets from 50 miles? R-77 missles or something was mentioned in a conversation online.

 

Any good youtube vids that could show me how they do it? Would be nice to know what's going on above 500ft. Do they use AWACS, a super shkval, radar, what... how? Mostly I want a better understanding of how they employ these types of long-long range weapons know so that I can keep out of harms way. If I can see what they would be seeing then that would be of some benefit I think.

 

Cheers

[winz]

I think this F15C tutorial pretty much sums what the pilot sees.

 

it pretty simple for them, find, lock, fire.

[Speed]

Fly slower, like EtherealN said. That'll keep you from being detected by radar until about 10km. EOS detection is similar, that means you have a lot of 'stealth' advantages.

 

 

Normally, I would agree, but RIPTIDE killed me on the 104th server from at least 20km away with an AMRAAM at high alitude while I was flying a constant 120kmh at 20-30 meters. I would expect that guy could be cheating, but there were some stupid Ka-50 pilots in the area blowing past me at like 250kmh. Could an AMRAAM have locked on to me after launch? Can they do that in DCS/FC2?

[Helios]

Normally, I would agree, but RIPTIDE killed me on the 104th server from at least 20km away with an AMRAAM at high alitude while I was flying a constant 120kmh at 20-30 meters. I would expect that guy could be cheating, but there were some stupid Ka-50 pilots in the area blowing past me at like 250kmh. Could an AMRAAM have locked on to me after launch? Can they do that in DCS/FC2?

 

As I have just been getting started with multiplayer and spending a little time on the 104th, I have probably been one of those idiots :-) Was not aware of the speed effect, so very happy to discover this thread. With the map on 104th, terrain masking options do seem rather limited (though I liked the idea of "hiding in cities" as was mentioned in an earlier post).

 

Not sure which is worse though ... even at standard max safe cruise speed, flying to targets 40+ km off with nothing much happening already takes a bit of patience. Dropping to < 130 kmh and taking a longer detour to avoid being where you can be expected to be ... well, better not get shot down 3 mins before reaching the target ...

 

By the way I must say flying on the 104th and listening in on Teamspeak is really great fun, it's a nice crowd there. I love my Ka-50, even when getting shot down by fighters! However everyone else also seem to also be having so much fun with their fixed wings, so now I am also waiting for my freshly ordered copy of LOMAC to arrive :)

[shu77]

I have to agree, I jumped on TS and the 104th on the weekend and was setting up a new controller and going on and off single player. There was a great conversation between a couple A-10 pilots going on at one point and while they werent flying in the same game as me at that point, the two of them discussing evasive manouvres really added to the ambience of the single player game I was in at the time.

[JasonJ]

Thank you winz.:)

 

I saw this video listed in my searching this morning and I had already watched a few videos, but they only seemed like fairly close range. I didn't get around to viewing that one. It had "doppler" in the title and thought that rotor doppler was not yet modeled, so I thought no point watching the video. I see now that pulse-doppler refers to the name of the radar. :doh:

 

So much to learn. Just after you look into everything, then you go back over old stuff and rediscover new stuff you missed the first time around because it went way over your head.

[STP Dragon]

... because Su-27s and F-15s are on top of the "food-chain". People tend to like the role of the hunter better than the role of the prey.

....

 

As nemesis posted on page#1 these are necessary mission design compromises that must be there in order missions to be fun for all.

 

I'm on it!

My latest mission "Hamburger Hill" is my first PvP mission and I thought about this isues alot.

My solution became to a basic rule of my future missions:

- If a client fighter is in the area he have to become busy by other fighters.

- If no enemy client fighter is joined, some A.I. fighter have to spawn to keep the client fighter busy.

- If the A.I. fighter will be shoud down. New A.I.s have to spawn.

- If a enemy client fighter joined the game, no new A.I.s shoud spwan anymore.

 

 

It is a very complicated trigger logic but in my point of view it is working very good.

Edited July 20, 2010 by =STP= Dragon

[GGTharos]

What most likely happened is that he lost lock on the original target after launching, the missile started searching on its own and it found you. Its notch parameters are tighter than the aircraft radar so 120kph was easily outside of the notch zone.

 

Normally, I would agree, but RIPTIDE killed me on the 104th server from at least 20km away with an AMRAAM at high alitude while I was flying a constant 120kmh at 20-30 meters. I would expect that guy could be cheating, but there were some stupid Ka-50 pilots in the area blowing past me at like 250kmh. Could an AMRAAM have locked on to me after launch? Can they do that in DCS/FC2?