IGLA

[Flagrum]

Not sure what you're trying to say there. Since you are "Moderator / ED Testers Team" it stands to reason that you are likely to defend the game vigorously against any perceived slight, so perhaps you have perceived what I have said as an attack and are therefore reacting with some kind of belittling statement. But what I am saying is not a slight. The program is great fun, it's just *not reality*, and treating it as though it were is a mistake.

I fail to understand what your point is here - imho you are stating the obvious.

What happens, for example in this thread, is that people have a problem or a specific situation and try to find some sort of solution for it. Often the first approach to this is to try to apply a RL solution. Why? Because many things are actually simulated quite well and it is not per se a bad way to try out things in this software. In the following discussion often shortcomings of the sim are revealed and work arounds proposed. Nobody here seriously takes RL data or procedures as the only, god (ED :o) given solution for any issue that is encountered.

[ENO]

I think allmhuran is taking himself a bit too seriously.

 

Like Flagrum says, the sim seeks to reproduce / mimic / model the way things are in real life. At the very least it intends to give some sense of real accomplishment to a virtual pilot for completing a tough mission that exercised his / her technical knowledge of the platform they took into battle and the threats they confronted. Certainly, some aspects fall short but as the program develops we see these come closer to reality, not trending away from it. Doing some research on modern, real tactics isn't going to hurt provided you balance it out with research on what works in the sim and recognize the differences.

Edited September 29, 2013 by ENO

[allmhuran]

Eno and flagrum: From your various posts I know that both of you provide information about the game itself, and so to you what I'm saying might seem obvious. But there are plenty of posts around the forum that don't make this distinction. When someone starts talking about "real world" data as if it was also factual information about the game it makes it very difficult to sort out just what is true in DCS and what is not. Just look a few posts prior to this and see how GGTharos responded when I suggested that this discrepancy even existed.

[ENO]

I think the part that takes away from your point is that you feel obligated to expand so vehemently on the subject just to point out that the sim isn't a mirror image of real life. We're not nitpicking donkey kong, here- and the developers work hard doing the same research we do to try and emulate reality as closely as possible. They have their experts, and we have a few of our own around here to bounce ideas off of.

 

I'd have never read the books "Warthog" and "A-10s over Kosovo" had it not been for this sim... but I don't need to be reminded that "it's not real." I'm quite certain the others who are doing everything they can to understand their platform of choice and their enemy are smart enough to figure that one out too.

Edited September 29, 2013 by ENO

[AtaliaA1]

Was it a home made paper-tube launched missile? Because real anti-air missiles don't have trouble with maneuvers ... They act faster than aircraft and the people piloting those aircraft. There are specific last ditch maneuvers out there, but a rollout doesn't resemble any of them :-P

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

 

That's not true GG. even the manual suggest going nose down and rolling out adding a hard 4g turn to exhaust the rockets energy. Besides your comment doesn't add to the enlightening intent of this forum, don't you think as a Moderator you should include relevant enhancements to the subject matter and not just trollish negativity. page 255 of the Ereader ver. of FC3, I think it was. anyway! off to better subjects.

[Tengah]

MANPADS are still (In the real world) notoriously cumbersome, unreliable and easier to deal with (by a target aircrew) than most SAM's. As some one mentioned here that an Igla should be persuaded not to bag you simply by dumping a flare or two combined with an evasion manoeuvre. The Igla, amongst others, are waaay over powered, not so much in explosive (killing) power but in flight and reliability.

 

A personal example of this is during one home made multiplayer mission my Flight members (who has already been bagged by a Strela) both watched in amazement as one Igla armed infantry man lobbed missile after missile at me as I went over his head at 270 kts and 50ft on the clock. Most hit me of course, a couple I managed to evade. In all they counted 6 missiles launched by the time I was myself bagged.

 

The reload times are way off and the ability to get a lock on an aircraft overhead at 50ft and even at a relatively slow speed is pure fantasy. I hope ED can work a little on the AAA in DCS, also I would love to see some of the higher calibre AAA with the traditional white puffs of 37mm and black for the heavier guns.

[AtaliaA1]

MANPADS are still (In the real world) notoriously cumbersome, unreliable and easier to deal with (by a target aircrew) than most SAM's. As some one mentioned here that an Igla should be persuaded not to bag you simply by dumping a flare or two combined with an evasion manoeuvre. The Igla, amongst others, are waaay over powered, not so much in explosive (killing) power but in flight and reliability.

 

A personal example of this is during one home made multiplayer mission my Flight members (who has already been bagged by a Strela) both watched in amazement as one Igla armed infantry man lobbed missile after missile at me as I went over his head at 270 kts and 50ft on the clock. Most hit me of course, a couple I managed to evade. In all they counted 6 missiles launched by the time I was myself bagged.

 

The reload times are way off and the ability to get a lock on an aircraft overhead at 50ft and even at a relatively slow speed is pure fantasy. I hope ED can work a little on the AAA in DCS, also I would love to see some of the higher calibre AAA with the traditional white puffs of 37mm and black for the heavier guns.

 

 

I never noticed that, I rarely fly low though. I probably average 3 to 5K in elevation. Utilizing the TGP for accuracy, putting eyes on target would give the sim. an exiting bit of realism though. In some of the books I've read in Danger Close situations the pilots could almost make eye contact with the enemy.

 

I bet that is tweekable in a lua file though.

[EtherealN]

MANPADS are still (In the real world) notoriously cumbersome, unreliable and easier to deal with (by a target aircrew) than most SAM's. As some one mentioned here that an Igla should be persuaded not to bag you simply by dumping a flare or two combined with an evasion manoeuvre. The Igla, amongst others, are waaay over powered, not so much in explosive (killing) power but in flight and reliability.

 

A personal example of this is during one home made multiplayer mission my Flight members (who has already been bagged by a Strela) both watched in amazement as one Igla armed infantry man lobbed missile after missile at me as I went over his head at 270 kts and 50ft on the clock. Most hit me of course, a couple I managed to evade. In all they counted 6 missiles launched by the time I was myself bagged.

 

The reload times are way off and the ability to get a lock on an aircraft overhead at 50ft and even at a relatively slow speed is pure fantasy. I hope ED can work a little on the AAA in DCS, also I would love to see some of the higher calibre AAA with the traditional white puffs of 37mm and black for the heavier guns.

 

You're a MANPAD trooper?

 

There are people here with direct experience. ;)

 

Remember that the term "Igla" is like "Sidewinder". A lot has happened in all those years. The first generations of Sidewinders were crap. Modern ones... not so much.

[AtaliaA1]

EtherrealN.........Can that be edited in a lau? at least the reload times?

[GGTharos]

That's not true GG. even the manual suggest going nose down and rolling out adding a hard 4g turn to exhaust the rockets energy.

 

Dive and roll-out is for one reason only: To gain speed. No speed, no g's, and A-10's have a hard time gaining speed to begin with.

 

'4g turn' means nothing in terms of evading missiles. There is no missile avoidance instruction in the description as you've typed it.

 

The last-ditch maneuver for missile evasion is an orthogonal barrel roll, which is tried and true in real life and in-game. While there are others, they're not as efficient.

 

The only missile you're going to be evading with a 'roll-out' is a nerf dart.

 

Besides your comment doesn't add to the enlightening intent of this forum,

It was about as enlightening as swearing about having read an article about how you can evade a missile with a roll-out ;)

 

Yes, 'rolling out' may mask the exhausts, IF you are in the right place for it. As far as an SA-7 is concerned, this could be disastrous ... MAYBE. But an igla that'll happily lock onto the IR signature of the hull, not so much. It will reduce the SNR, possibly making the flares more effective, yes, but that sort of line-of-sight processing is not available in DCS.

 

@Tengah: In RL, MANPADS will volley at you. Right now, you can represent this with a single dude because of what you described. As for bagging aircraft at 50' altitude, that's more of a procedure (for the shooter) problem, not an altitude problem. Those MANPADS can be and will be used to shoot down cruise missiles.

[AtaliaA1]

So you attempt to explain away your rude comments by a wall of post dictating how right you are.???!!!

 

Roll Out,,,,,,,,,Barrel Roll. My comment "I could swear I read" can be translated to "I am not sure but"......Right! So to go were you went was rude and equal to what a SNERT or TROLL would do, Take it out of context so you can disagree showing everyone how smart you are as you be little others with what you conceive to be your intellect and knowledge. NOT!

 

Next time just apologize and explain it without the arrogance and belittlement of the Forum members GG. just be human and drop the I am King of knowledge and any other ideas or hypothesis are wrong as you proceed to inundate us with your ohhh soooo brilliant speels.

 

ie. GG replies to Atalia..............No Atalia I think you mean barrel roll

Atalia replies OK maybe that was it I knew I read something about it

just couldn't recall exactly what it said. Thanks GG

Edited September 30, 2013 by AtaliaA1

[Pyroflash]

So you attempt to explain away your rude comments by a wall of post dictating how right you are.???!!!

 

Roll Out,,,,,,,,,Barrel Roll. My comment "I could swear I read" can be translated to "I am not sure but"......Right! So to go were you went was rude and equal to what a SNERT or TROLL would do, Take it out of context so you can disagree showing everyone how smart you are as you be little others with what you conceive to be your intellect and knowledge. NOT!

 

Next time just apologize and explain it without the arrogance and belittlement of the Forum members GG. just be human and drop the I am King of knowledge and any other ideas or hypothesis are wrong as you proceed to inundate us with your ohhh soooo brilliant speels.

 

ie. GG replies to Atalia..............No Atalia I think you mean barrel roll

Atalia replies OK maybe that was it I knew I read something about it

just couldn't recall exactly what it said. Thanks GG

 

Or maybe you could recognize the difference between trolling and constructive criticism. Aviation is all about precision. If you come in here spreading misinformation about a subject that you have little to no actual experience with, of course subject experts are going to correct you. All that means is that there are people here who have the desire for information being spread to be correct and useful. Sometimes the way they convey these corrections isn't exactly all that sensitive and politically correct, but it's something that you will have to get over eventually. People with real world experience in aviation fields tend to have a LOT of pride in their knowledge. They may, at times, be a bit hostile when you directly contradict that (even if you don't personally acknowledge the mistake, or even realize that one was made).

[ENO]

anyway! off to better subjects.

 

 

Agree with Pyro- probably should have stuck with your gut on this one Atalia.

[GGTharos]

By "The last-ditch maneuver for missile evasion is an orthogonal barrel roll" I mean orthogonal barrel roll, not just barrel roll.

 

Specifically orthogonal to the missile's plane of motion, which means you point your wing at the missile (3-9 line) at a couple of seconds (by a could I mean two to three, not five to ten) before impact you will barrel roll the plane in a manner that keeps that wing point at the missile, so for example straight up while rolling towards the missile at a rate that keeps the wing pointed at it - you dispense countermeasures throughout the maneuver.

 

In an A-10, if you have the altitude you may prefer to do this inverted in order to preserve speed.

 

Terminate the barrel roll immediately when the missile misses (or hits), roll out and pull the nose below the horizon to regain speed and SA, as there's likely another missile coming.

 

So, what do you mean by "barrel roll", GG? I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what the maneuver should be. Do you mean dive, and then roll out sideway's near the ground? Or just simply roll in the air?

[AtaliaA1]

Or maybe you could recognize the difference between trolling and constructive criticism. Aviation is all about precision. If you come in here spreading misinformation about a subject that you have little to no actual experience with, of course subject experts are going to correct you. All that means is that there are people here who have the desire for information being spread to be correct and useful. Sometimes the way they convey these corrections isn't exactly all that sensitive and politically correct, but it's something that you will have to get over eventually. People with real world experience in aviation fields tend to have a LOT of pride in their knowledge. They may, at times, be a bit hostile when you directly contradict that (even if you don't personally acknowledge the mistake, or even realize that one was made).

 

 

Stopped reading after your "Misinformation" statement. You need to reread the post, I asked a Q. He took it as a statement. So all after "Misinformation" was moot.

[AtaliaA1]

Agree with Pyro- probably should have stuck with your gut on this one Atalia.

 

 

 

Then you need to reread the post. I asked a Q. So your agreement isn't based on your knowledge of what was said, it was based on what was "Misunderstood". And what do you have to do with it anyway.

 

 

What's wrong with you anyway. I was Offended by his language and treatment of me and simply suggested an apology. instead he chose to write a post on how "Right" he was, adding insult to injury. He was right so I deserved to be talked to and insulted? when he took my Q as a statement?

Edited October 1, 2013 by AtaliaA1

[guitarxe]

Hey, guys, could you please take it off the forums, into PMs or something? :thumbup:

Here we have a nice topic discussing manpads with lots of wonderful and helpful information, and then we have you two going at each other's throats.

[AtaliaA1]

Hey, guys, could you please take it off the forums, into PMs or something? :thumbup:

Here we have a nice topic discussing manpads with lots of wonderful and helpful information, and then we have you two going at each other's throats.

 

 

I am so sooo sorry Quitar. I am a handi-capped individual and have dealt with bullies and people who treat me different because I am handi-capped.

 

Whether it is because a person knows more or is physically different than I am they are not going bully, make fun of and berate me anymore. As a handi-capped teen I would cry myself to sleep because of people like him. Not Any More!

 

I am not different because he knows more than me, nor because he is physically able to do what I can't. I am not stupid because of either of these conditions. and refuse to be insulted by him, bullied by him as if it is OK cause he thinks he is better than me.

[EtherealN]

Topic is Igla.

 

If you have concerns about other users, bring them to a forum moderator or community manager, don't derail threads with discussions about who has what attitude.

[Pyroflash]

FYI, as far as the game is concerned, the Stinger is actually a little more powerful than the IGLA. The problem is that the Stinger will NOT detonate on a glancing or passing shot. The IGLA will. This behavior is actually correct. THe Stinger's only form of warhead fuzing is time delayed impact. It actually has to hit a target to do any damage. The IGLA-S, however, has magnetic proximity fuzing which allows it to inflict collateral damage, even in near miss scenarios. Other than that, and average velocity, the Stinger is actually better at doing things than the IGLA. Even the seeker on the Stinger has a better range than the IGLA (in game).

[AtaliaA1]

FYI, as far as the game is concerned, the Stinger is actually a little more powerful than the IGLA. The problem is that the Stinger will NOT detonate on a glancing or passing shot. The IGLA will. This behavior is actually correct. THe Stinger's only form of warhead fuzing is time delayed impact. It actually has to hit a target to do any damage. The IGLA-S, however, has magnetic proximity fuzing which allows it to inflict collateral damage, even in near miss scenarios. Other than that, and average velocity, the Stinger is actually better at doing things than the IGLA. Even the seeker on the Stinger has a better range than the IGLA (in game).

 

 

Good to know.

 

But the IGLA in this case was launched 6 times at the OP, this rate of fire (I assume) would hardly be plausible when considering the weight and difficult handling of the rockets themselves?

 

And if this is true is there a way to adjust this in a lau file? @Etherreal

[EtherealN]

I don't know, never dug into that side, but I suspect it is possible. (There's a lot of interesting things you can do in LUA, but there are limits.)

 

It will flag you as a cheater in multiplayer though, so make sure you have an easy way to revert any changes you want to make.

[Flagrum]

Good to know.

 

But the IGLA in this case was launched 6 times at the OP, this rate of fire (I assume) would hardly be plausible when considering the weight and difficult handling of the rockets themselves?

 

And if this is true is there a way to adjust this in a lau file? @Etherreal

That must have been two shooters then. Afaik one holds 3 missiles max, then he has to reload for 15 minutes.

[AtaliaA1]

That must have been two shooters then. Afaik one holds 3 missiles max, then he has to reload for 15 minutes.

 

 

Now that makes more sense. (logical)

[Tengah]

Remember that the term "Igla" is like "Sidewinder". A lot has happened in all those years. The first generations of Sidewinders were crap. Modern ones... not so much.

 

I apologise, I think I was emotionally ranting, coming down off a MANPAD high after being blooped ingame :D

 

Let me clarify my statement: The Igla's... I am not doubting the missile's capability once airborne, the damage model would appear to be accurate as does it's flight chars and seeker capability. But the Human factor and the launch system's reliability, launch procedure time, launch envelope seems to be questionable in DCS.

 

Back in GW91 the SAM most feared over Iraq was the Roland 2 but even that had major limitations despite bagging an A-10 and two Tornado's. Earlier variants were used in the Falklands war where the Argentinian forces nailed a Harrier and claimed to have shot down two 1000lb bombs in flight with the system... So i have no doubt that older SAM's disregarding modern updates have a potent edge, every SAM should be given due respect.

 

But hey I am going away from the main subject...

 

Maybe I am talking from my bottom but in my opinion the Igla reload, reacquisition, lock and launch times are off, the human element of surprise, rushed and fumbled handling etc are just not factored in. To lob off 6 Iglas from one man in 30 to 40 seconds of flight is pretty unreasonable.