Some details of FC3 AFM Missile Improvements

[EtherealN]

Oh! So did you fly the Su-35, PAK-FA, and the F-15C Golden Eagle so that you could tell the difference? Hmmmm... I'm guessing no. :P

 

How come GG needs to have flown the aircraft himself to speak, but you don't? :)

 

No-one has said Su-35s and EF-2000 will be unable to fight F-15's. (Or, if they did, that's a strange position to take...) I think they'll probably do a pretty good job at it. And most certainly Flanker squads in FC can hold their own; there is a reason why I frequently use the 51st as an example for Flanker people to look at when they're letting themselves be convinced that it is impossible to beat F-15's in the simulator. But Tek's position specifically is one where some factual inaccuracies had to be corrected, simple as that. :)

[GGTharos]

Oh! So did you fly the Su-35, PAK-FA, and the F-15C Golden Eagle so that you could tell the difference?

 

You're guessing wrong. I've also flown EF, MiG-29M, Gripen, F-16 and F-35, as well as J-20 and J-31, and probably a few others that I forget now :P

 

What have you flown?

 

Hmmmm... I'm guessing no. :P Even if you did read "classified data" and stuff, it says absolutely nothing... read-world (read wartime performance) performance differs quite significantly no matter what your classified data tells you. In the end, pilot skill matters the most no matter what aircraft you fly. Even a Su-25 can take out an F-15C, if the Su-25 pilot is better and vice-versa, an A-10A pilot can take out a Su-27S, if the A-10A pilot is better.

 

I hear a lot of gamerific 'blah blah blah' and a lot of ignoring of the fact that the F-15C is a superior BVR platform in RL to just about any current Su platform - they've been keeping up you know, to the point where the F-15C is now classified as a 4.5 gen fighter, but the poor Su-35 barely makes that mark (of course, you might argue that it depends on who's making up the definition). You don't have to like it, you don't even have to believe it, that's just how things are.

 

You picked the wrong argument to make here.

[Sov13t]

Su-27S entered service just in time for the end of F-15C production. ;)

 

Dates please...

 

---

 

Man these conversations/monologues after years and years.... just become :doh:

Edited February 5, 2013 by Sov13t

[GGTharos]

483 built 1979–1985

 

Yeah, how's your forehead feeling? ;)

Edited February 5, 2013 by GGTharos

[Sov13t]

Yeah, how's your forehead feeling? ;)

 

I just try to /ignore most of these now. How's yours?

[Sov13t]

483 built 1979–1985

 

SU-27 was in service 1984. MSIP didn't happen till 1985 no?

[GGTharos]

Since I've been around from when LO was release, I've had to install a metal plate.

 

Regarding MSIP, I don't recall the exact dates but you might be right. The trick to this whole deal though is that MSIP/MSIP II and other upgrades (some without funky codenames) are wholesale multi-component upgrades to the fleet. On the other hand, take the radar alone for example - it would receive a significant upgrade almost every year. Unfortunately I don't have the timeline handy to post here, but it was quite revealing to see that.

 

I just try to /ignore most of these now. How's yours?

Edited February 5, 2013 by GGTharos

[Drona]

You're guessing wrong. I've also flown EF, MiG-29M, Gripen, F-16 and F-35, as well as J-20 and J-31, and probably a few others that I forget now :P

 

What have you flown?

 

I've flown the entire Su- series, entire MiG series, entire F- series, entire A- series etc etc.... :megalol: :D

[EtherealN]

SU-27 was in service 1984. MSIP didn't happen till 1985 no?

 

Su-27 entered service in '84. F-15C ceased production in '85.

 

Now consider the offered scenario of Su-27S fighting what was, on it's introduction, obsolete aircraft? F-15A was at that point old enough that it's successor was ceasing production. That is my point.

[Sov13t]

Now consider the offered scenario of Su-27S fighting

 

Strange, the Soviet manuals/scenarios I have read or have access to all normally compare the Flanker to F-15C not A.

 

But I understand your point.

[GGTharos]

The A was a bit lighter, generally speaking they have equivalent capability thanks to upgrades.

 

Strange, the Soviet manuals/scenarios I have read or have access to all normally compare the Flanker to F-15C not A.

 

But I understand your point.

[Alfa]

 

Regarding MSIP, I don't recall the exact dates but you might be right.

 

IIRC the F-15A was introduced to service in 1972, the F-15C in 1979 and first MSIP upgrade came in 1985 - i.e. roughly around the same time the Su-27 was put into service.

 

The trick to this whole deal though is that MSIP/MSIP II and other upgrades (some without funky codenames) are wholesale multi-component upgrades to the fleet. On the other hand, take the radar alone for example - it would receive a significant upgrade almost every year. Unfortunately I don't have the timeline handy to post here, but it was quite revealing to see that.

 

Yes and therefore its really irrelevant when production of the Su-27S started and when the F-15C ditto ended - the fact is that both types remain in service to this day and while the F-15C recieved continious updates, the Su-27S didn't until very recently due to economic/political realities in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

 

The F-15 already had a superiour radar(AN/APG-63) from the outset compared to the Su-27's N001 and I realise that the F-15C representation in the sim is something of a "bastard" and doesn't include all features of the 1985 MSIP upgrade, so I agree that even in a 1985 config with only AIM-7M it would be a supriour BVR platform compared to a 1984 Su-27S with R-27R, But then you could also argue that it would be a better match(superior in BVR, but with the Su-27 holding the edge WVR with EOS, HMS and R-73) to what we have in the sim now....1984 Su-27 vs. ~1992 F-15C with AMRAAMs :) .

[GGTharos]

Sort of, but it's not where it should be. That's all fine because FC has a certain level of fidelity to achieve and a certain level of built-in balancing whether by design or due to necessary coding decisions made when creating the sensor code etc.

 

Personally I've been trying to look after the R-73, as it does not perform to my satisfaction.

 

As for BVR superiority, right now the F-15 + AMRAAM has marginal superiority. The 'other side' screams about being unable to evade AMRAAM, and yet the statistics show that the very same crowd is evading quite a few of them.

 

It's a picture painted by 'I fly only this plane' glasses and not seeing how the other side works on a longer term basis. :)

 

Anyway ... that's my two cents.

[karambiatos]

the crying may be from the missiles needing some major adjustment currently where the R-27ER just falls out of the sky like a rock and looses lock as soon as the other plane changes direction a bit (though i dont know if this is realistic or not)

[GGTharos]

No, that does need fixing - it's not that there are no issues, but even when the 27ER works as it should the shooter should be at a disadvantage vs a 120. On the other hand, they're not impossible to evade.

 

A lot of this has to do with the attitude some people aproach A2A with.

[blkspade]

Just the other day, a SU-27 pilot managed to evade my AIM-120 at 7nm co-altitude medium or I was slightly lower. It being my last missile meant the inevitable merge, which leaves me in a catch 22. I need speed to even begin to maneuver against him, but being in afterburner at that range is stupid against Russian fighters. So we merge with me 50-100knots below corner, I have no chance at coming around fast enough to deny him a 73 shot. Why be upset at the realization that the SU-27 is no match at BVR, when if you make it to the merge will likely own if you fly your jet properly. I may have won a max of 3 wvr engagements against SU-27 pilots, where i only had the use of guns.

[Alfa]

Sort of, but it's not where it should be. That's all fine because FC has a certain level of fidelity to achieve and a certain level of built-in balancing whether by design or due to necessary coding decisions made when creating the sensor code etc.

 

Perhaps GG, but I still think there is an unnecessary mis-match by design. Remember that the outset(Flanker series) was a simulation of the Su-27 and that one of the main reasons why the F-15 was chosen as the first US addition(for Lock-on) was because it was the closest counterpart to the Su-27. Just as it would have been odd to chose an F-15A introduced to service ten years before the Su-27, it always seemed odd to me to pick a "constructed" config with armament that the F-15C didn't get until ten years after.

 

As for BVR superiority, right now the F-15 + AMRAAM has marginal superiority. The 'other side' screams about being unable to evade AMRAAM, and yet the statistics show that the very same crowd is evading quite a few of them. It's a picture painted by 'I fly only this plane' glasses and not seeing how the other side works on a longer term basis. :)

 

I think you are right that there is a tendency to look at this squarely from one "side of the fence" and that, from an overall point of view, things may be fairly well balanced in the sim, but again the question is whether its for the right reasons. My point is that I would rather see an earlier F-15C variant(contempory with the Su-27) modelled to its full specs than "sort of parity" through a newer variant lacking(for whatever reasons) varies features/capabilities it actually should have - "game balance" or not :) .

 

But thats just my two cents worth and since neither of the two platforms in question are in my "core interest" I guess I should leave to others to "fight it out" :D

[GGTharos]

The model in FC3 is sort of like the '88 variant of the radar, but with heaps of missing features - if we ignore the 120's. :)

 

I guess you're waiting for a MiG :D

[Sov13t]

The development of the 27 programme didn't sit still after 1984 either. By 1988 the first T-10M was produced and future upgrades to avionics, radar, TVC and even low IR nozzles were all tested/experimented with.

 

A lot of what we see today on such birds like the 35/PAKFA has direct roots from that time period. Our "Nineties" didn't help much.

 

Either way, both aircraft deserve proper treatment and a more accurate realization - and from the "hints" of it, ED does not disagree.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Sov13t

[Alfa]

Why be upset at the realization that the SU-27 is no match at BVR, when if you make it to the merge will likely own if you fly your jet properly.

 

Because RL experience shows that if you are no match in BVR you are unlikely to ever make it to the merge? :)

 

Anyway, as I mentioned above, given the better radar the F-15C would still be superiour in BVR with AIM-7Ms and since such a config is completely contempory with the Su-27 version in the sim, there really was no good reason to add the AIM-120 into the mix.

 

So as far as I am concerned, its not a question of accepting to be inferiour in BVR - only to what extend and why :) .

[*Rage*]

Is the entirely abysmal performance of 27ERs in the sim now realistic?

 

I think not...

[Alfa]

The model in FC3 is sort of like the '88 variant of the radar, but with heaps of missing features - if we ignore the 120's. :)

 

Well you know a lot more about the F-15 than me, but that was also the impression I got :) .

 

I guess you're waiting for a MiG :D

 

....and a Hornet :) .

[GGTharos]

Is the entirely abysmal performance of 27ERs in the sim now realistic?

 

I think not...

 

 

That depends ... do you want to go by the E-E conflict? Then yes, such abysmal performance is realistic.

 

For certain good reasons, a lot of people tend to ignore the E-E conflict though when it comes to R-27 performance.

[159th_Viper]

That depends ... do you want to go by the E-E conflict? Then yes, such abysmal performance is realistic.

 

 

They launched R's and not ER's in that wee furball.

 

Country Date Aircraft Unit Pilot Weapon Victim Country

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 25Feb1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn Russian mercenary 4xR-27R MiG-29A 5 Sqn ERAF*

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 25Feb1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn Russian mercenary 2xR-27R MiG-29 5 Sqn/ERAF

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 25Feb1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn Russian mercenary R-73 MiG-29 5 Sqn ERAF

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 26Feb1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn Asther Tolossa R-73or30mm MiG-29UB 5 Sqn/ERAF**

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 18Mar1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn ???????????? 2xR-27R MiG-29A 5 Sqn/ERAF

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 18Mar1999 Su-27S 5 Sqn ???????????? 2xR-27R MiG-29A 5 Sqn/ERAF

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 16May2000 Su-27S 5 Sqn Ethiopian 2xR-27R MiG-29A 5 Sqn/ERAF**

 

EtAF/Ethiopia 18May2000 Su-27S 5 Sqn Ethiopian 2xR-73 MiG-29A 5 Sqn/ERAF

 

 

**unconfirmed

*damaged or close call.

rest confirmed.

[Alfa]

The development of the 27 programme didn't sit still after 1984 either. By 1988 the first T-10M was produced and future upgrades to avionics, radar, TVC and even low IR nozzles were all tested/experimented with. A lot of what we see today on such birds like the 35/PAKFA have direct roots from that time period.

 

Yup :).

 

Our "Nineties" didn't help much.

 

No and because of them those developments weren't put into service at the time, so aside from difficulty in acquiring proper documentation for them, I guess the "realism" aspect has also been a reason why ED hasn't pursued more advanced versions of the Su-27 and MiG-29 so far.

 

Either way, both aircraft deserve proper treatment and a more accurate realization - and from the "hints" of it, ED does not disagree.

 

No I am sure, but the question is still what fidelity can be achieved with the documentation available.