Some things that *should* be in V1.11+

[D-Scythe]

I've just compiled a few bits of information that we know about in the F-15/A-10, but was not implemented in the patch for some reason (even though it was discussed earlier).

 

Also, this is partially a call to arms for A/A and A-10 pilots, so if you guys like what you read, please post your support ;)

 

MiG-29S

- Pretty sure that the MiG-29S was able to carry six R-77s, and thought this was going to make it into V1.11. Would post the link to the thread, but the Search function is not co-operating. Maybe JJ can chime in here?

 

F-15C

- Vertical search, Boresight, and Guns CAC modes should have effective ranges around 24 km (15 miles). According to "Boeing F-15 Eagle," IAPR Vol. 7:

"For dogfighting, the APG-70 offers automatic acquisition options known as 'Auto Acq' modes. These are used when adversary aircraft are within 15 miles (24 km) and a quick reaction capability is required..."

 

It goes on to describe a few CAC modes. For copyright reasons, I'm not going to post more than I absolutely have to. I will note that, for whoever cares, the same article on the APG-70 also states that there are several 'special modes' that are provided to counter ECM, and that the radar "will automatically reconfigure the radar to optimise detection and tracking characteristics when necessary....It will also automatically enter special tracking modes when it detects jamming of radar channels." It's pretty vague and ambiguous, highlighting just how secretive this ECM vs ECCM stuff really is.

 

AIM-120

- I'm still utterly confused as to why the AIM-7M performs better than the AIM-120 right now (provided you keep lock). Every single source credits the AIM-120 as being far superior to the Sparrow across virtually its *entire* employment envelope. I'm not going to even produce a source for this one: please, just dumb down the Sparrow.

 

Even in real combat, the AIM-120 has had a kill probability of 60-65%, while the AIM-7M was like 30-35%; almost twice as effective. You don't see this difference in Lock On; I mean, the AIM-120 is *obviously* the preferred weapon, but you'll never guess that by playing Lock On.

 

AGM-65D

- Simple issue: Quickdraw. Would allow A-10 pilots to engage convoy/grouped targets more quickly and efficiently, especially considering that in some cases the Mavericks themselves can be shot down.

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=7943&page=6

http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomb7.html

 

I know, Quickdraw was implemented in LASTE V6.0 or something, and the A-10 in Lock On is LASTE V4.0, but the A-10 does have the AGM-65K ;)

 

[D-Scythe]

For a quick test, I placed an F-15C and a MiG-29S, probably the most effective missile evader in terms of AI (armed with R-73s), 11-12 miles apart, both at 5000m altitude to compare the performance of the AIM-120 and AIM-7. So just sitting on the BVR/WVR boundary, and a few miles outside the no-escape zone for both missiles.

 

Ran through 20 trials, half using AIM-120s and the other half using AIM-7s. Missile effectiveness 100%. The results are:

 

AIM-120C

1. Miss

2. Miss

3. Kill

4. Kill

5. Kill

6. Miss

7. Kill

8. Miss

9. Kill

10. Kill

 

Okay, not too bad, 60% pK (although I'd be expecting 60% at the "realistic" missile effectiveness setting of 50%). However, this pales in comparison to the Sparrow:

 

AIM-7M

1. Hit

2. Hit

3. Hit

4. Hit

5. Hit

6. Hit

7. Hit

8. Hit

9. Hit

10. Hit

 

Pk = 100%

 

Does *anyone* else see something wrong here?

[SwingKid]

You generally have my support, all good ideas, although there are many more out there, e.g. my own :)

 

I don't know about the "15 nm" auto-acq range. The F-15 should have 10, 20, 40, 80 and 160 nm range scales, I don't know where this "15" originated from. Peter Davies' book says the original auto-acq modes use the 10 nm scale, but at least one (long-range boresight "LRB") was added with 20 nm range (beating normal boresight's 10 nm).

 

-SK

[Kula66]

And some sort of IFF on the HUD ... please. Especially in auto modes ... its just too dangerous to use otherwise.

[Guest IguanaKing]

D-Scythe, you've got my support. :D Here are a few more things.

 

AGM-65: Another thing that would help is to give the K its scene mag capabilities. Its newer CCD seeker was intended to yield higher image quality and greater standoff range, but we are stuck with a set magnification, so its essentially crippled.

 

LAU-61s: Again...these don't belong on the A-10. They should be replaced with 7-tube LAU-68s or LAU-131s...and...when someone loads those launchers with WP rockets, they should get 7 per launcher. Right now, there are incorrect 19-tube launchers available, but apparently, with WP, only 4 per launcher are loaded. Its almost as if the 61 magically becomes an LAU-10 when WP rockets are loaded, which is another weapons system the A-10 doesn't carry.

 

HSI: I wouldn't expect it to be fully functional, but it sure would be nice to at least be able to manually set the course needle.

[golfsierra2]

Can we PLZ have real TWS in the MiG29 ?

As I understood, it was planned for Patch 1.11, but it's not in there. The F15C can, but not the MiG29 ?!

[golfsierra2]

And some sort of IFF on the HUD ... please. Especially in auto modes ... its just too dangerous to use otherwise.

 

The F15C has a good NCTR capability, that should help you out in most cases, depending on your Allies (if there are any...)

[tflash]

I agree D-Scythe

 

On the Maverick, the current "K" model is totally useless. I also don't know on what basis ED modelled this, since there is not much info available.

 

Anyway, if it is the K, then we need scene magnification AND a range of 1 to approx. max. 7 miles (at least 5), not the completely useless 2 to 3 miles we have now.

 

I would prefer the AGM-65G IR-guided, which has a max. 8 miles range and 300 pound warhead

[Pilotasso]

Can we PLZ have real TWS in the MiG29 ?

As I understood, it was planned for Patch 1.11, but it's not in there. The F15C can, but not the MiG29 ?!

 

WHat do ya mean? As far as I can tell the Mig cant multi engage.

[britgliderpilot]

WHat do ya mean? As far as I can tell the Mig cant multi engage.

 

The MiG can't engage multiple targets - the MiG29S was fitted with the capability to fire the R77, but not the capability to target from TWS mode.

 

It HAS a TWS mode . . . . but it's no good for launching missiles.

 

That's the spec of the RL aircraft.

 

 

I don't think the AGM-65K should be present at all - it's features aren't modelled and it wasn't supposed to be on this aircraft.

Quick Draw isn't supposed to be on this aircraft either - for me realism wins over blowing stuff up more easily. The challenge is fun, get used to it :D

 

 

AIM-7 is a wtf? missile. Shrug.

1.2, chaps, 1.2 . . . . . grin.

[Kula66]

The F15C has a good NCTR capability, that should help you out in most cases, depending on your Allies (if there are any...)

 

That doesn't really help in a knife fight (because its not on the HUD ) where allies and enemies have same types of A/C ... I have no evidence, but I'm sure that the 15 has a way of showing friend or foe on the HUD!

[Starlight]

That doesn't really help in a knife fight (because its not on the HUD ) where allies and enemies have same types of A/C ... I have no evidence, but I'm sure that the 15 has a way of showing friend or foe on the HUD!

 

I don't think so. many early fighters didn't have any IFF capability at all (unless just answering with their own codes). I.e. in an early F-16 which is not an ADF-version you can't know if the target you're locking onto at BVR is a friend or foe. sad but true.

[GGTharos]

Don't compare the F-16 to the F-15. The F-15 was equipped with IFF well before the F-16.

[Vadifon]

15 miles (24 km)

15 nm =27,78 km

[Pilotasso]

Don't compare the F-16 to the F-15. The F-15 was equipped with IFF well before the F-16.

 

Cant see the logic of your coment, since F-16 has IFF NOW and has had it for a LONG time.

 

One of the psicilogic factors to bash the F-16 seems to be because of some capabilities only added after entry to service wich IMHO is a poor way to judge a plane. Once up there you cant just laugh at the competition because "oh their crap because they only had this thing with an upgrade". No one cares up there.

[Alfa]

 

MiG-29S

- Pretty sure that the MiG-29S was able to carry six R-77s, and thought this was going to make it into V1.11. Would post the link to the thread, but the Search function is not co-operating. Maybe JJ can chime in here?

 

Ay - I really dont know what to say, but I am afraid that this issue was forgotten.....yet again :icon_redf . By the time we remembered, it was too late to make the changes to the V1.11 installer :( .

 

So all I can do is really to suggest Lock-on servers to adopt a mod to correct this issue - perhaps integrated into Shepski´s realistic payload mod.

 

The MiG can't engage multiple targets - the MiG29S was fitted with the capability to fire the R77, but not the capability to target from TWS mode.

 

It HAS a TWS mode . . . . but it's no good for launching missiles.

 

Well I believe the jury is still out on that question ;) . However, in order to realistically model such capability(if it exists for the MiG-29S´s in Russian service), it would be necessary to have in-dept documentation on how it works and I am not sure whether such documentation is available.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[GGTharos]

Cant see the logic of your coment, since F-16 has IFF NOW and has had it for a LONG time.

 

One of the psicilogic factors to bash the F-16 seems to be because of some capabilities only added after entry to service wich IMHO is a poor way to judge a plane. Once up there you cant just laugh at the competition because "oh their crap because they only had this thing with an upgrade". No one cares up there.

 

Thanks for going on a tangent Pilotasso ;)

 

Just because the F-16 has IFF NOW doesn't mean it's any sort of baseline comparison for when the F-15 had IFF.

[Kenan]

So all I can do is really to suggest Lock-on servers to adopt a mod to correct this issue - perhaps integrated into Shepski´s realistic payload mod.

 

Great master Alfa has spoken!

This makes me feel much better about Mig29S, and will remind my superior officiers to make this available on 504th server.

[Cobra360]

In a World Aircraft publication I have from 1999, it says that When the MiG-29S were first fitted with N-019M radar they could not do simultaneous target tracking. This was latter added in a small scale upgrade that improved software and greater processing capacity.

 

Futher later improvements brought R-77 compatibility and simultaneous dual target engagement capability was added. And it goes on to state that there are as of 1999, 2 squadrons of MiG-29S with this standard in Russian front line service.

[Pilotasso]

Thanks for going on a tangent Pilotasso ;)

 

Just because the F-16 has IFF NOW doesn't mean it's any sort of baseline comparison for when the F-15 had IFF.

 

;)

 

Still a bit puzzled by your ideas...as far as I can tell the F-16 was upgraded with an IFF from 1987...The eagle was in service for 13 years by then (30 years of service now). I dont understand why is any relevant to discriminate such old models so long ago when the todays standards (even early 90's standards) are totaly different than early ones. Who still operates block 10 aircraft anyway? o_O

[GGTharos]

In a World Aircraft publication I have from 1999, it says that When the MiG-29S were first fitted with N-019M radar they could not do simultaneous target tracking. This was latter added in a small scale upgrade that improved software and greater processing capacity.

 

Futher later improvements brought R-77 compatibility and simultaneous dual target engagement capability was added. And it goes on to state that there are as of 1999, 2 squadrons of MiG-29S with this standard in Russian front line service.

 

Yes, but there's a question at to how this dual-engagement capability is actually mechanized. Ie, there is some question as to wether it happens like on an F-15 (ie. you track two targets simultaneously) or like on an F-15 using STT on one plane until its missile goes active, and then acquire and launch on the second target - something along those lines.

I don't know why this confusion exists, but I think there must be a good reason.

[GGTharos]

;)

 

Still a bit puzzled by your ideas...as far as I can tell the F-16 was upgraded with an IFF from 1987...The eagle was in service for 13 years by then (30 years of service now). I dont understand why is any relevant to discriminate such old models so long ago when the todays standards (even early 90's standards) are totaly different than early ones. Who still operates block 10 aircraft anyway? o_O

 

An IFF transpoder yes, not an IFF interrogator, IIRC. Ie. it had an onboard IFF system to ID itself to friends, but it couldn't actually interrogate friendly IFF's.

[Cobra360]

I believe it operates like the latter option you stated. I have even heard of what I think to be unrealistic claims that the radar switches between the tracked targets very quickly. It illuminates on for a few seconds than quickly changes to the other and continues on in that system. I don't believe it could possibly work that way.

[Guest IguanaKing]

An IFF transpoder yes, not an IFF interrogator, IIRC. Ie. it had an onboard IFF system to ID itself to friends, but it couldn't actually interrogate friendly IFF's.

 

True...an IFF interrogator adds a few more antennae to the radar plate, thus requiring either a larger radome or a redesigned radar plate. The IFF transponder only requires a minimum of 1 L-band antenna mounted on (usually the bottom of) the fuselage.

[Trident]

Well I believe the jury is still out on that question ;) . However, in order to realistically model such capability(if it exists for the MiG-29S´s in Russian service), it would be necessary to have in-dept documentation on how it works and I am not sure whether such documentation is available.

 

Agree, I'm not convinced that all they did to the R-77 capable MiG-29S's (which for Russia means only those based at Kursk as per SK) was to add the ability to carry and fire the missile. I believe SK said something about an additional, improved SNP mode on the Malaysian MiGs, which use an export version of the radar that could be expected in the Russian R-77 airframes. Maybe there is some info to be found in Indian sources, their MiGs have been upgraded to a similar standard?

 

EDIT: Forgot to add that I'm with D-Scythe on these issues :)