Rusky radar question

[Kenan]

On a more serious note: F-15C IS in a fair advantage in Lockon.

I took MIG29S yesterday, packed with ARH's and scored 5 kills, 3 losses.

Few minutes ago, I finished my SU27 session, flying as red against blue F15's.

NONE of my SARH's hit anything, I was head on, tailing, had a clear lock authorization etc. The opponents were simply dodging them and when they got a slightest lock on me, they would just fire their Aamrams close range, turn tail and hit me right in my nose..

 

The fact is, we can talk 'tactics' and 'skill', but it's clear Flankers are in a huuge disadvantage.

I know this is the way it should be IRL, but it sure as hell kills the will to fly these babes. Hell, let's ask ED to make us a more modern version of the SU27 carrying those R77's.. ;)

[Gazehound]

Great stuff ForceFeedback

[Force_Feedback]

Here's a little thing from page 145, section 2.3

 

Indication system

 

The indication system is designed to show the pilot the following data:

-Command-targeting and tactical information.

-Information about target situation, based on data from viewing-targeting means (radars).

-Information on weapon control.

-Pilotage-navigational information, necessary for solving tasks of the Weapon control system, and also information on the pilotage-navigational system.

-The indication system is based on the principe of digital computing of information and receives the necessary data from on-board systems through a coded communication line.

-------------

On page 149 more is revealed on the datalink system

 

Here is something about the GCI system (the system that gives orders to the planes in an airgroup, like intercept this, go to there, engage afterburners, etc)

 

 

The interchange between the warfare control system and the on-board systems of the plane is accomplished through digital connection lines with bipolar recurring code.

When the systems are linked, the following types of information exchange occur:

 

-Asynchronous sharing, during which access to information occurs voluntarily, because the transmitter is giving out information without interruption, consisting of a couple of words or one word, and the receiver turns on on its own independant program and choses the necessary parameters by address.

 

Link on readiness, during which the transmitter informs all the users of a initial exchange of information and the latest causes the users's receivers to switch to receiving mode.

 

A list of parameters of the two systems is on table 1

-------------

Paragraph 4.2

 

linkage of weapon control with the pilotage-navigational complex PNK.

 

The pilotage-navigational complex PNK is the main source of information for the weapon control system on flight parameters and the current position of the own plane, and also planes in the airgroup. In its own turn, the warfare control system dysplays information on the PNK, necesary for the control of the plane with the help of the GCI on all flight modes, and also for visual corrections.

--------------

 

Later on it is told that a datalink system can consist in a air group of 4 planes, doing the same task, and that the systems allows for automatic information exchange between the members of that airgroup. An other system connects the airgroup with another one, making something of a network between airgroups (which each consist of max 4 planes), the number of airgroups that can be linked together is from 2 to 5. The system ensures actualization and the corresponding cyclogramme of exchange. (decides the priority of informational needs and updates in that order)

 

--------------

 

I found the datalink-section!

 

As explained before, the datalink can work in the following modes:

 

-In a single airgroup, linking all the members together, on initiative of the flight leader.

 

-In a combined flight (of multiple groups), by the commanding officer.

 

-When working in pairs; the leader must select the "Pair 1" switch, while the wingman should select "Pair 2".

 

-Receiving mode, reciving of datalinks on the common frequency, depending on the place of a plane in a group.

 

All the work modes are realised with the help of a specialized digital computer, with programs loaded in its memory, realising the algorythms of the modes of the complex.

Switching from one to another work mode is accomplished by the swich "Who Am I?". the mode of exchange (pair2, pair1, group, off) and exchange network Network 1-2-3-PN according to information on the flight briefing.

 

-----------

 

Further on there is some explanation on the "Symbol-1" system.

 

The specialized digital computer "Symbol-1" is an on-board computer, designed for the automatization of organisational, control and informational tasks of the radiolink complex.

 

These tasks are devided into 4 basic groups:

-Control of communication devices tasks

-Organisation and control of echange of information tasks

-Information converting tasks

-Tasks of combining and decluttering of devices inside of the complex (radar, weapon control) and with combined Radar detection complexes.

 

The total number of commands, depending on address types and operational codes, is 190.

 

The speed during the tasks, when doing the most easy task is not less than 40 thousand operations per second.

The basic elements of the complex of the computer are integrated circuit chips of the series: 587,564,164,133,530.

An integrated system testing system and program control system to discover failures of thw workings of the subsystems.

Power from grid +27 V.

Needed Wattage, not more than 80 Watt

Mass, not more than 20kg.

Mean time between failure 500 hours

---------------------

 

3.7 Equipment R-098

 

The R-098 equipment- is the end of the telecoding equipment, designed for information exchange in the communication colmplex K-DlAE.

 

Equipment R-098 ensures the following functions:

 

-Jamming resistance of coded repeatable messages and decoding with detection and fixing of errors in received signals;

 

-Synchronization of messages, coming from channelforming devices.;

 

-Linking with CPU for operation of modes of *contraption* R-098;

 

-Input/output of information in/out CUP during receiving and transmitting on the communication channel.

 

The apparatus is connected to the outside command channel of the CPU.

Information exchange with the CPU is accomplished woth a bi-polar recurring binary code.

Power is fed to the R-098 from the AC 115V power grid at 400Hz.

The power requirement is not more than 12VA.

 

 

 

Ok, enough of this translating stuff, it gives me a damn headache, and the manual doesn't explain how exactly the information is shown, but I guess that is in the weapon control section, which I will translate later on, but not now

 

BTW, the translation is very rough, but I hope, understandable.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The opponents were simply dodging them and when they got a slightest lock on me, they would just fire their Aamrams close range, turn tail and hit me right in my nose..

That is what I am talking about!

 

The fact is, we can talk 'tactics' and 'skill', but it's clear Flankers are in a huuge disadvantage.

That was another point I was trying to make.

 

I know this is the way it should be IRL,...

In real life, Flanker's on board sensors are supplemented by GCI(EWR) and AWACS! SARH missiles can then be employed more succesfully.

 

... but it sure as hell kills the will to fly these babes.

I don't fly Su-27 any more. It is redicules. On line you don't have a chance against F-15 and miG-29. Off line, F-16's can kill you EASY! That is just plain not fun!

 

Hell, let's ask ED to make us a more modern version of the SU27 carrying those R77's.. ;)

No, that is not needed at all! We need to stay as close to reality as possible. More modern Su27 did not exist at the time that Lock On is simulating. However, AWACS and GCI did! And that is exactly how flanker was designed to work!

 

All that it needs to be done is to add AWACS/GCI to on line maps! That's it!

[Ulrich]

2 ==4c= Hajduk Veljko

 

In any case, I think AIM-120 can be neutralized by maneuvering, and Su-27 always have a good chance to shoot down F-15/F-16 in LO. At least in action with AI enemies.

 

You just don't know how to cook R-27ER. ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

2 ==4c= Hajduk Veljko

 

In any case, I think AIM-120 can be neutralized by maneuvering, and Su-27 always have a good chance to shoot down F-15/F-16 in LO. At least in action with AI enemies.

Just look at the on line games and see which airplane is on the top of the list!

 

AIM-120 can be outmaneuvered, yes, so you turn your tail and run! And then run and run all the way back to Moscow! I don't think that is how Flanker designers planned arial battles against F-15's!

 

On line, two good F-15 pilots in Lock On will always beat two good flanker pilots. Off line, dont even try to go without AWACS even against F-16.

[GGTharos]

On a more serious note: F-15C IS in a fair advantage in Lockon.

I took MIG29S yesterday, packed with ARH's and scored 5 kills, 3 losses.

Few minutes ago, I finished my SU27 session, flying as red against blue F15's.

NONE of my SARH's hit anything, I was head on, tailing, had a clear lock authorization etc. The opponents were simply dodging them and when they got a slightest lock on me, they would just fire their Aamrams close range, turn tail and hit me right in my nose..

 

So why didn't YOU split-S away when y ou saw this happen? He's turning tail, what's keeping YOU there? You waiting for that 120 to kiss you on the lips? ;) Turn around, chaff, and get out of its way!

 

The fact is, we can talk 'tactics' and 'skill', but it's clear Flankers are in a huuge disadvantage.

I know this is the way it should be IRL, but it sure as hell kills the will to fly these babes. Hell, let's ask ED to make us a more modern version of the SU27 carrying those R77's.. ;)

 

Nope, flankers are still competitive. I've flown them against the tactics you complain about, and I've done just fine. Not great, but then again the 27 isn't my main ride. So why then do /I/ fair well enough against 15's when the 27 isn't my main ride? ;)

[Pilotasso]

Not having ARH missiles on the flanker is a pain, sure. But what makes people die is the temptation to keep flying straight at the F-15's. Whenever I fly flanker I usualy avoid playing with the eagle in equal terms. Instead I keep out of detection as long as possible untill I get close enough for an R-27ET shot, or SARH too if I have surprise.

[Ulrich]

Just look at the on line games and see which airplane is on the top of the list!

Maybe PILOTS are in the list, not planes? ;)

 

AIM-120 can be outmaneuvered, yes, so you turn your tail and run!

There are different evasive maneuvers, not only running.

 

On line, two good F-15 pilots in Lock On will always beat two good flanker pilots.

IMO, point at issue.

 

Off line, dont even try to go without AWACS even against F-16.

Just tried, AI is not a problem. :biggrin:

[TucksonSonny]

Not having ARH missiles on the flanker is a pain, sure. But what makes people die is the temptation to keep flying straight at the F-15's. Whenever I fly flanker I usualy avoid playing with the eagle in equal terms. Instead I keep out of detection as long as possible untill I get close enough for an R-27ET shot, or SARH too if I have surprise.

 

Again, 1 on 1 is no problem because you can of course use tactics: beam/dive/go low/F-pole/whatever (and keep lock) force the f-15C into defense and finish the job with ET’s. But just imagine the Su-27 with R-77 versus F-15C with only AIM-7 (you guess already the result right).

 

We (Su pilots) even don’t ask this from the hosts. But we are just asking AWACS support for Su-27’s!

With 1.11 most of the time AWACS is not having perfect conditions anyway (AWACS behavior in 1.11 is kind of realistic and acceptable).

[Ulrich]

We (Su pilots) even don’t ask this from the hosts. But we are just asking AWACS support for Su-27’s!

 

It's your opinion, not all pilots'. Don't summarize, please.

[TucksonSonny]

It's your opinion, not all pilots'. Don't summarize, please.

 

Ok, Me and “=4c= Hajduk Veljko” :icon_wink

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Just tried, AI is not a problem. :biggrin:

One on one is not the problem! Even with F-15. Try two on two, or multiple heavy ECm environment similar to on line engagements. Try some of the missions that were supplied with lock on.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

So why didn't YOU split-S away when y ou saw this happen? He's turning tail, what's keeping YOU there? You waiting for that 120 to kiss you on the lips? ;) Turn around, chaff, and get out of its way!

So you Split-S, his missile is after you, and your missile is NOT after him! He simply returns and finishes you off! Su-27 don't have options! The only option is to run!

[GGTharos]

AI multiple on multiple is a problem because the AI (on your side) is not very smart.

[GGTharos]

So you Split-S, his missile is after you, and your missile is NOT after him! He simply returns and finishes you off! Su-27 don't have options! The only option is to run!

 

What if you launch an ET his way before you SPlit-S? ;)

 

Regardless, running is not so bad - this also happens to F-15, sometimes the engagement is such that hey must continue to run.

 

In this case you need a RECEPTION ESCORT or at least a wingman to get the 15 off your tail. It -can- be done right, every time ... just set up for it properly.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Again, 1 on 1 is no problem because you can of course use tactics: beam/dive/go low/F-pole/whatever (and keep lock) force the f-15C into defense and finish the job with ET’s. But just imagine the Su-27 with R-77 versus F-15C with only AIM-7 (you guess already the result right).

This is an excelent point! Yes, let us have Su-27SM with eight (or ten, not sure) R-77's against an F-15 with AIM-7's only!

 

We (Su pilots) even don’t ask this from the hosts. But we are just asking AWACS support for Su-27’s!

With 1.11 most of the time AWACS is not having perfect conditions anyway (AWACS behavior in 1.11 is kind of realistic and acceptable).

That is exactly what I am trying to say as well! We the (former) Su-27 pilots do not want unrealistic Su-27SM! What we need is realistic combat evironment as modeled in a game! Give us our AWACS/GCI against F-15! That is how it is in real life, that is how it suppose to be in a game!

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

AI multiple on multiple is a problem because the AI (on your side) is not very smart.

So your AI is not smart, and the "other side" AI is smart? So 2 on 2, engagement, on your side is on stupid AI and one live player, and on the other side are two smart AI's?

[GGTharos]

Well, no AI is smart. It's just that they become even dumber when faced with jammers and ARH ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

What if you launch an ET his way before you SPlit-S? ;)

Statements like this one from a beta tester can make a lots of young and inexperienced Su-27S pilots believe that R-27ET missiles is an active radar missile! On top of that, engagement range of R-27ET is (much) less then of the AIM-120. On top of that the R27-ET is not going to hit anything if you launch it before the missile seeker locks the target. You know very well that R27-ET is not designed to compete with AIM-120!

 

In this case you need a RECEPTION ESCORT or at least a wingman to get the 15 off your tail. It -can- be done right, every time ... just set up for it properly.

F-15 also has his wingmen! The only solution is to give up on Su-27 and fly MiG-29 with R-77's. Well, in Lock On, MiG-29 can carry only four R-77's! In real life, six ...

 

Almost forgat, other solution is to give us our GCI/AWACS!

[GGTharos]

Statements like this one from a beta tester can make a lots of young and inexperienced Su-27S pilots believe that R-27ET missiles is an active radar missile! On top of that, engagement range of R-27ET is (much) less then of the AIM-120. On top of that the R27-ET is not going to hit anything if you launch it before the missile seeker locks the target. You know very well that R27-ET is not designed to compete with AIM-120!

Oh nice, so I'm now single-handedly responsible for making new pilots believe that good tactics are bad tactics? Of COURSE the ET has less seeker range, but it's always a credible threat. It outranges the AMRAAM, too. If the 15 turns on his AB, that ET will likely track. I watched one of my wingment get splashed yesterday that way.

 

F-15 also has his wingmen! The only solution is to give up on Su-27 and fly MiG-29 with R-77's. Well, in Lock On, MiG-29 can carry only four R-77's! In real life, six ...

Yes, and you know what? My wingmen have saved me EVERY time a foolish Su-27 OR MiG-29 pilot decided to pursue me while running away. Similarely, I have been drawn into traps by running MiG-29's or Su-27's. Either start using your imagination, or start flying a bomber because with that attitude, the only thing you'll be doingis getting shot down.

AA combat is NOT point and shoot, you must WORK to win, and if you don't work as hard as the other guy, you go down. There are SO many techniques for evading missiles, VERY effective techniques that work VERY well on the 120, while ALLOWING you to keep lock on the enemy aircraft, it's not even funny!

 

I -very- strongly suggest you start learning them because ...

 

Almost forgat, other solution is to give us our GCI/AWACS!

...this won't help you one little bit when you meet an F-15 that knows exactly how to render itself invisible to these facilities ... and there are plenty of them out there. It won't even help you against an F-15 that doesn't care if you can see him, but who knows how to scan the area around him properly.

[Pilotasso]

Again, 1 on 1 is no problem because you can of course use tactics: beam/dive/go low/F-pole/whatever (and keep lock) force the f-15C into defense and finish the job with ET’s. But just imagine the Su-27 with R-77 versus F-15C with only AIM-7 (you guess already the result right).

 

Well the reason why I cant keep the lock in acentuated F-poling is cecause I have too few keys on my technologicaly impaired HOTAS to steer the radar beam Sideways, or change scan azimuth, nor Am I easly at home doing all that in real time with the keyboard. My Stick is very weak, so my tactics reflect this as well. Currently I have radar cursors on the hat (the only 1), and a shift button provides radar tilt, and radar mode change. I left trim, and everything to do with azimuth out. Not even views. Ill change that in a couple of weeks though. I can hardly wait to dump all these functions to the multiple hats and extra buttons I will have. Be very afraid! ;)

[Ulrich]

What we need is realistic combat evironment as modeled in a game! Give us our AWACS/GCI against F-15! That is how it is in real life, that is how it suppose to be in a game!

 

Why don't you want to set AWACS for F-15's also? "How it is in real life"?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

...this won't help you one little bit when you meet an F-15 that knows exactly how to render itself invisible to these facilities ... and there are plenty of them out there. It won't even help you against an F-15 that doesn't care if you can see him, but who knows how to scan the area around him properly.

I will respond to this statement first and then if necessary to other statemtns from this post!

 

So, GOOD! You do agree that AWACS/EWR(GCI) support does not give too much of an advatnage to Sukhois! I am glad to hear that! therefore, I am here calling for all on line mission (maps) makers to please include AWACS/GCI(EWR) when they build on line missions!

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Why don't you want to set AWACS for F-15's also? "How it is in real life"?

I do! I never said that I don't! Let me make it clear! BOTH SIDES SHOULD HAVE AWACS/GCI INCLUDED!