Low AAM PK .. Oh no not that again...

[S77th-GOYA]

Assuming there is ground all around the robber, there are already trees behind him from which he is constantly running away. But he is also running toward new trees (also ground) that are in front of him. So as he is punching chaff, he is planting and miraculously growing new trees that are hiding him momentarily. Is that pretty much it?

 

And the policeman only sees a bunch of trees and the new trees blend in with all the pre-existing trees?

 

How bout this one. You're a cop in 1969. You see a hippie running across the completely blackened White House lawn. But you can only tell it's a hippy because you see the cherry from his "joint". But this is fine because that "joint" shows up very well against the black backgound. Then all of a sudden the hippie throws down some lit flash powder that they use at their "love-ins" to help get them "freaked-out". Next to the bright flash the "doobie" doesn't show up very well and the cop looses him, he burns down the White House, Nixon gets his eyebrows cinged and all hell breaks loose.

 

How's that?

 

Analogies are my forte. :)

[51GRIZZLY]

I finished flying an Eagle pack and after a while got used to an AMRAAM+Sparrow routine where I fired an AMRAAM at a target (or my wingman did) then I locked and fired a Sparrow slightly ahead of my target path thus avoiding his chaff bloom and achieved a nice kill ratio.

 

Very few times I had to use my Sidewinder to finish the job.

 

Now I am back to my beloved Flanker – first time since the patch 1.1.1

 

Oh my.

 

Arghhhh.

 

Yucky.

 

R-77 are ballast.

 

My R-27ERs fly nowhere near anywhere – forcing me to spend another R-27R which more often than not ends AWOL so I get in my target IR AAM zone where I should not be - if he is a MiG-29A bye bye I am gone.

 

Over and over again high, low, parallel, frontal … low PK forcing me to dogfight when I don’t want to and should not.

 

I am seriously considering going back to 1.1 .

 

(Oh ... BTW : I developed an immunity against enemy radar guided AAM)

 

 

Well ..... my guess is that soon their will only be F-15 flying on Hyperlobby. That should even out the odds ;)

[Prophet_169th]

I am liking the AWACS idea to help that.

 

Will see what happens though.

[GGTharos]

The AWACS idea will help what? Increase missile Pk?

 

 

Well ..... my guess is that soon their will only be F-15 flying on Hyperlobby. That should even out the odds ;)

 

Have you flown one? If not, then judge not. Anyone who doesn't fly and understand all the aircraft has no business crying about balance or missiles not hitting things ;)

 

There's one difference betweem the R-77 and AMRAAM in this game: The R77 has more range.

[D-Scythe]

The AWACS idea will help what? Increase missile Pk?

 

 

 

Have you flown one? If not, then judge not. Anyone who doesn't fly and understand all the aircraft has no business crying about balance or missiles not hitting things ;)

 

There's one difference betweem the R-77 and AMRAAM in this game: The R77 has more range.

 

I thought everyone knew that the R-77 is a superior missile overall in LOMAC?

[Prophet_169th]

That is why MiG29S = F15C Slayer.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The AWACS idea will help what? Increase missile Pk?

Of course it will! Tactical situation increases the chance of a successful missile deployment. Otherwise, AWACS would not exist.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Well ..... my guess is that soon their will only be F-15 flying on Hyperlobby. That should even out the odds ;)

One of the best selling points of Lock On series is the fact that there is more then just one airplane to fly. The game itself is designed so as to level the playing field between F-15 and Su-27. However, on line maps do not reflect that, because in on-line maps Sukhoi pilots have to “deal” with the fact that no AWACS/EWR is included.

[GGTharos]

AWACS and missile Pk are not related ;)

[GGTharos]

One of the best selling points of Lock On series is the fact that there is more then just one airplane to fly. The game itself is designed so as to level the playing field between F-15 and Su-27.

 

No, it isn't. It just happens to be level right now between those two individual aircraft with nothing else on the map.

 

However, on line maps do not reflect that, because in on-line maps Sukhoi pilots have to “deal” with the fact that no AWACS/EWR is included.

 

Yes, just as F-15Cs have to 'deal' with flawed TWS and ECCM/HoJ modes, lack of flaws in the Su27 radar, and so on and so forth.

 

Fly an F-15C for a month and then come back and tell me that. ;)

[Yellonet]

AWACS and missile Pk are not related ;)

Not directly, no. But AWACS helps you get into a good firing position from where your missiles potentially will have a higher pk.

[GGTharos]

Yes Yellonet. AWACS allows you to get a better tactical position. It still does not affect missile Pk.

 

It does affect the outcome of an engagement.

 

However if the missile has an overall Pk of 5% in the best of circumstances, you're still not hotting much of anything. I use this extreme example to illustrate the disconenct between missile Pk and AWACS.

[S77th-GOYA]

Let's steer this to a situation of in game reality. GG, what would you say the ER, ET, and R-73's Pk would be given the best of circumstances. In game.

[GGTharos]

Best circumstances: Non-maneuvering, unaware target inside NEZ.

 

Ph=1, Pk not sure - the R-73's don't always drop an aircraft out of the sky, but it would sure be close to 1.

 

Of course, 'in game reality' doesn't really model environment factors or equipment failures either ... then again Pk's of real test shots are also pretty high in the same circumstances.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

It does affect the outcome of an engagement.

However if the missile has an overall Pk of 5% in the best of circumstances, you're still not hotting much of anything.

If AWACS does not increase your PK, what do you exactly mean when you say “…an overall Pk of 5% in the best of circumstances…”. Best of circumstance is best tactical position, best launching position, or what is it?

[GGTharos]

If AWACS does not increase your PK, what do you exactly mean when you say “…an overall Pk of 5% in the best of circumstances…”. Best of circumstance is best tactical position, best launching position, or what is it?

 

Arrgh. No, 'Your' Pk is NOT the missile Pk! 'Your' Pk can ONLY be as HIGH as the Missile's Pk, which is dictacted by your tactical position.

 

However, the MISSILE'S Pk is NOT affected by the AWACS. Your tactical position is, WHICH in turn may enable you to make a shot which will have a higher Pk (because missile Pk is not constant in all regimes).

 

With or without AWACS, the missile Pk is the same for the exact same circumstances.

 

Eg: 1. Pk against an unaware fighter for an R-73 is 1.

2. Pk against an actively maneuvering and aware fighter is 0.25.

 

AWACS simply enables you to arrive at condition 1 more easily, but if the enemy HAPPENS to notice you, you're back to condition 2.

In other words, the missile's Pk is still the same.

[S77th-GOYA]

Arrgh. No, 'Your' Pk is NOT the missile Pk!

 

"You" don't have a Pk. Only your missles have a Pk. "You" can gain a better firing solution to release a missle, increasing its Pk.

[504MrWolf]

glad i dont fly A2A :p :D

[504 Wolverine]

glad i dont fly A2A :p :D

 

:biggrin:

[GGTharos]

"You" don't have a Pk. Only your missles have a Pk. "You" can gain a better firing solution to release a missle, increasing its Pk.

 

Okay; to settle this, I'll agree with you in that the statement sounds correct. There exists a subtle difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying, but I'll quit nitpicking now.

[TucksonSonny]

 

Yes, just as F-15Cs have to 'deal' with flawed TWS

 

Please explain me what do you mean with flawed TWS?

I suppose you know why TWS is flawed compared with LRS, but what make you think that RWS is flawed in FC 1.11 versus Real Life?

Can you maybe give an example?

[D-Scythe]

Please explain me what do you mean with flawed TWS?

I suppose you know why TWS is flawed compared with LRS, but what make you think that RWS is flawed in FC 1.11 versus Real Life?

 

Can you maybe give an example?

 

IRL, the TWS is probably a bit more automated, and there has been some proof the radar will automatically try to keep the PDT within its gimbal limits. Currently, in LOMAC, the pilot himself has to try to keep the PDT within gimbal limits, and this can be difficult while maneuvering in a BVR engagement.

[S77th-GOYA]

Currently, in LOMAC, the pilot himself has to try to keep the PDT within gimbal limits, and this can be difficult while maneuvering in a BVR engagement.

 

Huh? Currently the PDT doesn't need to be within gimbal limits. Are you testing 1.2? Or 1.12, whichever has the new limitations?

[D-Scythe]

Huh? Currently the PDT doesn't need to be within gimbal limits. Are you testing 1.2? Or 1.12, whichever has the new limitations?

 

Well, I was talking about V1.1/1.02. Yes, there is a bug in V1.11, and ED is trying to fix this for V1.12. I think there is a bug fix list for V1.12 on Wolf's UK site.

[S77th-GOYA]

It was the same in 1.02 and 1.1 as it is currently. Probably even back to 1.00.