Milestone

[GGTharos]

Well, I don't really know what's going on either, but I know that both ED AND customers are pretty keen on the WAFM, so even if it doesn't come in 1.2, it'll come in the next project. I've seen things delayed before due to lack of time, so who knows. As Olgerd did say, they have very much work still to do on the Ka-50 and they underestimated the time required ... OTOH they still plan to meet the march release date so ...

 

 

Also, it isn't a balanced play issue, I assure you. Right now, while ED is aware of the AIM-120's superiority, the way the missiles are modelled, they simply can't really differentiate it ... but there are also some bugs that caused certain missiles to /seem/ more effective than others that are being addressed, I believe.

 

Now to address your question about real tactics and weapons employment ... I don't know :) The /actual/ weapons employment and tactics for current aircraft and weapons are highly classified.

 

However you can still use various well known and classic weapon employment options, like pincers, etc ... you can also use high-low shots, though they are IMHO less effective than they should be due to the lack of WAFM primarily (my opinion) when it comes to kinematics. So there's a bit of distortion of reality in the high-low / low-high shot ranges, as well as aircraft speed making no difference in missile range.

 

Now as far /actual/ missile performance, well eehhhh ... kinda hard to match since ... again, highly classified. Some aspects we can guess, others we plain don't know or even realize that some factors affect things (eg. Recently ... well a few months ago, I found out that actuators affect missile pk in a big way ... it seems obvious, but you just don't think about it)

 

I believe that ED plans to move all aircrafts to AFM, and the Ka-50's pit tech. But it will happen quite slowly.

When/if the 15 is moved to AFM+NewPit, you'll see new radar modes etc ... BUT! Don't hold your breath, 'cause you'll die before it happens ;)

[Rhen]

Well, I don't really know what's going on either, but I know that both ED AND customers are pretty keen on the WAFM, so even if it doesn't come in 1.2, it'll come in the next project. I've seen things delayed before due to lack of time, so who knows. As Olgerd did say, they have very much work still to do on the Ka-50 and they underestimated the time required ... OTOH they still plan to meet the march release date so ...

 

Well that's still good news. While i have no desire to fly slower than 200kts except to land, I'll be there in March for my copy of Black Shark.

 

 

Also, it isn't a balanced play issue, I assure you. Right now, while ED is aware of the AIM-120's superiority, the way the missiles are modelled, they simply can't really differentiate it ... but there are also some bugs that caused certain missiles to /seem/ more effective than others that are being addressed, I believe.

 

It's more than just the kinematic aspect that appears problematic. It's also related to how the AIM-120 radar, guidance package, and ECCM software algorhythms are modeled.

 

Now to address your question about real tactics and weapons employment ... I don't know :) The /actual/ weapons employment and tactics for current aircraft and weapons are highly classified.

 

While this is true for such things as what western air forces know about the easts weps, and vice versa, along with the proper methods to trash a slammer, sparrow, or sidewinder, there are still much unclassified material, both written and videos where you can infer tactics, ranges, and ability. Just look at the conflicts which have been fought in the past decades - they contain a wealth of knowledge about the capabilities and tactics used for the various weapons systems modeled in LOMAC. These same methods, tactics, ranges should produce a similar result in LOMAC (within a margin of error).

 

However you can still use various well known and classic weapon employment options, like pincers, etc ... you can also use high-low shots, though they are IMHO less effective than they should be due to the lack of WAFM primarily (my opinion) when it comes to kinematics. So there's a bit of distortion of reality in the high-low / low-high shot ranges, as well as aircraft speed making no difference in missile range.

 

I agree the kinematics are off, but the effects of scintillation regarding the F-15 as well as the slammer radar with respect to high-to-low, as you put it are quite off the mark, the susceptibility of the radar to ECM and it's ECCM abilities are not perfect either.

 

Now as far /actual/ missile performance, well eehhhh ... kinda hard to match since ... again, highly classified. Some aspects we can guess, others we plain don't know or even realize that some factors affect things (eg. Recently ... well a few months ago, I found out that actuators affect missile pk in a big way ... it seems obvious, but you just don't think about it)

 

Much more than that, the radar receiver, datalink antenna, actuators, gimbals limits, microwave power output, wavelength hopping capability (AIM-120) all make a contribution to Pk, along with altitude, airspeed, aspect, and bearing. Missile performance can be determined from the record of kills made in recent air battles, along with a study of the current literature. Comparing these two things should give you an idea of where the weapons envelope lies +/- a percentage in altitude/airspeed/aspect/angle off/maneuver, etc.

 

I believe that ED plans to move all aircrafts to AFM, and the Ka-50's pit tech. But it will happen quite slowly.

When/if the 15 is moved to AFM+NewPit, you'll see new radar modes etc ... BUT! Don't hold your breath, 'cause you'll die before it happens ;)

 

Oh, i'm not but i'll need my inhailer for a while until the fixes come out.:p

[GGTharos]

Yeah yeah yeah. We know about all these factors. We don't know what they do or how they do it, however, in a lot of cases ;)

 

As I said, a lot of stuff is classified, and there's not much you can infer from videos, either. Again, there exist things which we suddenly just learned, and things that are dubious, and the very few things that we know for certain.

 

Frankly I have zero idea of how the 120's seeker compares to the 77. Or the fuze. Or the actuators. Or the algos.

 

ECCM is also often highly classified, as is ECM. This makes everything quite difficult.