Su-27 Weapon Systems and Missiles

oh, good, i'll just ask eagle pilots to only use AIM-7s and -9s..

 

Mount your server with your rules.

Mount your server with your rules.

 

I hate it when people say that shit. Do you play multiplayer? Do you see how many empty servers there are? Why would anyone join my new server instead of their usual hangout? Why would they stay when they discover that their F-15 no longer has a god button?

Most of us play MP. There's no F-15 God Button, but lots of people like to repeat that BS.

 

I hate it when people say that shit. Do you play multiplayer? Do you see how many empty servers there are? Why would anyone join my new server instead of their usual hangout? Why would they stay when they discover that their F-15 no longer has a god button?

Thanks for your kind words.

 

Yes, i play mp.

oh, good, i'll just ask eagle pilots to only use AIM-7s and -9s....

Just to put it out there, people looked forward to this on servers like the 51. F-15 and Su-27 pilots.

You do realize how much of a hypocrit you are by wanting to force AIM-7 vs ER/ET do you? That fight far less fair than ER/ET vs AMRAAM. 7s against 27R/T is fine though.

 

Furthermore if you think equipping AMRAAM means an automatic win you have utterly zero clue about anything relevant.

You do realize how much of a hypocrit you are by wanting to force AIM-7 vs ER/ET do you? That fight far less fair than ER/ET vs AMRAAM. 7s against 27R/T is fine though.

 

who said i want to force any such thing? I may have been slightly oblique about it, but my posts rather indicate that I would have the opposite preference... get the SU-27 some missiles which perform on the same playing field as what the F-15 can bring to the table.

 

Furthermore if you think equipping AMRAAM means an automatic win you have utterly zero clue about anything relevant.

 

I see. Hyperbole, then, is a thing only people who are not me are allowed to employ?

Apparently :)

who said i want to force any such thing? I may have been slightly oblique about it, but my posts rather indicate that I would have the opposite preference... get the SU-27 some missiles which perform on the same playing field as what the F-15 can bring to the table.

 

Slightly oblique? You were strictly saying AMRAAM equals a god button. That is as far from the truth as it gets. APG-63+AMRAAM combination actually has more issues together than your ERs but because it's an ARH vs SARH it'll still have advantages in certain situations. It's just ridicoulus that people come here and then pretend they have it harder than the other guys. You have more than enough tools to deal with ARH wielding opposition in the form of datalink and some other stuff.

 

To be really honest if we had working TWS radar memory+datalink+ARHs flying towards last known intercept point in case the bug is lost instead of going full retard you wouldn't stand half the chance you do now. You should be happy you got an upgraded HDD along the flightmodel which nobody expected and AFAIK holds the capability of plane 2 plane datalink. I would trade AMRAAM capability for a p2p datalink any day probably, the potential is insane.

 

I see. Hyperbole, then, is a thing only people who are not me are allowed to employ?

 

See above. You pretend it's harder for you, truth be told it's quite well balanced, with only a very slight favor to to one side depending on the circumstances. In case AWACS/EWR is present, russians have the advantage, otherwise, the NATO side. But it's not like that alone decides who'll win the battle. It's just a minor thing.

Some interesting data about air-to-air missile success.

 

http://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/air-to-air-weapons-effectiveness/

Love this thread. :D

 

This thread in short:

New guys, just simply beleive the veteran guys, because they have seen enough to say what they say, and have their reasons.

 

DCS in its current form is far more in BVR than we could have ever hoped for, the only true missing thing is datalink for F-15 to make it a 90's fight. Please god never go beyond 2000s where this simulation gets like "EASY MODE ON". An AESA for instance does pretty much that. As Blaze said, even the datalink for Eagle may shift balances too much. On ECM: consider lagging an effective way of it ^^ It's pretty much the same result

 

Besides, arguing on whats when entered service is pointless. This sim could have never happened in real life.

Just a few notes, why:

- F-15C with APG-63 baseline ended in '86. And we are having that.

- Still, we are having 120C, which is 1996 stuff.

- R-27ER/ET is faaaar within 90's stuff, Flankers could not fight with them for a decade, while Eagles would spam 7Ms since 82. (LOL, Flankers were not even service that time)

- don't even mention new modules like Ka-50 and A-10C (2005), thats LOL to argue about them why within one sim.

 

Enjoy them and prey that this not changing. (God, just once, I'd like to see a single F-22 in the 104th . . . cheaters)

Edited November 24, 2014 by 59th_LeFty

Even if a vietnam/korea sim was being modeled, none of what's said on that site captures anything useful about why the Pk was what it was.

 

It's nothing but the parroting of some numbers and attempting to fit them into a place where they are not appropriate.

 

Some interesting data about air-to-air missile success.

 

http://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/air-to-air-weapons-effectiveness/

Even if a vietnam/korea sim was being modeled, none of what's said on that site captures anything useful about why the Pk was what it was.

 

It's nothing but the parroting of some numbers and attempting to fit them into a place where they are not appropriate.

 

Seriously?

 

If you read the same thing as me then it clearly states the fail rate of missiles due to training of pilots to out manoeuvre incoming missiles.

 

Also historically majority of air combat missile kills are well within visual range using IR guided missiles due to poor performance of radar guided missiles.

Slightly oblique? You were strictly saying AMRAAM equals a god button. That is as far from the truth as it gets. APG-63+AMRAAM combination actually has more issues together than your ERs but because it's an ARH vs SARH it'll still have advantages in certain situations. It's just ridicoulus that people come here and then pretend they have it harder than the other guys. You have more than enough tools to deal with ARH wielding opposition in the form of datalink and some other stuff.

 

To be really honest if we had working TWS radar memory+datalink+ARHs flying towards last known intercept point in case the bug is lost instead of going full retard you wouldn't stand half the chance you do now. You should be happy you got an upgraded HDD along the flightmodel which nobody expected and AFAIK holds the capability of plane 2 plane datalink. I would trade AMRAAM capability for a p2p datalink any day probably, the potential is insane.

 

 

 

See above. You pretend it's harder for you, truth be told it's quite well balanced, with only a very slight favor to to one side depending on the circumstances. In case AWACS/EWR is present, russians have the advantage, otherwise, the NATO side. But it's not like that alone decides who'll win the battle. It's just a minor thing.

 

No online P2P datalink (yet) in the 27. I'm no F15/120 expert but I would say most 120 defeats online are due to terrain masking or energy depletion. Sure it does some stupid things on occasion. But that really pales in comparison to how poor the tracking is for the ERs. I have tested this extensively. To death and over again.

 

In an organised, well disciplined flight of 3 or 4 I would agree with you, its fairly well balanced. If flying lonewolf, as most of us have started out, actives make your life much easier. Nothing wrong with that. They should. When the stats servers where still operational (mostly 504 and 51st stats servers in my experience) the top pilots (regardless of affiliation) usually had a much higher k/d ratio when flying solo if they flew in the F15 vs the Su27.

Edited November 24, 2014 by ///Rage

Seriously?

 

If you read the same thing as me then it clearly states the fail rate of missiles due to training of pilots to out manoeuvre incoming missiles.

 

I read other things too. Who says isn't a time and place when the missile is all but impossible to physically out-maneuver?

If you're claiming that the training of the pilots matters, I agree. But it doesn't just matter when it comes to defense, and good pilots will put you in a place where your defense won't matter anyway.

 

Also historically majority of air combat missile kills are well within visual range using IR guided missiles due to poor performance of radar guided missiles.

That is certainly not a fact. Even the numbers presented are not completely correct, especially the closer you get to modern missiles. The reasons for failure also change. The assumed 'measure of success' is also not necessarily all there is to things. Doesn't really say much about anything on that web page.
Edited November 24, 2014 by GGTharos

Even if a vietnam/korea sim was being modeled, none of what's said on that site captures anything useful about why the Pk was what it was.

 

It's nothing but the parroting of some numbers and attempting to fit them into a place where they are not appropriate.

 

Yes. Those poor Pks should be far far lower when fighting an equally trained and equipped foe:)

Training was one part. There's plenty of others, plenty of them not dealing with people or training. :)

 

Yes. Those poor Pks should be far far lower when fighting an equally trained and equipped foe:)

Point is the real life Pk is poor. The bulk of the numbers that make up the semi-reliable stats from which that Pk is derived are from assymetrical conflicts where one side had much better planes (F4 vs Mig21, F14/15 vs Mig23, etc), much better training and flight hours (USAF/USN/RAF/IDF vs 3rd world countries), and much better support (multinational coalition, blanket AWACS, numerical superiority, blanket ECM, other supporting flights, etc).

 

What happens in DCS MP is that most of the above points are evened out. Hence DCS Pk is even less than real life Pk. Because DCS warfare is not assymetrical.

I agree. Things are way too fair in DCS.

No online P2P datalink (yet) in the 27. I'm no F15/120 expert but I would say most 120 defeats online are due to terrain masking or energy depletion. Sure it does some stupid things on occasion. But that really pales in comparison to how poor the tracking is for the ERs. I have tested this extensively. To death and over again.

 

I know, I said it holds the capability. It works in SP IIRC, so should be available to MP in some time.

 

What I meant about the slammer that the problems around it are more complex than in case of a SARH for instance.

 

In an organised, well disciplined flight of 3 or 4 I would agree with you, its fairly well balanced. If flying lonewolf, as most of us have started out, actives make your life much easier. Nothing wrong with that. They should. When the stats servers where still operational (mostly 504 and 51st stats servers in my experience) the top pilots (regardless of affiliation) usually had a much higher k/d ratio when flying solo if they flew in the F15 vs the Su27.

 

Well the problem with flying on a server is that you practically have to do something all alone unless you're flying in a group as you said. Multi target capability along with the advantages of having ARHs will surely make it easier. But even in an Eagle getting multikills basically means the other guys messed up extremely badly. In comparison if there's AWACS/EWR and you're flying a russian jet your life just got a whole lot easier. Suddenly cooperating with the other guys is super easy even if you aren't on TS. IMO in a 1v1 duel which happens quite a lot on the servers the Flanker can have the advantage if he's willing and can afford to fully commit to the fight. For every 50 Flanker pilot I see maybe 1 knows the value of altitude. The rest just flies 200m above ground thinking it's some kind of magic.

 

What I meant about the slammer that the problems around it are more complex than in case of a SARH for instance.

 

At least the Slammer has a NEZ...

I agree. Things are way too fair in DCS.

 

Lol. Would you rather they just cancelled out multiplayer? In a hypothetical cold war gone hot scenario the sides would have been fairly well balanced. In a typical DCS server both sides are balanced. Therefore on the whole, the Pk is probably about right. Most dedicated online pilots will accrue thousands of simulated flight hours. Will dodge hundreds of missiles and then will analyse that performance with Tacview over coffee and biscuits. Thats an entirely different performance to the 3rd world air forces and their limited hours, faulty equipment and shattered economies.

 

If you only wanna fight an unfair fight then you have a problem. Most people dont wanna do that. Only fly against new players? Insist they dont use their Radars or RWRs to simulate the above asymmetries?

 

I guess it depends on what your idea of realism is. If its about the fidelity of the plane modeled and learning to exploit its performance to the limit than DCS is great for that. If your idea of realism is about pummeling lone, disadvantaged, under-equipped flights with your uber strike force then you will find MP DCS very frustrating.

 

I know, I said it holds the capability. It works in SP IIRC, so should be available to MP in some time.

 

What I meant about the slammer that the problems around it are more complex than in case of a SARH for instance.

 

Well the problem with flying on a server is that you practically have to do something all alone unless you're flying in a group as you said. Multi target capability along with the advantages of having ARHs will surely make it easier. But even in an Eagle getting multikills basically means the other guys messed up extremely badly. In comparison if there's AWACS/EWR and you're flying a russian jet your life just got a whole lot easier. Suddenly cooperating with the other guys is super easy even if you aren't on TS. IMO in a 1v1 duel which happens quite a lot on the servers the Flanker can have the advantage if he's willing and can afford to fully commit to the fight. For every 50 Flanker pilot I see maybe 1 knows the value of altitude. The rest just flies 200m above ground thinking it's some kind of magic.

 

The stats from those servers don't support your argument. Unfortunately they have long since been purged and so they don't support mine either:) With regards to AWACS/EWR I suspect most F15 pilots have picture or bogey dope requests on their Hotas. Not quite as good as the currently modeled datalink but not too shabby either. P2P though will be advantageous once thats modeled. I disagree on the 1v1 advantage though. Fully committing in the Flanker means taking a 120 to the face just to get the ER kill. Not a good look:) Especially when the ERs guide as bad as they do now. Interestingly I see proportionally alot more F15s flying low in the valleys now than I did before. Even in the posted AAR type videos. Not sure why...

Edited November 24, 2014 by ///Rage

Interestingly I see proportionally alot more F15s flying low in the valleys now than I did before. Even in the posted AAR type videos. Not sure why...

I'll tell you why. Because most pilots used exploit. Altitude less than 20m to defeat ERs, or with the distance of less than 10km from the enemy, ARH be fired and immediately take shelter behind the top of the hill. Constantly happens that I shoot an enemy who licks ground, and he succeeds to kill himself before we me guess. Ban for one day for those who they crash. I understand the extremely low height for tactical overflights, I do not understand the dynamic lead the fight to 20m. On second thought, crash itself would be best simulated by subtracting licenses. :lol:

At least the Slammer has a NEZ...

Here we go again with this nonsense. The fact that you fired an ER is good enough. I still don't know of any reliable way of dodging them inside NEZ and I've tried some really funny stuff. At this point I respect the ER the most out of any missile existing in DCS, maybe even more than the slammer. They might not guide always but the one on the receiving end never knows that.

 

With regards to AWACS/EWR I suspect most F15 pilots have picture or bogey dope requests on their Hotas. Not quite as good as the currently modeled datalink but not too shabby either.

AI AWACS has stupid calls and it can be extremely slow to respond. It also doesn't show the position of your friendlies which is quite a necessity.

 

I disagree on the 1v1 advantage though. Fully committing in the Flanker means taking a 120 to the face just to get the ER kill. Not a good look Especially when the ERs guide as bad as they do now.

You know too there are positions that you can pick where the ER outdoes the AMRAAM kinematically. No I'm not talking about forcing a merge. It's just that more often than not they don't want to be in those positions for god knows why, and in other cases, they can't afford to be. Fully committing also means you have to SPEND those missiles regardless of what is going on. Provided you had some advantage at the start and you started early enough you can fight your way through the AMRAAMs with constant maneuvering on your side and the slammer's similarly god awful guidance. But this will result in using a minimum of 2 but more likely 3-5 missiles for one target.

 

In comparison the usual engagement for a good Eagle driver looks like this: you set up a good approach and you take 1/2 missiles to kill him. That's almost impossible to mimic on a Flanker because if the guy sees you and you didn't start early you won't be able to afford to do the exact same as he does due to the lack of ARHs on your end. You can substitute an ET for it but they are easy to spoof if you see them and you can only carry 2 anyway.

You know too there are positions that you can pick where the ER outdoes the AMRAAM kinematically. No I'm not talking about forcing a merge. It's just that more often than not they don't want to be in those positions for god knows why, and in other cases, they can't afford to be. Fully committing also means you have to SPEND those missiles regardless of what is going on. Provided you had some advantage at the start and you started early enough you can fight your way through the AMRAAMs with constant maneuvering on your side and the slammer's similarly god awful guidance. But this will result in using a minimum of 2 but more likely 3-5 missiles for one target.

 

In comparison the usual engagement for a good Eagle driver looks like this: you set up a good approach and you take 1/2 missiles to kill him. That's almost impossible to mimic on a Flanker because if the guy sees you and you didn't start early you won't be able to afford to do the exact same as he does due to the lack of ARHs on your end. You can substitute an ET for it but they are easy to spoof if you see them and you can only carry 2 anyway.

 

Yep. Which is why if K/D ratio is your main concern then the F15 should be your vehicle of choice. This is quite an abstract concept though since most squads prefer a battle scenario such as RF, GI, SATAC, Op summer rain, Op JW etc were, as in real life, controlling the airspace is much more important than a few kills.