sobek Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 (edited) Posts removed. Mind rule 1.2 when posting. Edited October 12, 2013 by sobek Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunMcKill Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 Hi guys, good discussion, I have a beautiful tacview track here (and the original DCS track too), if you want to check the really BAD perfomance of the russian missiles, you will see how a F-15C only moving the plane head up and down, and releasing chaff evade 4 R-27ER, distance to the enemy ? less than 20 kms!, in the second round you will see how I shoot two ET below Rtr to a frontal F-15 with only EOS and the guy with flares evade both less than 12 kms! in the other side they only shoot an 120C and killed me with only one missile each time, it's ok than 120C is the best missile of the world but I don't beleive that russian missiles are SOOOOOO bad. That's my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 That's fine. Heat seekers are like that. in the second round you will see how I shoot two ET below Rtr to a frontal F-15 with only EOS and the guy with flares evade both less than 12 kms! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karambiatos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 That's fine. Heat seekers are like that. you mean working as intended, or need further improvement? A 1000 flights, a 1000 crashes, perfect record. =&arrFilter_pf[gameversion]=&arrFilter_pf[filelang]=&arrFilter_pf[aircraft]=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC"] Check out my random mods and things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 In fact they're not sensitive enough to flare head-on. :) So, working as intended, and 'improvement' would be in the opposite direction of the complaint :) Head-on shots are against the coolest possible aspect. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karambiatos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 In fact they're not sensitive enough to flare head-on. :) So, working as intended, and 'improvement' would be in the opposite direction of the complaint :) Head-on shots are against the coolest possible aspect. so spamming flares while barre rolling is an actual realisticish thing to do? just asking here A 1000 flights, a 1000 crashes, perfect record. =&arrFilter_pf[gameversion]=&arrFilter_pf[filelang]=&arrFilter_pf[aircraft]=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC"] Check out my random mods and things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkwolf Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 the thing that IR seeker are tracking is mostly the exhaust. If you take the plane frontal, the IR may not see it. Ok, that's not a fighter, but the principle is the same. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] PC simulator news site. Also....Join the largest DCS community on Facebook :pilotfly: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 @karambiatos Maybe, but I don't think it's real maneuvering - a pilot wants to maneuver as little as possible. The more you maneuver, the more SA you lose that you then have to re-gain. Barrel rolling is also simply not necessary. Think of a C-130 spamming flares. If your heater isn't using an FPA seeker, it's going to be as blind as the pilot who launched it... :D @Darkwolf: Sure it will see it, but it's looking at the coolest possible profile of the aircraft, which means signal-to-noise ratio is reduced, thus detection/lock range head-on is reduced, and sensitivity to counter-measures is increased. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunMcKill Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 (edited) I will post you how I launched ET from rear aspect at less than 10 km to see what you will answer then. And what about the ER? they need rear aspect too? what about the 4 I shoot at less than 12 km and a couple of chaff sent them to the space?. Edited October 20, 2013 by JunMcKill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 I will post you how I launched ET from rear aspect at less than 10 km to see what you will answer then. What's the problem? And what about the ER? they need rear aspect too? what about the 4 I shoot at less than 12 km and a couple of chaff sent them to the space?.What about the ER? What about the AIM-7? What about AIM-120s? All radar missiles (and heaters to some extent) share the same problem of having fairly old and not very flexible CM rejection code. It's going to stay this way until it is replaced some time in the future. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFAL Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 Yeah... ERs suck.... I dont even bother.. i fly the 29C... the R77 suck just a bit less... 120c.... hate them... bias very bias... But every one knows that... and the moderators know it too.. but this is what we have... alternative? None.... Ohh... no... no alternative. Im sure down the line we will have a develoler remarking that they screwed up somewhere with the code and its fine now.... and then the russian radar missiles will be uber effective... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 "whatever-the-other-guys-have-is-always-better-than-mine". I assure you it is not the case. All missiles suck right now. Its difficult for the other guys as well. If they still manage to kill you then its you who suck even more. Sorry to be this blunt but its not ED bias against you :) Time to clear that rain cloud hovering your head. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFAL Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 ED isnt biased towards me...im no egomaniac... But i ran my circuts before on this theread... none will come out on top untill some lays down the hard data on all systems.... but then we would bitch about that. Just the nature of the beast. ED has a monopol position on this really and with great pwore comes great... bug fixing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 What's the problem? What about the ER? What about the AIM-7? What about AIM-120s? All radar missiles (and heaters to some extent) share the same problem of having fairly old and not very flexible CM rejection code. It's going to stay this way until it is replaced some time in the future. Oh please. You know the ERs problem is much worse than the 120c. Evading 4 missiles head on with chaff (reproducible) is a joke. Im still waiting on chizh to see if he can make a temporary workaround. For flanker pilots there is no alternative to a useless R/ER. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Rage* Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 The R-27ER is susceptible to CM like Chaff simply because it's a SARH missile. It's best launched from the EOS lock initially Lolwut? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 195.201.110.22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 (edited) You have no documentation to put up on the table, so claiming that it is better against chaff and maneuvering targets is something you and I can guise. The platform that use Aim-120 against ER-27 get already the edge since AIM-120 is active. Putting in our own bias speculations by how much etch missile should track better compared to another is pointless. Therefore I believe the best approach is to make the chaff/flare resistance to minimum differences. There are other parameters that makes the missiles behave different compared to each other, it doesn't have to be in tracking. Its like us starting to argue witch seeker is more sensitive to flares, AIM-9 or R-73. Until we can see documents or videos as prove, I will have my bias approach and you yours. Therefore it is better to model as little difference in how missiles react to chaff or flares. Because the only thing we can say is that it is a newer missile, which doesn't prove anything. You can still believe that only Aim-120 had software upgrades not ER-27 along all this years, especially when ER-27 has been transferred to newer generation of fighters. Russians are still learning how to advertise their products, they are by far not as efficient as US companies. Edited October 21, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 (edited) It's reversed. The final Semi-Active stage of ER is vulnerable to chaff, and 120C Active stage is least vulnerable. The initial stages of SARH launch, Inertial with Mid-course Updates are controlled by the host aircraft and chaff is less useful, but ECM can be used. Once the ER is on its final stage, it's solely relying on physics of reflection of radar waves off the target and that's very fragile stuff that can change in a moment with CM and maneuvers/angles. The question is by how much Aim-120C is more resistant to chaff compared to ER-27? Since that is not known it would be reasonable to make minimum differences in that part of the simulator. As you are saying there is plenty of other systems that could make the difference. Meanwhile we are waiting for DCS F-18 and Su-27S, When it concerns tracking ED need to draw average line between this systems we don't have. Edited October 21, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 It is known that AIM-120C isn't just resistant to chaff, it's pretty much immune. R-27 is old technology and still vulnerable to chaff, but it should only be vulnerable on the beam. That is also known. There are no 'average lines'. That's like saying 'it isn't known how much more vulnerable to chaff R-13 is, so MiG-21 should draw an average line between itself and F-18'. The question is by how much Aim-120C is more resistant to chaff compared to ER-27. Since that is not known it would be reasonable to make minimum differences in that part of the simulator. As you are saying there is plenty other systems that could make the difference. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 (edited) GG, MIG-21s missiles are are 40 years older then F-18s not 10, So the difference would not be minimal :) Edited October 21, 2013 by Teknetinium 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 R-27 is 20 years older than constantly upgraded AIM-120C. Do you think the difference should be minimal? I'll say it again: AIM-120C is practically immune to chaff. It's not just 'less vulnerable', it just doesn't care about chaff. R-27s are not equivalent SARH models to AIM-120. The best you can do right now with knowledge that is public, is maybe guess that AIM-7P (which is NOT right now part of DCS, but it should be when F-18 comes out, since the P is a USN missile - the USAF never used it, it switched completely to AIM-120 after AIM-7MH) is a SARH equivalent to an AIM-120, but that's because the P version is a fairly recent upgrade including hardware and software components. I've not heard a thing about such radical upgrades to any model R-27 that currently in use. GG, MIG-21 is 40 years older then F-18 not 10, So the difference would not be minimal :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teknetinium Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 R-27 is 20 years older than constantly upgraded AIM-120C. Do you think the difference should be minimal? YES, between AIM-120A/B. Aim-120C should fight R-77. Basicly it is not realistic to me because Aim-120C would face updated versions of aircrafts as Su-30 and so on. I know that Russians had only couple of squads of this new modified aircrafts in 1992 but that is what you would get if you fight squad against squad. 51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 YES, between AIM-120A/B. AIM-120A had its problems, and it was very quickly replaced. Given that it was set to replace AIM-7, which is comparable to R-27, I really doubt R-17 and AIM-120A are anywhere near the same footing. Aim-120C should fight R-77. AIM-120B and R-77 are of comparable technology. AIM-120C is more advanced. Basicly it is not realistic to me because Aim-120C would face updated versions of aircrafts as Su-30 and so on. So far it faced MiG-29As. I know that Russians had only couple of squads of this new modified aircrafts in 1992 but that is what you would get if you fight squad against squad. ... So F-15C's should start getting AIM-9X's because you have helmet sight and R-73? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtaliaA1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 @GGTharos and Teknetinium Guys this is a Hell of a read, I am a retired Logistic Analyst/PC. Tech. and had little time to study the weapons systems of my Sim. Hobby turned Passion. How did you guys learn so much about the systems like this!!!??? Outstanding! This was a Boutique Builder iBuypower rig. Until I got the tinker bug again i7 920 @3.6Mhz 12Gig Corsair XMS3 ram 1600 Nvidia 760 SLi w/4Gig DDR5 Ram Intel 310 SSD HDD 160 Gb + Western Digital 4Terabyte HDD Creative SB X-Fi HD Audio Logitech X-530 5.1 Surround Speaker System Dual Acer 32"Monitors. PSU 1200 w Thermaltake Win10 64Bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepin1234 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 R-27 is 20 years older than constantly upgraded AIM-120C. Do you think the difference should be minimal? I'll say it again: AIM-120C is practically immune to chaff. It's not just 'less vulnerable', it just doesn't care about chaff. R-27s are not equivalent SARH models to AIM-120. your constant justifications not justify the catastrophic performance of Russian Missiles Here a picture of how R-73 could be better than the R-27R in some cases. 13km launched and the R-73 has impacted me first. 13km of launch for the R-27R and does not have enough power to reach the target properly. what is the next step, downgrade the R-73 too? I think is good enough... how Long time we should see this way to respond to everybody. How many People do you like see requesting what should be done?? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCarrier Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 ... So F-15C's should start getting AIM-9X's because you have helmet sight and R-73? Yes, please. Was this a trick question? I'm not sure. :music_whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts