Jump to content

GGTharos

Members
  • Posts

    33366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Everything posted by GGTharos

  1. The most likely answer is 'yes and you can't have it'.
  2. Image recognition yes, it just might not mean exactly what you think it means. It can classify a thing as a target (not this is an airplane, or whatever, just target) and 'these are parts of the target' in some respect and then classify other things as 'not my target' or 'false target'. Generally without very modern countermeasures a 9X should not be getting decoyed if the decoy isn't making the target IMHO.
  3. It is good to ask questions, but not good to accuse of errors in many cases - the R-27 range, engine, and other issues have been discussed for over a decade and the data for this are good. If you want to discuss strange rocketry, the SD-10 in DCS is a good candidate with a rocket set up with a 6s boost and 4s sustain resulting in a missile that is far faster than it ought to be. ED stated that they will be working on what remains to be worked on for the R-27 family which is guidance. I hope they will significantly enhance ECM behavior and the 'RF environment' in addition to other things (for example sparrow and AIM-120 have brought new guidance mechanics in terms of the physical motion of the missile)
  4. F-18Cs were getting delivered with the EPE since lot 15 IIRC, so I don't see the unicorn thing.
  5. MPRF does 3/8 and going of very distant memory it is required due to multiple doppler bands being eclipsed as well as resolving other ambiguity, but again ... don't quote me on that.
  6. I would personally prefer QOL improvements to the radar and navigation.
  7. Yep, so that's the closure component which allows you to easily be in the notch compared to going faster, basically the angle off 90 degrees to the radar opens up significantly.
  8. ~21, as in 20 to 22 ...this is important because above 22 you get into heavy AoA-induced drag used for aerobraking (And this is a type of approach you can use for minimum ground run but there is more to it than just AoA). Throttle probably shouldn't be cut because you're made of inertia and makes a touch-and-go harder in case you need it. Reduce yes, but cut only when you touch down. If you have to apply full brakes before 60kts, ideally 40-50 if heavy, the runway you have chosen is too short and you'll have a hot brakes problem (N/A DCS).
  9. IRL you don't go off mission like every DCS player out there. 'Cheap kills' aren't a thing - I mean if it's right in front of you and you can chuck a rock at it sure, but there won't be deviating for this. All detections that I know of that were 'missed' were due to terrain masking. Of course, I don't know everything. Also, composite blades are great and lower RCS, but it's still on the order of m^2, not fractions thereof. Everyone wants to ignore reality which is ... IRL the environment is full of things that will show up on your sensors and are not targets. Even if they technically are targets, you may be prevented from going after them for a number of reasons, be it staying on task or issues with identification or just because the wreckage may land where it's not wanted. And barring an abundance of targets confusing the picture, none of those things have anything to do with a radar determining that something is a helicopter or not. The radar is either modern enough to deal with it or it isn't.
  10. That doesn't reconcile one bit with eagles practicing treetop level cruise missile intercepts, or their attack on (unfortunately friendly) helicopters or the fact that that Mi-24 (or 8, whichever) was tracked in A/A from 50nm until the moment it was bombed (they were ready to attack with an AIM-9, but switched to bombs after they slaved the pod to the radar and realized the heli was on the ground)
  11. There's probably no need for STT, but this not sure that this is worth discussing. You're basically looking for a slow moving Vc jammer You can get this off a hit, and display the classification; I have seen radar plots (not kinds we're used to) showing the main body return and the rotor return, and you could similarly classify prop planes as well. This is all about processing. The moment you get a digital processor the likelihood that you can distinguish certain things goes up tremendously - detecting moving vehicles is just a matter of them going fast enough to be out of the notch gate.
  12. IRL you would have distractions from the environment regardless of how good the radar is. This gazelle video is a perfect example: It's possible the gazelle would be ignore as 'car on highway' unless someone ran NCTR or otherwise the radar itself picked up the fact that this is likely a heli. So yes, flying low is no haven from missiles save for reducing Pk (not driving it to zero, but reducing it) due to fuze issues etc, and there that too depends on intercept geometry and whether the target is maneuvering and using CMs. Clutter shouldn't have NO effect but past a certain technology level it should also not be a safe space, in particular when out of the notch. No matter what you do here there will always be unrealistic things popping up.
  13. Same year as they started carrying them. Actually, before that, in the test trials. Edit: I cannot post the part of the document, but basically it's in the F-15C -34 page 1-140 states that PDT plus up to 7 other track files can be designated for attack.
  14. And yet doppler discrimination makes hiding at low altitudes pretty much a thing of the past. F-15s tracking cars on the highway is not a joke. Also, the F-15 can simultaneously attack with as many AMRAAMs as you have onboard. Not sure where ED got the 4 targets.
  15. No, there are no such servers - it's people that you have to look for I don't know how you go about that but I guess making a post about it somewhere or on some discord could be a start
  16. Find someone who has flown it to teach how to fly the airframe, or at least someone who knows how to say, test fly aircraft - someone who can explain flying technique. Again, not systems (radar etc) but flying. While some techniques will be aircraft specific, the vast majority will be usable on all aircraft and you'll have to 'calibrate' yourself to the specifics of the aircraft like where does light/moderate/heavy buffet start etc. And if you can't find someone, @Schlingel mit Kringel pretty much hit the nail on the head (although here I'll disagree with the trainer approach also simply because you can ignore things that aren't needed for flight). Which portions of dealing with your aircraft you choose to focus on more is obviously up to you - I'm just saying most people focus on the explosive landscaping and tactical x-raying parts which, while important for combat, are not the flying part of operations if you catch my drift. It's a simulator and it will serve as whatever you make of it. You can treat it as a game or some parts of it as a game, or you can treat it more seriously.
  17. Sure, but this is not the point I was trying to make. Regardless of the pace, you're not going to know the things you could/should study if you're not told about them. And while it isn't secret sauce, it's just not 'out there and easy to find and understand and implement' sauce.
  18. I think the problem you're encountering is that there is no one to tell you what to learn and how. And I do mean with respect to flying an aircraft and its aerodynamics, how you translate that into piloting etc. Operating the system is ok, but that's mastering the aircraft's systems.
  19. There's nothing bad about it, that's how the aircraft does things. Yes it does. You can break the wings with no tanks as well. That's just silly. Drop them all, the centerline tank has a much drag as the two wing tanks and it reduces stability.
  20. There is a section in the -34 which describes very briefly the AIM-7 split-s protection. A similar technique could easily be used to coast through the notch, so I think that would be a good section of the document to look through. This behavior affects all DCS missiles, including ARH, it's just that ARH are more capable of recovering in-game for whatever reason.
  21. It is left overs and a basic assumption that because it's 'the same radar' (At least 80% of it) that it should appear the same but this should not be the case.
  22. If there is a difference with the MiG-29A FC3 flight model, I believe any changes done to the FF MiG-29A will be ported back to the FC3 one, much like what was done with the A-10 model.
  23. There's no problem with an F-15C other than the willingness of some party to create it as a module.
×
×
  • Create New...