Jump to content

zzzspace

Members
  • Content Count

    228
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About zzzspace

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Australia
  1. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1629376&postcount=27 Yes, the sound-engine does have an adjustable LPF function. But there's no independent rotor sound for the interior. It just uses the spill-over from the exterior rotor sounds (two of them), so using LPF in those .sdefs ... well, you can image what would happen. The only interior balancing you can edit with respect to the outside level in the BS are the levels of the interior turbine sounds, for both left and right engines, with respect to each other, and also with respect to the external turbine sound level. But the in
  2. zzzspace

    Eye Candy

    Very much looking forward to this jet, thanks for the priority work you are giving to it.
  3. Win-8 is not an upgrade, it's a downgrade. (but then again I consider Win7 a most regretable downgrade of XP from my standpoint as being the user ... while Win8 looks like the ultimate microsoft horror-story).
  4. Stand-off and altitude tactics definitely, Speed. Completely agree there as well. In saying the above I'm looking at it a bit more from the direction of taking advantage of the ability to sneak in and attack at low-level now (lets presume recent INTEL is good and current) now that this sort of flight finally works within DCS World. And to leverage cover and terrain as much as possible for ingress and egress and also in between attack runs. It can be done and used for CAS and ground attack but I'm also looking forward to doing strike tactics with an F-15E ... and how all this will fit
  5. Incorrect, the Ai has never been 'dumbed-down' at any point. It was never intelligent to begin with. It's always been quite terrible, but has shown very slow and halting improvements over the past ten years. This topic also has zero to do with how long you last in the sim, as far as I can see as that has to do with your tactics and skills and your own decision-making. Don't do it wrong and you'll last far longer, hit your target, and RTB. This is a technical study SIM, not a shooter, there is no comparison. But if you want or require 'dumbed-down' Ai, you simply sellect the level of
  6. I've identified another aspect to the Ai engagement behaviour which seems to affect all of the Ai fighter aircraft in DCSw (don't know if this is a known issue, apologies if it is) If you place 2 x 2 in a guns-only and watch you soon realise that once the Ai mutually 'choose' each other as their respective enemy target, they will only attack that one single target aircraft, and not any other in the fight. They also will not switch targets at any time even if the perfect opportunity emerges to do so and get an easy kill. So when one of the aircraft is destroyed, the remaining two aga
  7. What I can't understand is where the onerous complication is in simply giving a real command system (back at the launcher) a digital terrain model for the area of operations, so that the commands it gives doesn't do something stupid like waste a viable missile that could have gotten a hit. This seems to me to be a quite simple and obvious software solution to the whole problem of complex terrain. After that all you need to do is shape the trajectory to best conserve energy and maximise intercept options. And the DTM helps here, because it also allows the guidance system to predict the
  8. What you wrote above, print it out, laminate it, stick it to the wall, and get on with the rest of your life. ;) :D You'll thank me in ten years. have fun johno
  9. Yeah, that's it, ramp start screwed up the navigation, so it flys to the wrong waypoint co-ordinates, by the look of things. It ignored the usual waypoints, and passed through radar coverage of active SA-11, SA-15 and SA-19s, ignored them, and headed off out to sea, at the correct altitude, but towards 291 degrees, and 331 knots. Should have been doing 420 knots. Nothing like the mission plan. Like you said, headed back to Germany. Looks sort of like the nav has gone chasing after a UTM 137T coordinate, instead of 138T. Congrats! ... so now YOU have to test all the jets, to f
  10. Yes, default date, I'll try a ramp start from 3:30AM and come back.
  11. Had a dig around about this system and where it's at now (nasty-land): -- TUNGUSKA Missile variants have 9 kg continuous expanding rod warheads with ~10km range 9M311: Original missile, laser proximity fuze. 9M311K (3M87): naval version of the 9M311 used by the Kashtan system. 9M311-1 export version of the missile. 9M311M (3M88): Improved version of the missile 9M311-1M: Used with the Tunguska-M1 radar proximity fuse for improved capability against cruise missiles. Pulsed tracking light instead of constant flare for better ECCM. Range improved to 10 km.
  12. Sorry John, that's not it either, I launched the same test mission at 4AM, and the missiles were in the air by 4:04AM, and the EWR and Buk system were dead seconds later.
  13. ACMI shows German IDS Tornados launching HARMs
  14. I haven't looked at your track files but I just did a quick test with three German IDS Tornados set for SEAD with HARMs, smash an EWR and Buk battery, in very short order. No odd behaviours noticed, and the HARMS were used very aggressively and effectively. Ai was set to Random. So it is not the HARM, nor the aircraft, or the combination of them.
×
×
  • Create New...