Ракеты в DCS

Там речь была совсем о другом. Переменный коэффициент навигации по относительной дальности никакого отношения к фм не имеет.

А когда меняли непосредственно ФМ, не напомните? И для каких моделей каких ракет.

Пока сделано на новой ФМ семейство AIM-7.

AIM-7E / AIM-7F / AIM-7M / AIM-7MH ??? Все?

P.S: На работе пока не могу вспомнить, у нас есть еще другие модели. :(

What problem?

Is you mean chaff screen - yes.

 

 

Probably yes.

Why are aim-120 C/B not effected by chaff as much then, you have to be 90 degrees and pop all chaff you have to miss, AIM-120C is even worse you need to be below 500km/h, I feel AIM-120 are slightly to good in chaff rejection if you compare to Su-27 radar, as well as it is not making DCS less realistic if aim-120 go for chaff by more%

Like your phone today is more powerful than the 386 you once had, the AIM-120s processing capability is that much better than the N001. Not sure what you 'feeling' anything has to do with it.

Can you explain how and why aim-120B/C have better chaff rejections them su-27? Chiz?

We are talking power output, not only processor. Thats why I say, you take all the positives but disregard the negatives, and on Su-27 point out only negatives.

Superior digital processing, MPRF operation when in terminal homing, path shaping to help keep chaff out-of-sight.

What makes you think the Su-27 would reject chaff better than the AIM-120? That radar is 10 years behind the original APG-63, and over 20 years behind in technology compared to the AIM-120. Can you explain how the Su-27 could possibly be better at chaff rejection than an AIM-120?

Power output is irrelevant. Noise ratio is relevant. You talk about power output without understanding at all how it works. Who cares - SAMs would literally defeat everything in the world if it was about power output.

You could go to space if all was about processors, but its not! For your knowledge GG, ER-27 and ET had updates as well!

It is pretty much all about processors, manufacturing technology etc. Vietnam era missiles failed because the components couldn't take the abuse.

They also failed because processing power was low, and they failed due to lack of training (in this case, failure is attributed to the pilot shooting out of parameters).

Components became better in that same era (solid state technology) and things happened faster, missiles would no longer break as easily, they could maneuver better but there was still a training issue - also the old technology used there was pretty poor at picking a target out of noise compared to what we have even in the 80s.

In any case, I don't see why you feel the need to make stuff up that you don't even know much about. Your complaint that 'This missile does this, but that missile works in a different way' is enough.

As for updates to the R-27 series, show'em. We can date updates to pretty much any US missile - a little less so for other western missiles but that's out there also.

For your information Tek, I work directly with an ex MiG-29 pilot ... he confirms that this radar was the suck.

It is pretty much all about processors, manufacturing technology etc. Vietnam era missiles failed because the components couldn't take the abuse.

They also failed because processing power was low, and they failed due to lack of training (in this case, failure is attributed to the pilot shooting out of parameters).

 

Components became better in that same era (solid state technology) and things happened faster, missiles would no longer break as easily, they could maneuver better but there was still a training issue - also the old technology used there was pretty poor at picking a target out of noise compared to what we have even in the 80s.

 

In any case, I don't see why you feel the need to make stuff up that you don't even know much about. Your complaint that 'This missile does this, but that missile works in a different way' is enough.

 

As for updates to the R-27 series, show'em. We can date updates to pretty much any US missile - a little less so for other western missiles but that's out there also.

 

For your information Tek, I work directly with an ex MiG-29 pilot ... he confirms that this radar was the suck.

I have direct contact with Su-27/Su-30/EF-2000 pilots as well and they tell me other stories then you and ED. lol but hey their life is on the line :) Only in DCS can you fly straight pupping flare and chaff and knowing that ER-/ET will go for countermeasures 100%, only in DCS :) Frostie made a good point, the probability for ER-27/ETs tracking is way to obvious compare to RL or other missiles in DCS.

As I told you I have video of 4 T/73 fired in RL combat, I cant have better prove.

We are talking power output, not only processor. Thats why I say, you take all the positives but disregard the negatives, and on Su-27 point out only negatives.

Increasing power output will increase return both from chaff and target. SNR will stay at the same rate. So, processing capabilities and noise floor start to rule here

You could go to space if all was about processors, but its not! For your knowledge GG, ER-27 and ET had updates as well!

I told you, you should learn about guidance systems much more. 27 do not have processor at all.

Increasing power output will increase return both from chaff and target. SNR will stay at the same rate. So, processing capabilities and noise floor start to rule here

Then jammers would work on active missile from 10km by your logic, but this is DCS and you are not making you self a favor when you facing a bandit and using exploits that will make bandits missile miss 100%, there is no such tricks in RL.

Then jammers would work on active missile from 10km by your logic, but this is DCS and you are not making you self a favor when you facing using exploits that will make bandits missile miss 100%. there is no such trick in RL.

There is no guarantee that jammers will work from any distance. It depends on SNR once again, on jammer frequency hopping abilities related to missiles', on bandwidth, on pulse rise and decay time e.t.c.

There is no guarantee that jammers will work from any distance. It depends on SNR once again, on jammer frequency hopping abilities related to missiles', on bandwidth, on pulse rise and decay time e.t.c.

There is no guarantee that ER-27/ET will go for chaff or Flares as well, It would be appreciated if ED could look in to that.

As for updates to the R-27 series, show'em. We can date updates to pretty much any US missile - a little less so for other western missiles but that's out there also.

A couple of months ago you assured me that the R-27P does not exist:megalol:

For your information Tek, I work directly with an ex MiG-29 pilot ... he confirms that this radar was the suck.

If R-27s are such bad missiles, why did India buy them for their Su30MKI?

There is no guarantee that ER-27/ET will go for chaff or Flares as well, It would be appreciated if ED could look in to that.

There is. It has very poor signal processing and guidance abilities. Read missile's technical description for more info.

There is. It has very poor signal processing and guidance abilities. Read missile's technical description for more info.

videos show something different :) So you want to play and assume that jammers should not work on actives or at all but ER-27/ET should go for Chaff and Flares 100% of the time. Lovely logic.

videos show something different :)

Your videos show exactly what I said - missile hits straight-flying target without countermeasures. This is not a surprise, this is expected performance. In 1986 on Balkhash tests they were employed against low-level low-rcs targets and failed, as expected.

As for updates to the R-27 series, show'em. We can date updates to pretty much any US missile - a little less so for other western missiles but that's out there also.

.

The first serial batch of updated missiles will go into service with the aerospace forces before the end of this year, several sources in the Defense Ministry told Izvestia. The first samples of modernized missiles were tested during an operation in Syria on Su-30SM and Su-35 fighters. These winged vehicles will become the main modern R-27 carrier aircraft. They can also be used on the Su-27, Su-33, Su-34 and MiG-29, interlocutors in the military said.

https://iz.ru/882783/aleksei-kozachenko-aleksei-ramm/v-boi-idut-stariki-istrebiteli-vooruzhat-raketami-dlia-duelei

videos show something different :) So you want to play and assume that jammers should not work on actives or at all but ER-27/ET should go for Chaff and Flares 100% of the time. Lovely logic.

Once again you fail to understand basics of guidance. Do you even know what missile seeker is? I'm not even asking about difference of SA/Active seeker and signal processing.

Your videos show exactly what I said - missile hits straight-flying target without countermeasures. This is not a surprise, this is expected performance. In 1986 on Balkhash tests they were employed against low-level low-rcs targets and failed, as expected.

So did aim-120 in Balkans, at best 50% did hit as documentation say on aircraft with no RWR or jammers and overwhelming numbers.

https://iz.ru/882783/aleksei-kozachenko-aleksei-ramm/v-boi-idut-stariki-istrebiteli-vooruzhat-raketami-dlia-duelei

Доведут Р-27 до уровня AIM-7P спустя 30 лет после релиза оной. Апплодисменты.