F-15 Radar vs russian awacs what to do? need advice

[Qosmius]

So, we all know this advantage that russian aircraft has. they can be silent hunters never needing to open theyr radars to spot theyr targets, they can just look at theyr radar screen which shows you the targets that your awacs or radar systems have found for you.

 

in a 1vs1 where there are no awacs around i think the f15 has the upper hand. but in maps where both sides have awacs availabale i find the russian aircraft has a massive advantage since the F-15 cannot lock on its radar to see the aircraft our awacs have spotted.

 

am i just stupid or do the f-15 have this ability too? why did noone of the american researchers think of this idea that the russians did by implementing awacs radar to your plane. or is it just not modelled into the game yet?

 

anyways to the point, how do i play the f-15 in a scenario where the enemy side has awacs? i find it easier to fly low and hide than going high where everyone can see you. can i use my awacs for something?

Edited June 7, 2014 by Qosmius

[lunaticfringe]

Datalink in the F-15 has existed since the 80s. It is simply not modeled yet.

[SDsc0rch]

the DCS F-15 desperately needs it..

[Buckeye]

the DCS F-15 desperately needs it..

 

Agreed 100%, dude.

[lunaticfringe]

If it's as poorly represented as the Russian's, I'll pass.

 

The F-15 needs three things, specifically, more than the AWACS datalink, and in combination they would bypass it entirely:

 

1. the post-RAM area zoom for accurate sort.

2. discrete bar scan control.

3. actual AWACS frag logic. That is, the ability for a mission designer to designate sectors of airspace coverage to specific groups, and only send threat calls to the appropriate group (unless there's overlap or an emergency).

 

Maneuvering to hide from the F-15s radar is going to hide from AWACS it's normal operational standoff range, so asking as an aid is not useful. The blind zones it will have will be *longer* in relative "depth" against the terrain than yours will, so it's not an honest argument.

 

Nor is flying low, given the sacrifice in missile performance and detection range. If he's hiding behind something, you're not going to get a lock on him till he comes out. Then you're both working the same shot profile. That's the benefit of working on high- he's got to come up to meet you to generate range on his weapon, meaning two things are going to happen:

 

1. You're going to have the longer stick, and

2. You're going to get a popup call when he sticks his nose out.

 

The reply to this isn't to have datalink from AWACS, because if you're looking at your scope, the indicator on the tactical display may not get your attention. The call from AWACS will. And if you know your radar cold, you're going to convert the BRAA call into a track in a matter of seconds, rather than looking down, looking up, and looking back down to make sure you're looking at the right airspace.

 

You can skip number three, and let players deal with over-compensating responsibilities at the group level. But one and two would level the playing field against the datalink just fine. .

[Sceptre]

This is why I fly Russian planes..... that and the ability to look at a target, pull the trigger and watch it explode :)

[Exorcet]

am i just stupid or do the f-15 have this ability too? why did noone of the american researchers think of this idea that the russians did by implementing awacs radar to your plane. or is it just not modelled into the game yet?

 

anyways to the point, how do i play the f-15 in a scenario where the enemy side has awacs? i find it easier to fly low and hide than going high where everyone can see you. can i use my awacs for something?

The F-15 has this, it's just not in the sim.

 

The Russian datalink not only shows enemies, but friendlies which is also a big advantage. Don't underestimate communication. Try to get others to share information with you. The F-15's radar is top of the line and when multiple F-15's are scanning an area, it can be tough to hide.

 

If you happen to be alone, be careful where you fly. Avoid flying high over mountains for example. I don't think it's necessary to fly low all the time though. If you can find an open flat area to flight over, stay high and look down with the F-15's radar. Rely on your own AWACS to call out higher threats. If someone tries to sneak up on you from below, dive down and gain an energy advantage over them.

[TAW_Blaze]

TWS track memory would be helpful aswell, it's quite annoying to lose the bug everytime the bandit turns hot/cold.

[KTLeth_61]

Face it , thay gave us a bone and we bit it. Its a game just got to deal whit it

[Qosmius]

hmm, i guess its not that hard to modell the datalink in the f-15 since all the russian fighters already have it.

 

i guess 1 hour of coding and its done. i dont understand why russian aircraft has this major feature while the f-15 which is supposed to be very "technological" dont have it ingame

[TAW_Blaze]

If it's so easy why don't you do it yourself. I wouldn't expect to see a functional MFD on the F-15C before advanced systems modeling.

[VTJS17_Fire]

can i use my awacs for something?

 

Yep, you can!

+ Play on a server with LotATC,

+ invite a buddy

+ to play the GCI role via LOtATC and

+ you have a lot of fun. :D

 

LotATC is much more complex and has a lot of real functions/ possibilities, the ingame AWACS doesn't have.

 

 

regards,

Fire

[blkspade]

If it's so easy why don't you do it yourself. I wouldn't expect to see a functional MFD on the F-15C before advanced systems modeling.

 

That's only a partial cop-out there. For the people with actual access to the code, and experience (preexisting code) with said feature, it is something that would technically be relatively easy. That's excluding whether or not have accurate information for the symbology. The most logical reasoning for it not being there is just that FC level modules don't get changeable MFD pages, so having 1 default view kinda gives armament precedence. It would certainly be far more useful to have given us the SIT page than the fuel display selector option we were given.

[104th_Maverick]

hmm, i guess its not that hard to modell the datalink in the f-15 since all the russian fighters already have it.

 

Wrong :)

 

i guess 1 hour of coding and its done.

 

Wrong again :)

 

The sim is far more complex than you assume, if something was as simple as this to do it would have been done already.

 

i dont understand why russian aircraft has this major feature while the f-15 which is supposed to be very "technological" dont have it ingame

 

The aircraft in the sim are based on airframes from years gone by, they are not supposed to be a representation of the modern variants with all these systems installed that fly around in the present day so there are actually a lot of toys that never made it into the sim. However as we move closer to the DCS F-15C (not FC3 F-15C) more of these systems should be modeled.

 

The F-15 has a better radar system and TWS is very strong so one counteracts the other, yes F-15 pilots are at a slight disadvantage by not having datalink at the moment but its not that big of a deal... you just need better SA to come up with your own picture of what is going on around you.

 

Datalink is not the be all and end all, there are lots of very capable F-15 pilots in the sim who have done very well without it for years so don't let it get you down ;)

Edited June 9, 2014 by [Maverick]

[SDsc0rch]

the f-15 is simply not up to ASM standards

 

yet

 

you'll have to wait

 

nothing anybody can do about that..

[Cali]

;2087293']Wrong :)

 

 

 

Wrong again :)

 

The sim is far more complex than you assume, if something was as simple as this to do it would have been done already.

 

 

 

The aircraft in the sim are based on airframes from years gone by, they are not supposed to be a representation of the modern variants with all these systems installed that fly around in the present day so there are actually a lot of toys that never made it into the sim. However as we move closer to the DCS F-15C (not FC3 F-15C) more of these systems should be modeled.

 

The F-15 has a better radar system and TWS is very strong so one counteracts the other, yes F-15 pilots are at a slight disadvantage by not having datalink at the moment but its not that big of a deal... you just need better SA to come up with your own picture of what is going on around you.

 

Datalink is not the be all and end all, there are lots of very capable F-15 pilots in the sim who have done very well without it for years so don't let it get you down ;)

 

You know it's going to be a never ending cry battle between the US/NATO vs Russian pilots. They both say their missiles suck, one side gets fixed the other doesn't....crying starts. The other side gets fixed and becomes better.....the other sides starts crying. The Russian jets have AWACS and EOS.....the F-15 is missing a bunch of features.....No R-77's on Su-27's.....F-15's have Aim-120C.......it will never end. You are right about there being a lot of very capable F-15 pilots that are fine without AWACS and the full picture that Russian jets have. They are smart and have played this game for years. They use the 15 to it's full potential.

[Maximus_Lazarus]

;2087293'].......... However as we move closer to the DCS F-15C (not FC3 F-15C) more of these systems should be modeled.........

 

 

uhm what now ?

 

I don't believe this is coming. (unless you're talking 5 years ahead )

[Frostie]

uhm what now ?

 

I don't believe this is coming. (unless you're talking 50 years ahead )

Ok I fixed that for you.

 

 

No problem, typos suck. :thumbup:

[Maximus_Lazarus]

Man you had me all excited >_<

[Qosmius]

ok, so is there any place where i can learn the stuff that the awacs is telling me when i call him? all i hear is bogey dope 245 at 405 blablablabal.

 

if i could understand what hes saying i guess it would be easier to fly the f-15

[Maximus_Lazarus]

first number : Heading from you. So what direction you need to fly to fly towards him

 

Second number : How many miles away from you

 

Third number : Altitude . "angels 20" means 20.000 feet.

 

"Hot" , "Cold" means approaching you, or flying away from you.

 

"flanking" is going sideways from you .

[VTJS17_Fire]

first number : Heading from you. So what direction you need to fly to fly towards him

 

Second number : How many miles away from you

 

Third number : Altitude . "angels 20" means 20.000 feet.

 

"Hot" , "Cold" means approaching you, or flying away from you.

 

"flanking" is going sideways from you .

And that's why the DCS ingame GCI/ AWACS controller is crap. :mad:

 

1. "Angels" is only used for the own flight, not to call out the targets altitude. Thats always spoken in (thousand) feet (like in your example).

2. "hot" is never used. If the target is hot on you, the aspect angle is cut out.

3. "flanking" is only used with an aspect angle from 15° to 75° on you. More than that is "beaming".

 

And there is nothing real simulated, such as real GCI calls (single groups, two groups etc., no inner-group and outer-group formations and so and so on).

 

I advice the "AFTTP 3.1-1" for real GCI calls, labeling and targeting. Maybe, ED can implement this in the future ...

 

 

regards,

Fire

[blkspade]

I don't think its accurate to use the example of the choice of brevity in relation to RL to define the AWACS as crap. For all intents and purposes that info still gets the job done. If a person is unfamiliar BRA and brevity that would even be used in their own flight, thats certainly not a flaw of the AWACS implementation. Now it failing to provide any information at all, or 3 mins after your bogey dope request, I would define as crap. Your primary issues seem to be ones of semantics.

 

And that's why the DCS ingame GCI/ AWACS controller is crap. :mad:

 

1. "Angels" is only used for the own flight, not to call out the targets altitude. Thats always spoken in (thousand) feet (like in your example).

2. "hot" is never used. If the target is hot on you, the aspect angle is cut out.

3. "flanking" is only used with an aspect angle from 15° to 75° on you. More than that is "beaming".

 

And there is nothing real simulated, such as real GCI calls (single groups, two groups etc., no inner-group and outer-group formations and so and so on).

 

I advice the "AFTTP 3.1-1" for real GCI calls, labeling and targeting. Maybe, ED can implement this in the future ...

 

 

regards,

Fire

[lunaticfringe]

first number : Heading from you. So what direction you need to fly to fly towards him

 

No, it's telling you what piece of sky you need to be looking in to *find* him. You don't go flying on a vector against a target you don't have detected. In STT you can be pointing 1/6th of the horizon away from the bastard and still get him bugged- thus minimizing rate of closure, and expanding the amount of time one has to get the acquisition.

 

BVR is the same as WVR: you don't point at people until you're ready to kill them.

[SDsc0rch]

(think, gulf of sidra, 1989.....)