Link 16 things you want in the next update
-
Same question here. According to my brother who serves as Officer in a Luftwaffe Patriot Regiment. We took over serveral SAM systems from the former NVA in 1990. The range of the 9M33 is < 10km so less than 5.3 NM. So it more that BMS tactical reference is wrong which shows 9NM for the 9M33 as well as the ceiling is to high
The answer is not simple.
1. I have quite clear memories of SA-8 engaging and guiding above 4 nm. That was in 4.33, and 4.34 probably? Not sure. I have no clear recording of that. I also have at least one report of such a thing.
https://www.falcon-lounge.com/falcon-bms-essentials/threats-guide/surface-to-air-missile-sa-8/
The first weakness we can exploit is the SA – 8’s relatively short range, about 5 – 7nm in BMS. Because of this and the AIs tendency to prosecute at maximum range one can react quickly to the incoming threat by performing a maximum performance brake turn away from the missile while descending sharply before rapidly exiting the threat envelope. While conducting the defensive turn chaff should be used liberally. Additionally the system has a shallow launch angle, one can use this against the SA – 8 by performing a rapid climb then a rapid descent which should drive the missile into the ground.
2. Public sites give ranges above 4 nm.
3. I tested again in 4.35.2. The SHORAD SA-8 site didn’t engage above 4 nm. For that reason, there’s no reason to change the ring, thus we agree on that.
4. I have a strong doubt SA-8 were labeled as SHORAD in previous versions.
5. I am pretty sure there was a search radar assisting the TELAR, labeled as “Oscar” on our usual RWR.
I highly suspect something changed between 4.34 and 35 (maybe 33 - 34 but I doubt it), which I didn’t find in any log, concerning SA-8 battalions and maybe vehicles. I can’t check easily.
-
What is the current range of the ring ? … Normally it should be about 6-7Nm or so …
-
It is 4 Nm. Testing in 3D is consistent with this value.
-
…
Indeed … most (if not all) SAM RING are bullshit. I don’t know who changed them but system has not been designed around those values.
So I will (one more time) set them back to what they should be (by design, not by experience which is irrelevant now anyway since IA brain has changed a lot and now SAM top no fire at the same distance all the time as it was before).
Then I hope nobody will change them again afterward without know how systems has been designed in database. -
… ok … I see in SVN that it is VERRRRY old. Since 4.33! … And I never noticed it! :mad:
-
You were very busy on many things.
-
it would be real nice if we can have a wingmen command that says “keep your altitude” that way they won’t dive when I do, and therefore won’t be at risk of being shot for nothing but just to follow the lead.
-
it would be real nice if we can have a wingmen command that says “keep your altitude” that way they won’t dive when I do, and therefore won’t be at risk of being shot for nothing but just to follow the lead.
While Red Dog is kinda dubious of it in the Comms+Nav manual, that may be a good use of the “Flex” command. It is supposed to make the wingman do one orbit and then rejoin.
-
While Red Dog is kinda dubious of it in the Comms+Nav manual, that may be a good use of the “Flex” command. It is supposed to make the wingman do one orbit and then rejoin.
flex command makes the wingman do an orbit then rejoin, interesting. How big is the orbit?
-
It says 1 orbit of a holding pattern that puts them in a 10-15 trail but I believe Red Dog was discussing it in a sense that the lead keeps going. I believe it is probably 5 miles or so orbit size to get that much in trail with cruise speeds.
-
what if I use the command twice? will it orbit twice same circle or once circle twice as big?
-
it was around 15nm given that ownship is also moving, not a bad command for keeping them in safe zone.
-
So, a 2.38 mile radius turn would be required to put the wingman 15 miles in trail. The turning circle would be 4.77 miles across. The wingman would fly a circle 15 miles circumference and end up where they started at, while the lead flying at the same speed would also cover 15 miles in the same timeframe. This would give you 15 miles separation.
Neatly enough, speed is totally irrelevant. As long as you are cospeed with the wingmate, it works. Changing speed will change the time taken to establish the maneuver, and the required bank angle and G force, but so long as you keep the radius the same, you will end up with the same amount of separation after one orbit.
-
why in flameout landing TE the air refuel switch doesn’t work anymore?!!
-
Engine out? … (maybe no more hyd pressure to activate the AAR door) … Check the circuit scheme or chapter about HYD systems.
-
From the Dash 1:
“The AR system consists of a hydraulically actuated receptacle and slipway door, a signal amplifier, and the associated controls and indicators. Hydraulic system B provides pressure for operation of the door and latch mechanism. The receptacle is located on the top fuselage centerline aft of the canopy. When the slipway door is opened, a mechanical linkage retracts the aft end of the slipway door into the fuselage, forming a slipway into the receptacle.”
So you’d think as long as HYD B is operating the door should function…but I’d also think that if you are flamed out that this would be the LEAST of your worries…
-
So you’d think as long as HYD B is operating the door should function…but I’d also think that if you are flamed out that this would be the LEAST of your worries…
yes, but I wanted to land the flameout and refuel it on ground then fly again. That apparently needed a good understanding of the hydraulic system which has been significantly updated.
-
Even still, you wouldn’t refuel on-deck using that port - you 'd use the NATO receptacle on the side of the jet, which is manually operated by the fueling personnel -
-
it would be real nice if we can have a wingmen command that says “keep your altitude” that way they won’t dive when I do, and therefore won’t be at risk of being shot for nothing but just to follow the lead.
I agree. Would be useful to have wingie orbit at altitude instead of following you down. Maybe need to try “flex”.
-
Even still, you wouldn’t refuel on-deck using that port - you 'd use the NATO receptacle on the side of the jet, which is manually operated by the fueling personnel -
True but opening the AR door is still necessary to depressurize the fuel system.