|
Tippis posted:It's pretty mortal-friendly since you can pick your level of insanity. Yeah I was worried it would involve a lot of puttering to get the more dynamic functionality, thanks for the insight.
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2024 06:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
Call this the quarterly recruitment post. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSQOrFyiMlYgpCPaCkB2E6i52UptYSRMlGQoa1pWnEy&s All this you can partake in by joining the Discord at: https://discord.gg/airgoons Thread: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3633891 But most of the activity nowadays is on Discord. AIR GOON RECRUITMENT First type of event: quote:The Long Afternoon War, a dynamic, player commanded war that combined DCS, Arma 3, Microsoft Flight Simulator, and Command: Modern Operations into one game! It is mainly played in DCS. Played every Saturday. SECOND EVENT MERCENARY CAMPAIGN, Brownwater Corporation. quote:Ludicrous plot lines, lots of free planes, crazy stuff, insane plot, and even more. Played mostly on Sunday in DCS. Very newbie friendly! THIRD EVENT: quote:FALCON BMS, The original, the free, the legendary. The absolute queen of F-16 simulation. Older than most, yet better in so many ways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2024 02:50
|
|
|
New newsletter dropped. Yes, that's a Hellcat. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2024 14:09
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/mbd1yMF-7iA?si=64NV-YQhWUzLWC95 Chinook preorders up
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2024 17:16
|
|
|
Dual rotors in VR? Please stop, my poor wallet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2024 05:31
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:https://youtu.be/mbd1yMF-7iA?si=64NV-YQhWUzLWC95 Can it sling load Jae?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2024 11:21
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:Can it sling load Jae? It's a simulation, not a fantasy game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2024 12:44
|
|
|
I was thinking: If an active radar homing missile initially homes in on the target using radar energy reflected off the target from the firing aircraft's radar (before it's close enough for its own radar to pick up the target), how come it doesn't work to use reflected energy from any other radar too, such as wingmen? Now that I write that out, I'm guessing it's because you need to know the position of the emitter for radar reflections to be useful? When firing you could tell the missile your speed and location and it could use dead reckoning to track your position... ...but in that case you'd need to keep flying the same course or else the dead reckoning would be wrong, and it's standard practice after firing to turn as far away from the target as you can without breaking radar lock. So how does it work, then?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 00:25
|
|
|
Most commonly, active homing radar missiles don't use radar for the initial phase, and instead rely on a mix of INS guidance towards a predicted position and command updates over data link from the launch vehicle. So having a different radar locking the target doesn't make any difference — that reflected energy isn't what it used anyway. Rather, missiles that allow for “buddy guidance” either still get their position updates via the launch platform, except that launch platform is in turn being fed position updates from the buddy, or — if it's really spiffy and advanced — everyone is linked together in a network so the missile can get its position updates from any approved data donor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 00:40
|
|
|
To get accurate range information, you need to know the time the radar pulse was emitted and received. If you only have receiving information, you can't determine range accurately. Without range information you cannot correctly perform lead pursuit maneuvers, and would likely need to fall back to direct pursuit (not the most energy efficient). Some jamming methods introduce noise to the radar calculated velocity and position. There are likely newer systems (on the horizon) that can communicate via datalink the time of a radar pulse to allow a passive receiver to calculate range information, though the accuracy may be limited. e:f;b
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 00:46
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:Without range information you cannot correctly perform lead pursuit maneuvers False, every heat seeker since the original sidewinder does just that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 00:57
|
|
|
BMan posted:False, every heat seeker since the original sidewinder does just that. In a sense yes, in a sense no. The path you are referencing flies direct to the target. Long range shots are better served with a curved path through less dense atmosphere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 01:05
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:In a sense yes, in a sense no. The word you're looking for is "loft". "Lead pursuit" is a term of art which simply means that the nose is pointed in front of the target.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 02:21
|
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:The path you are referencing flies direct to the target. No it doesn't. A sidewinder flies to an intercept point ahead of the target (i.e. it performs a lead pursuit) by maintaining a constant angle to the target. This is different from constantly pointing the thrust vector at the target (direct pursuit). They were able to do this back in the 1950s with analog electronics and a spinning reflector. You are talking about lofted missile trajectories which do improve long-range performance, and it is true the Sidewinder does not fly those. But they're not useful for the sort of envelope the Sidewinder is used in anyway. Hyperlynx posted:I was thinking: In addition to what has been said, fighter radars emit coded pulses, not just continuous wave beams. The missiles can be designed to home on these specific pulse patterns as a method of defeating both intentional jamming and the sort of confusion you're talking about. Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Apr 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 02:21
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:In addition to what has been said, fighter radars emit coded pulses, not just continuous wave beams. The missiles can be designed to home on these specific pulse patterns as a method of defeating both intentional jamming and the sort of confusion you're talking about. Oh, like laser-guided bomb codes? Interesting! I was actually thinking about this not as a source of confusion/conflict, but as an asset. If you could fire on a target and the missile guide based on radar reflections from eg an AWACS then you could turn away and break the lock much sooner, which is potentially valuable tactically. Granted, the closer you are when you launch the higher the probability of kill, but still.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 04:08
|
|
|
A coded pulse train is also used in (near-Earth, active) radar astronomy. When you get a return signal, you can discern just which part of the original signal you're picking up - an important distinction from continuous wave radar.
TotalLossBrain fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Apr 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 04:13
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Oh, like laser-guided bomb codes? Interesting!
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 16:37
|
|
|
Historically the challenge has been getting a weapons targeting quality firing solution using a datalink track. Surveillance radars were limited in both positional resolution and refresh rate, and the datalink bandwidth just wasn’t high enough to do such a thing. However, the most recent variants of the AIM-120C and D models can launch off data linked tracks. This is possible due to improvements in surveillance radar and datalink technology, as well as sensor fusion, being able to refine a datalink target using onboard passive sensors (IRST and RWR). F-22 and F-35 BVR tactics essentially involve flanking the enemy using super cruise at 50,000 feet, while F-15Cs (and eventually -EXs) are forming a fighter wall. The F-35s swing around the rear and silently launch AMRAAMs using datalink from the AWACS and F-15s, and their onboard passive sensors, all without ever turning on their own active radars. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Apr 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 17:08
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Historically the challenge has been getting a weapons targeting quality firing solution using a datalink track. Surveillance radars were limited in both positional resolution and refresh rate, and the datalink bandwidth just wasn’t high enough to do such a thing. That's cool as poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2024 01:19
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:I was thinking: Well it knows where it is by knowing where it isn’t.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2024 21:13
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAwPOjgonqg I'm pining for the fjords
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 17:10
|
|
|
Hate to bring it to you but if they get to the fjords we've lost
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 21:10
|
|
|
What's typical airspeed and altitude for air-to-air refuelling? I suspect my training mission is too low and too slow - 20,000ft and 220kt.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 08:11
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:What's typical airspeed and altitude for air-to-air refuelling? I suspect my training mission is too low and too slow - 20,000ft and 220kt. Indicated airspeed is what matters, and should be around 275-315 knots for fighters. Mission editor is dumb in that it takes ground speed as an argument, so you have to calculate IAS for each altitude you place it at. (I assume you're not tanking an A-10, which would quite like 220 knots)
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 08:31
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:What's typical airspeed and altitude for air-to-air refuelling? I suspect my training mission is too low and too slow - 20,000ft and 220kt.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 08:46
|
|
|
Xakura posted:Indicated airspeed is what matters, and should be around 275-315 knots for fighters. Mission editor is dumb in that it takes ground speed as an argument, so you have to calculate IAS for each altitude you place it at. A Viper. Honestly, I didn't realise tankers are happy going at fighter speeds, so I picked something low.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 09:39
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:A Viper. There's a built-in instant action on the Caucasus map that has it all set up.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 10:07
|
|
|
Ah, I did have it set to 300, and was running afoul of that being true speed rather than indicated. Seemed to go better at the higher speed. I managed a few thousand pounds of fuel this time. The hard part seems to be controlling my speed... It seems like gentle stick movements is the thing, but quite aggressive throttle adjustments, and there seems to be much more of a delay between throttle adjustment and result compared with stick adjustment and result. Corky Romanovsky posted:There's a built-in instant action on the Caucasus map that has it all set up. I think I tried it, and it has the tanker flying a standard holding pattern. While I'm learning, I just have the tanker flying off in a straight line for ages.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 13:47
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:It seems like gentle stick movements is the thing, but quite aggressive throttle adjustments, and there seems to be much more of a delay between throttle adjustment and result compared with stick adjustment and result. Welcome to jet aircraft. Not familiar with the vipe, but a bit of constant airbrake can help. Congrats on tanking at all, that's not a skill every goon possess! 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 13:55
|
|
|
Xakura posted:Welcome to jet aircraft. Not familiar with the vipe, but a bit of constant airbrake can help. Thanks! I've been listening to a lot of military aviation podcasts lately, and it's something they talk about just doing like it's no big deal. They'll just say "and then I hit the tanker, got gas, and went and blah blah blah". And I think carrier planes take off without much fuel and go top up as a matter of course? Anyway, I started thinking "yes it's hard to learn, but it's a standard part of flying the thing". And besides, the Viper doesn't carry much fuel. It'd be really nice to not have to nurse my fuel so much, so that I can let loose with the afterburner more often. As it is, I barely use it unless I absolutely have to.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 14:02
|
|
|
Ive never once had to. Heli gang keeps winning
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 14:04
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Ive never once had to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAdpKpppZiA
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 15:20
|
|
|
What's got the best throttle reaction time? Like I'd guess the hornet if only from easy ground landings where it feels like the e bracket follows the throttle 121 e: now thinking about this vid, (I think from here) with tankers fueling tankers fueling one bomber traveling across the Atlantic https://youtu.be/e5yAtuYPHK4?si=uk_dcKaM2Fs1pqsU Chubby Henparty fucked around with this message at 18:07 on May 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 18:01
|
|
|
Chubby Henparty posted:What's got the best throttle reaction time? Like I'd guess the hornet if only from easy ground landings where it feels like the e bracket follows the throttle 121 Oh wow. The Hornet is infamous for its hilariously lethargic throttle response. For “good”, you probably have to look at something like the F-14 or F-15 (just too much power), F-16 (a lightweight rocket ship)… and of course the Viggen because of the utter insanity of strapping an afterburner onto a jumbojet engine. But then, as far as aerial refuelling, it's not part of the competition to begin with. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 18:51
|
|
|
Fair enough - only ever done barely passable refuels in the A4 so far so never paid attention to it that closely. Super trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3uvo2Ohesg
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 21:36
|
|
|
I think throttle response is dependent on where you are in the throttle's range too. I know the A-10 landing tutorials has you pop out your speedbrakes while you're landing so that you're working in the mid area of the throttle.quote:I've been listening to a lot of military aviation podcasts lately, and it's something they talk about just doing like it's no big deal. They'll just say "and then I hit the tanker, got gas, and went and blah blah blah". And I think carrier planes take off without much fuel and go top up as a matter of course? It's hard, but it's literally their job to be good at it. By the time they've gotten to the stage of their career where they talk about poo poo on a podcast, it could actually be something they've done a thousand times. In the book I read about the harrier in Afghanistan, the dude flew something like 100+ sorties over the year he was there and tanked at least twice on each of them. He also talked about having to fly the jets over from the west coast to Afghanistan and his flight of 6 harriers were just following a tanker while constantly cycling which of them were refueling because they had to maintain a high fuel reserve in case one of them hit a problem and had to divert.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 21:39
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:In the book I read about the harrier in Afghanistan, the dude flew something like 100+ sorties over the year he was there and tanked at least twice on each of them. He also talked about having to fly the jets over from the west coast to Afghanistan and his flight of 6 harriers were just following a tanker while constantly cycling which of them were refueling because they had to maintain a high fuel reserve in case one of them hit a problem and had to divert. If you want a deeply terrifying refueling story, can I recommend https://www.twz.com/air/f-5-pilots-double-engine-flameout-while-refueling-over-the-atlantic ?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 21:44
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:I think throttle response is dependent on where you are in the throttle's range too. I know the A-10 landing tutorials has you pop out your speedbrakes while you're landing so that you're working in the mid area of the throttle. That’s a pretty common technique used in real-world A-10 operations, and was exceedingly common on early carrier jets as well. They had even worse throttle response than a TF34, and speed brakes will stow faster than an engine will spool.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2024 21:49
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:It's hard, but it's literally their job to be good at it. By the time they've gotten to the stage of their career where they talk about poo poo on a podcast, it could actually be something they've done a thousand times. True. Still, feels like something worth practicing if nothing more than to get better at handling the jet. quote:I know the A-10 landing tutorials has you pop out your speedbrakes while you're landing so that you're working in the mid area of the throttle. 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2024 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
The F5 is a blast to land on short fields, cause you get decent speed brakes and a cute lil' chute.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2024 00:29
|
|
