He got me as well bruh
2 Likes
No it’s up there you need to look for EPW2.
5 Likes
@Morvran
The heat of the Harrier is going to be far worse than it ever was before.
The Flz Lwf 63/80 is just an aim 9P IIRC
with pre-flaring and reaction flaring its impossible to flare rear aspect unless you cut throttle to 0 long before the missile gets you at which point the enemy would very likely be within guns range lol.
There was 0 hesitation in the missile sometimes you will see a jerk to the flare and back to the plane but in this case the Harrier is so hot the flare wasn’t even seen almost.
The Harrier at this speed and alt in the dev was pushing out well under 16,000 lbs of thrust in comparison the F-4S would likely be putting out around the same amount thrust per engine and would have a significantly easier time evading.
I think that the Harrier has all 4 nozzles to be registering as if they where creating the engines entire thrust.
meaning it has 2X the Heat signature of a fully afterburning F-4S if the 1 Pegasus engine is producing the same thrust of just 1 of the GE engines.
6 Likes
Nah, it’s basically that the game doesn’t model IR sigs, rather uses produced thrust as an analogue, which works well for everything but the Harriers, as the Harriers produce alot of thrust and (in game) produce more at slower speeds.
This though doesn’t account for stuff like Hot/cold exhaust mixing or heat sig occlusion etc, as the actual engine temp doesn’t matter. That’s why the F-5s are so easy to flare in, as despite having comparable engine temps, the engines are kinda terrible and produce low thrust at pretty much all regimes, thus a lower sig.
1 Like
Not sure. I have heard it models it on thrust.
The F-4 has 2 engines producing X thrust does each engine get its own thrust/heat amount or is there just a random point to the center of the aircraft that the missile will try to go too.
We’ve gotten, a very basic explanation from the devs as to what is going on before and this idea of multiple engines was disproven though it was widely believed.
Well the Harrier is screwed it now continues to make its low end thrust but while going faster lol.
Yeah, missiles target centre mass, I would guess it’s the total thrust of the aircraft
Yup… Maybe the lack of BOL, especially in their fake nerf state, isnt that big of a deal on the T.10 because spamming all 380 wouldnt flare off anything ,especially the IRCCMs youll face
2 Likes
Than why in the F-4 I can just pop a flare and not worry about it when the plane is making more thrust than the Harrier.
Yet in the Harrier I have to spam flares and pull G like its top gun to still get hit.
You will die.
Avoid 12.0 up in Harriers is what I learned on the dev server.
An R-73 hit me side aspect while I was preflaring from like 3.5 Km
Of cause he will, he’s human not a bot all humans will die eventually : P
1 Like
yes but you get my drift flaring is as effective as just bailing out at this point.
1 Like
Given the Su-39 and A-10C have IRCCM at or near the same BR as the T-10, you are especially screwed . But its another nail in the coffin for the GR7 at 12.3/12.7.
1 Like
Agreed and taking out an A-10 in the Shar is practically instant death if he has got any missiles left.
The 9L will become a 9M.
I liked the way the event submarine was
Oh yeah it’s April fool at the end of the month, be kinda funny to see them put more effort in that than this update
2 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT I know the dev server is ending soon so the update is probably coming sooner rather than later but is there any possibility of Anti-ship missiles this patch? I think it would be a fun addition for us sim players! And maybe an eventual update of the ai ships in sim
1 Like
The Kh-59MK has been datamined by gszabi, and it is an anti ship variant of the family. Given that it is launched from Su-30MKI, id assume it should be able to be launched from Su-30SM, both being novosibbyrisk variant of the Su-30.
1 Like
Im glad to see it but I hope they arent the only one because that would blow