They used an English “translation” of the manual, not the original manual
Aside from that, this entire argument is serving no purpose but to increase the reply count on the thread further.
It definitely is supposed to. IIRC that is the biggest reason the EF-2000 incorporated a LWS as a response to the Su-27/MiG-29 passive sensors. It’s also why they developed a passive ranging ability for their IRST.
How do you passively range? Imaging?
It does if you turn the Laser on manually.
TBF, those also have their own problem: Active RF MAW
Which K_Stepanovich said he won’t make emit anything for the sake of the gameplay, at least for now since the player can’t disable it …
1 Like
Math. Lots of math.
I mean tbf there is an argument for LWS not picking up, because most modern LRF fires burst of laser instead of constant illumination like targeting lasers. But I assume most Modern LWS is sensitive enough to pick this up
Didn’t know that because I can’t see the sources of the bug report
But I know that the translation is kinda bad
Well atleast for now the LWR is just a gimmick that looks nice on paper
Or warns ppl I shoot a brimstone at
Really helpful for tanks and helis though.
All in all, given the direction they chose with F-16’s limiter (removing it “for the sake of gameplay”) I’m not too optimistic that they will bother to make these things realistic …
But not for jets with its current implementation
I think it’s the top result on Google, run through a translator.
The russian manual for the 27SK is available in Aviatonlog iirc? I have it downloaded in my pc, but it’s a picture of a typewritten book so good luck image translating that lol
Right. But any graphs in it should line up with the J-11 in-game, regardless of translation.
Isn’t 27SK/J-11 significantly heavier than the domestic 27S? Should affect performance a little no?
The weight between Su-27S and SK is different. But they should be the same between SK and J-11. That means any report made with the manual should be flown against the J-11 in-game for the report. Once you can show a difference there, any change will likely affect the whole Flanker family after their internal testing
As I understand it this is how the T-10 to Su-27 manual report was done to change the whole family
Unrelated but was the N001 / N001VEP this bad in real life? I don’t have the Su-27s in game, though im close to getting them, and i just wanna know if theyre usable because im getting the sentiment that the VEP is rather subpar compared to something like the APG-63(V)1.
And if it is that bad i hope someone finds a document saying that the N001VEP+Pero was incorporated into the SM3 or something to make it slightly better
Yes. They are generationally behind the APG-63(and V1) for a couple of reasons stemming from microprocessor innovation to espionage causing them to have to basically remake a generation.
N001/N019 still uses a cassegrain antenna compared to the planar arrays that make up the best radars prior to PESA/AESA. You can really see where this hurts it when you compare the vertical ACM speed and the scan pattern selection in-game.
The roughly equivalent radars are found on the MiG-29SMT and Yak-141 in-game. They would have been on the MiG-29M and Su-27M, if they had made it into service.
Yes the APG-63 is better, but the gap between them is not such that it makes the N001/N019 unusable. It still has good tracking and most importantly a good scan pattern that mixes height and width. Before the “double scan bug” it was a bit lacking unless you used manual tilt to put either the top or bottom line right on target (which actually made the radar faster than it is currently) but now it is perfectly adequate, just not best in class.
They might as well just change the SM into the SM3 at this point. All it’s missing from it is the radar as I understand it. Either folder SM3 underneath and revert the SM changes or make it a tier 4 mod, instead of this frankenplane.