you have to remember that’s for detection not tracking and that’s only for ranges above 15/30km. below that its only 50kph. And that’s a much tighter notch gate than what we currently have in game.
and at a short enough distance it literally doesn’t matter what the targets radial velocity is, radar will be able to track target
Again, it would depend on range. Close enough to target, radar will be able to track even at equalized radial speeds. after radar starts tracking it would be essentially impossible to avoid
i find that one has a lot of bad translations (probably used yandex)
granted, my scuffed OCR is probably… well… scuffed… but easier to infer the original text (which can be contextually translated better elsewhere)
EDIT: I think I also have a few other books/annexes but I have to check my archives, I’ll see about OCR’ing them as well, hopefully something on the armament/OEPS-27/SUV-27/RLS-27
i was playing j-10c earlier to get pl-12as and got all my shit shot down by both f-15cs and fa18es that were just heading straight towards me the entire time like this
ts game mode so ass
I want to correct my earlier point about the pulse mode in lookup, the manual doesn’t support that specific mechanism. The all-aspect tracking in free space may be due to adaptive clutter filtering, not a mode switch
He’s gonna jam the manual through AI program and then say “no well actually you are wrong” and then deflect to “well this doesn’t prove that WESTERN radars can track targets under similar circumstances.”
No, I’m going to make a claim without a source, get called out, move the goalposts to another continent, try to shift burden of proof, then finish with “I don’t have time for this”
And return the next day because I did, in fact, have time for this.
You know what I didn’t have?
A source to back up my fantasy opinions
:)
Whatever is proven or not by the Su-27 radar won’t prove or disprove anything about anything else btw.
The last time we spoke about the Su-27 manual you insisted that the turn rate diagram contained in it was for a plane with 50% internal fuel and not 25% internal fuel. And this was after running it through ChatGPT.
Normally argument pattern is he will ask for a source and will dispute it with ChatGPT even if it directly proves him wrong. He ended up running Su-27 manual in ChatGPT to try to prove that the turn rate chart is for 50% internal fuel and the. Didn’t even bother reading it when it actually disagreed with him.
What are we even arguing about here, I’m looking through the last 100-200 posts and the discussion is about everything but the topic of the thread. I even found some guide for mouse and keyboard controls.
The iron dome meta is both unrealistic and a bad game design, so what possible reasons could you have to want to keep it in the game.
It’s obviously a bad game design, because the gameplay comes down to literally just clicking buttons and the player who has more missiles wins.
The fact that in real life intercepting fox 3s with your own fox 3s is not done instantly proves it’s unrealistic. In real life the only rule is to win and if it’s not done, then it’s probably not effective.
Intercepting missiles overall is not uncommon, but it’s mostly the case for ground-based air defense systems and even those aren’t 100% effective.
not many people play british eurofighters, combined aesa and normal one have ~4100 games in february 2026 (latest available month on stat shark) while german ones have ~13200 games and italian ~2700 games, also italy is usually on red side (data pulled out of my ass)
You have to put pressure on an enemy to win a joust, you do that by launching earlier to deny the enemy the first launch. Delaying it can put more risk on yourself and many planes don’t have missiles capable of performing well enough at close range to be competitive. (Literally any amraam plane)
Think you can dodge constant missile spam against every plane? With any plane?
Can you get close with amraams?
I highly doubt you actually are good enough to do that. Let alone survive the first two missiles tbh.
The issue with MCM, is that you turn what was a relatively equal fight completely one-sided because one person (using MCM) can completely negate any pressure put on them while the enemy is now defensive, giving the MCM’er free positioning.
If both players MCM, it’s just a fight of who wins the RNG battle for shooting down missiles or whoever runs out fast.
There is 0 skill needed to MCM, it completely skews balanced engagements and is an incredibly cancerous meta to fight. MCM literally punishes knowing how to play properly and rewards braindead behaviour
As someone who played the eurofighter you should know how much more careful you have to be with missile launches compared to something like an F-15C GE or Su-30SM2 and how annoying it would be if they just use up their extra missiles to shoot down your more limited munitions.
As a sidenote, and even if I agree with him on this one, I don’t like that guy still.
He only complains about vehicles or mechanics which doesn’t suit its playstyle. Whenever a vehicle is barely functional on his videos, he immediately claims its little close to undertiered, and yes, that included the MiG-29s.
It’s a walking hyperbole, totally allergic to nuances for clicks.
okay quickly imo the overarching problem remains that the top br is way, wayyy too low, sure the mig-29 is nothing crazy on its own, but it’s so dumb that it can face stuff like the f-111F/C, f104 ASA, early kfir’s and even the mirage F1 to an extent. the R-27ER is legit usuable at 14.7 so making able to face planes with mid flight models that often have a bad rwr is a bit stupid to me (ahem mirage f1, vigen, f-104, f-4’s) all the fox 3 capable aircraft should move up 1 br point to create more breathing room for late fox1 and irccm fox2 stuff.
