10.08.2010, 11:00
mati140 Wrote:Can you make the "Engagement OFF" mode the default one? IRL it's impossible to arm guided missiles on the ground, here - it's impossible to disengage them when on the ground and an ready-for-strafing-enemy is in sight.Well, it's a bit hard to judge which mode fits best for everyone.
Regarding the ground issue, one thing I could do easily is implementing a lock which leaves the missiles disarmed as long as the A/C is on ground (maybe even including a delay before arming after takeoff).
mati140 Wrote:Can you make AUTO mode removable by user? I'm only engaging it manually, and AUTO mode is just some kind of "pain in ass", especialy when I forget double-pushing it when disengaging.Just like the difficult decision which fits best for everyone, the AUTO mode of course isn't realistic, it's just for making the missiles easier to use for less experienced users. I guess there's a reasonable number of users around which never ever do land an A/C and never pressed the brake key, they might even not know which key it is. That's why the AUTO mode is in.
Of course I could make it possible to disable AUTO mode completely with a specific line in the conf.ini, but in the past we made some bad experience with leaving users having to edit their conf.ini in order to get a mod to work in a specific way.
I currently don't have any reasonable idea how to fulfill all the eligible request regarding the engagement modes, maybe someone has some brilliant idea to share?
mati140 Wrote:AIM-9 is actually an close combat missile. I think that fallingdown first after accelerating and then going up isn't good flightpath for it. It's carried on the rail for a reason. It should go straight from rail, deatach from aircraft at the end of rail and start guiding to target imediately after deatachment.While that's true for later versions of the AIM-9 for sure, I watched a set of videos showing launches of early stage AIM-9 and AIM-7 missiles, and those which have been mounted underneath wings did drop that way for real.
There's a significant difference to later version AIM-9s mounted e.g. on wingtip stations. Those missile's had their rocket engaged prior to releasing them from the rail, thus they "swooooshed" off the rail. In contrast, the very early guided missiles didn't seem to have rocket motors reliable enough for that task, hence the drop to stay clean from A/C in case of rocket motor failure.
However you're right for any later version of the AIM-9. An AIM-9D for instance couldn't leave an F-8 with such kind of drop pattern, it has to have it's rocket engaged on the rail.
mati140 Wrote:Finally, are you going to do some RWR an countermeassures in future? Korean ere planes - late MiG-15bis, MiG-17 and all F-86F had tail RWR wich warned pilots if there was enemy using RR gunsight behind them and sighted on them. Of course it requires new, integrated RR mod. I don't know how about countermeasures but as MiG-21 is comming you should consider doing it on first place after this mod. Especialy with this new guidance alghoritm which is a bit to "uber" for AI to avoid itThe guidance algorithm currently is a bit "uber" less due to it's pattern in general, but due to the missing restraints of the flight envelope. There are some limitations waiting to be brought into the game, like the missing look-down/shoot-down capability, the tendency to track sun ray etc. However, AI is fairly capable to avoid the missiles, on veteran level the regularly do a good task in breaking off and leaving the missiles passing them by, at least to me in my quick tests.
A radar warning system is one thing to be implemented, but it wouldn't help against IR-missiles.
Chaff/Flare is another thing, plans already started but they're at early stage. However, until late 70s there's been no other way to get notified of approaching IR-missiles than seeing them be oneself or being warned by wingmen.
Best regards - Mike