Project Reality Forums

Quote:
Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Eddie Baker
Your suggestion will be ignored for spelling errors and for ending it with a preposition


LMAO

Argentinedude, that video is a miss. What you see is the missle fly to its max range and self destruct.

So far nobody has produced a video of a US plane getting tanked by an SA7, they are not easy to use and these guys are not getting training on them.

This might be a CH-46 getting hit by an SAM, but its hard to tell, you never see the launcher, you don't hear the tell tail prelaunch sound (what ever that is), and the missle does not appear to maneuver (I think its an increadibly lucky RPG shot).
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1ec7d3ccc6

*BUMP*
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=040_1173737631
Mujahideen displaying their SA-7 Grails...

Hmmm....I was too layz to read all 5 pages..so it could be said..but why dont you replace the beep souns with a rocket flying sound?

Like if you got locked on by an AA missile, you would hear a launch sound, if it was near you and after it started following you, you would hear a descending whooosh sound, notifing you that a missile is on your 6.

I would like to see the lock on tones gone all togather. IRL you launch flares shortly after, or during your bombing run and you just hope nobody locked onto you or shot somthing at you. In the mod USI they got flares to launch one at a time or all at once. It's way more realistic and aircraft are not so much a hasel wen you know you scared them off by tring to shoot at them.


Lock on tones are somthing you see in si-fi films and stuff. how ever if they want'ed to add in worning tones and ear shattering sounds when your chopper is hit real bad I would not mind.

Infact they should replace all the sounds for explotions and crashes. BF2s ones are ok but they sound so chesey for the effects that happen in the game.

Gunwing wrote: Infact they should replace all the sounds for explotions and crashes. BF2s ones are ok but they sound so chesey for the effects that happen in the game.

that's a lot of work man...

Silens, interesting video. I wonder how in depth they got in that training and who the trainies were (most liekly officers who could train the troops). anyone read Aribic can translate fo us?

I was going to ask the same question, if anyone on here spoke Arabic & wouldn't mind posting a rough translation/subject of what it says.

any new info on this topic? no lock but realistic number of flare and flare deployment? is it a go for the new aircraft in .6?

JL wrote:any new info on this topic? no lock but realistic number of flare and flare deployment? is it a go for the new aircraft in .6?

Even sat here on my arse I can think of a couple of methods for detecting an inbound heat seeking missile. I don't think it unreasonable that current aircraft would be equipped with such a device.

Liquid_Cow wrote:Argentinedude, that video is a miss. What you see is the missle fly to its max range and self destruct.

You definitely see something going down after it explodes.
And from that distance you wouldn't see any missile debris, it had to be alot larger than the missile itself.

The lock on tones are a bit powerful.
Just last night (or was it two nights ago)
Me and a squad mate we're trying to down enemy air support. I had an SA7 and he had a stinger kindly provided by an American spy
We were unable to down a single thing. Without even using flares every time we went to engage something the helicopter or the plane would simply go low and the buildings would block our launch angle. (And standing in the desert for a clean shot would be a death sentence)
And even if they were visible long enough for us to get a lock the shot would either miss, they would pop flares, or it simply wouldn't bring them down. We probably put up 40 missiles between us with no kills.
The only thing they seem to be good for is simply scaring the Americans from hovering, but hell if they're hovering just give me an RPG and it will be far more effective.
(Though even then I can put an RPG directly into the main rotor of a copter and not even that will bring it down, I may not be an expert on helicopters, but it seems to me that logcialy if a weapon desinged to punch through armored targets hits the base of a heliocopters main blades it should bring that ***** down. Though this is probably a rant for else where)

Shouldn't we only hear the tone when the missile is released? I'd like it much more if the pilot only had a second or so to react and hope to hell the flares did the trick like in RL.

a warning will only activate if active radar is being employed - so the Heat seeking portable AA should not trigger any warnings at all

I could swear the systems have been upgraded to look for tell tail smoke plumes.....ie the backblast and smoke produced by the launch of the AA weapon. I could be making this up but i seem to remember talking to someone at Duxford about it.

so

lock from a sa7/stinger /avenger= no lock warning

lock from a tunguska/type-something/linebreaker?/cobra AA missil/havoc AA missil = lokc warning

mavit wrote:I could swear the systems have been upgraded to look for tell tail smoke plumes.....

I think the system you're think of detects the IR signature of a missle launch. Tactical Aircraft Directed Infrared Countermeasure (TADIRCM) is a work in progress and has been life fire tested, but is still in the development stage. In fact, you may see it deployed on civilian airliners before tactical aircraft (May already be on El Al airliners)

Currently the job of detecting a SAM launch is left to the old Mk1A Eye-Ball, pilots are constantly looking all around, especially checking their "6" for launches.

yeah DrMcCleod, they are talking about the pre-warning you get when a launcher is pointed at your aircraft

If thats the Case do the Same for the Mig-29 missiles then as the Mig uses a heat Sensor to lock the Infra red Missiles too which means that Aircraft would rule the Skys, but im ok with Ground Targets Being able to lock me with No Tone. Makes it More Fun