IDFL

I would like input on changing the ROE 2 from rear aspect heaters to all aspect heaters. I would also like to have ROE 2 be "Fight's On" once in the pit if we can confirm the "latency" issues that caused it not to be in the first place have been resolved.

From what I understand when competitive dogfighting started 9P were common place in real life. Now 9p are not used, compared to the 9M and 9X.

So lets make that jump for realism sake.

So no comments? I take that as you love this idea and want it implemented in the next season.

I'll talk with Nap...

why not just include Roe 4 with only all aspect missiles

I'm a bit new at this, but here's my 2 cents:

I understand your point about mimicking real-life, but...
I think that will take the dogfight aspect more out of it, and I am not sure if that's a good thing for a dogfighting league.
What I mean is that right now I consider ROE1 and ROE2 to be dogfight engagements, and consider ROE3 a missile/detection evasion engagement, so right now the emphasis is on dogfighting skills.
If ROE2 changes to 9M missiles it will also become a missile evasion engagement, so the emphasis of the whole challenge switches further away from the pure dogfight which I think is what the IDFL is about.

That said, I completely agree with you that 9M/9X would be more realistic.
An alternative may be to add another ROE. That would create the possibility of 2-2 challenges but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Porkchop

Looks like PAVEWAY just beat me to it

After analyzing the ACMI, he had a smaller turn radius of about 10 words, while I had a turn radius of 100.

Your right it would be about missile evasion. BFM is about getting your jet into WEZ while keeping it safe.

Don't really see a need for another ROE since it is hard enough to get these 3 ROE's done.

I think that Roe 3 should only include aim 120's (4 missiles) only. add another Roe for all aspect missiles (4 missiles). In that way you have every engagement separated.

I like your idea, but I like it 2 missiles each ROE.

with 2 missiles you run into a gun fight. I just thought of having 4 missiles decreasing a chance of getting into a guns fight.

2 missiles is more than enough. Just have to know how to use them. I though you liked gun fights?

I like the idea of removing the 9P's and going with the 9m's. This may also decrease the darn explosions on the rail scenario. One thing I disagree with though is engaging once your in the pit. I think we should still pass each other first being its a competition style setup. Plus sometimes one person is in the pit faster than another.

I feel that we should move on with the times, as IR BFM/ACM engagements have been the forefront of training in modern air forces for years now.

We have stockpiles of 9ps, but they're no longer loaded, and pilots are no longer trained to use them.

I think altering ROE2 to carry (2)AIM-9Ms with 25nm seperation would be the modern, realistic IR BFM engagement that is every bit of dogfighting as it has been in the past with alternate ROEs.

With 25nm seperation the fight should be hot once you're in the jet. There is no clean pass in real life, so what is the purpose of it here? The reason a clean pass was developed in dogfighting competitions was to try and curb the ease of front quarter head on guns engagements. With the changes to the hitboxes several years ago, this is no longer required, although most pilots engage in this manner out of 'practice', and courtesy.

This also eliminates any question on the 'no fire' zone for AIM-9Ps. I also agree that adding a 4th ROE is not ideal due to the difficulties in getting pilots together for the required time to fly just 3 ROEs. Also, if currently in ROE2 you're getting into gunfights is because you're not shooting from proper WEZ, or once you've got angles you're inside RMIN and need to go guns anyway (which is the case with ROE2 because these fights are fought with smaller radi from both fighters.)

The missile blowing the jets up just off the rail speaks for itself

Those of you that believe all aspect IR is taking the 'dogfight' out of the engagement are probably the same ones that go 'suicide' in ROE3 when you're down to AIM-9Ms . I would recommend re-evaluating your tactics should this hold true to the individual .



Just some thoughts from a former competitor...

Why not just have pilots come to a verbal agreement of using all aspect or rear aspect missiles for Roe 2. If a conflict build up then just add another Roe .

Because a verbal agreement won't stand up in a dispute. It needs to be posted if this altered ROE is to be flown.