Introduction to Beyond Visual Range Combat | BVR Series | Part 1

[@rockwellh6910]

There are very few channels that introduce and explain things as well as you do. I watched your entire BFM playlist and can't wait to watch this series on BVR. Great video!

[@yappydawg8985]

This is great fundamental information that is not widely available in the DCS universe and the visuals really made your points clear. Thanks and I am really looking forward to the rest of this series.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Thanks. This is exactly why I made the video. I haven't seen anyone else do it this way and thought it would be helpfu.

[@lorenzobosi8650]

As always Mike a super simple and clear way to explain very complex things. Thanks!

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

I'm happy to hear my explanation was clear. Sometimes I worry I didn't explain it well. So it's helpful to hear when I get it right. Thanks.

[@tazhouthtazhouth]

cant wait to part 2

[@benlucke7763]

Mike, have been binging your channel for months now. Thanks a ton for these videos.

[@nicopincho]

I love your bfm videos, and I think I will love the bvr too

[@kunstistkrieg]

This is becoming my favourite channel, keep it up, you deserve way more subscribers and views!

[@manolog.9962]

That was an awesome instructional video. Thank you for sharing it.

[@paulvalente5132]

Awesome, I've been waiting for this series!

[@capthaltli]

Great video , learned a lot

[@KentLavisMW]

I love your video! Thank you for explaining air combat!

[@arnaudboucaud1894]

Ooohhh. I feel that I m finally going to be in control in MP GS server. 😂 Thanks Mike, I've studied all your videos. It s way better than goi'g to school. Looking forward to the next one!

[@keithbriscoe99]

Love this. Thank you.

[@maddog7989]

I love your work. Keep it up!

[@S3NTRY]

Great breakdown, thanks again Mike!

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Glad you liked it!

[@NehemieMMW]

Thank you very much! It was short, informative and sweet. I loved it, very helpful❤

[@marlan__]

Awesome video. Not sure it was clear, but DOR & MOR are not synonymous, they do mean different things. You may also want to mention MRR/MRAR (Minimum Reattack/Recommit Range) but that may be coming in a future video. (The minimum range where you can safely turn back in, fire, and abort NLT MAR)

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

Thanks. Just out of curiosity, would you happen to have a link to the definition of DOR that is A) publicly available and B) authoritative (as in a real source and not just some forum post)? If so I could get that into a future video.

[@marlan__]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom The Korean F-16 BEM is publicly available and defines* DOR/MOR. The CNATRA P-1290 defines MRR (after looking into it a bit further, having a MRR/MRAR timeline wicket seems to be a USN thing only) *That said, the "strict" definition of DOR/MOR depend on the tactic you're employing and it can vary (based on talking to a fighter pilot) -- its just important to note they aren't the same thing, you could just use one in DCS and call it a day, or you could use both depending on whatever tactic you wanted to make up. Basically DOR is a long skate using "DOR tactics" (this is the part that is variable) where you can execute a follow on skate & short skate (out NLT MAR) where MOR only leaves you with a follow on short skate

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

@@marlan__Thanks for the reply. After looking at "Korean AF BEM, Volume 5, 1 October 2005" I see what the issue. For that time and place "MOR" was defined as the range for "launch-and-notch" tactics whereas "DOR" was the range for "launch-and-leave". The meaning has changed over time as the tactics have changed (ie "launch-and-notch" no longer exists so MOR's mean has changed as a result).This is something that (unfortunately) happens a lot in military doctrine. Just look at the history of the term "bogey" to understand what I mean. In one time and place for a particular unit a term will mean one thing. But in a different time and place for a different unit it will mean something else. Unfortunately, that has happened with these terms. However, this series is not about the history of the semantics involved. My point here was to talk about the range for "SKATE" regardless of what people want to call it. "SKATE" will be the covered in the next video. So it was important to build the foundation for it here. Hopefully that makes more sense.

[@marlan__]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom Yeah for sure. I only meant to highlight that they aren't the same thing, but trying to say exactly what they are is probably beyond the scope of your videos. Appreciate you taking the time to look into it!

[@algroyp3r]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom Why does launch-and-notch no longer exist? Is it because modern missiles are too smart to be notched, or is it just a change in preferred tactics?

[@gilbertprassl2923]

Thank you very much for your awesome work, can´t wait for the next part :-)

[@AirMorgan.]

Awesome stuff! Thank you.

[@maddog7989]

Hi Mike. Great video as always. Would you be able to share the Fighter’s and bandit’s CAS for your stern WEZ calculations? Did the shooter had a speed advantage or were they co-speed? Thanks.

[@Syntax152]

Hi Mark and thank you for all of your vids, really great way to learn ! However something bugged my mind about 11:29 . Why did you add "Out cost" when its already added in MAR calculation? Isnt "Mar = wez + out cost" ?

[@GrumpyDon]

You're right! This results in 2 OUTs being added up. The reason to have 2 OUTs in your calculation is that you want to (i) turn away, (ii) turn back towards your opponent and (iii) turn away again without being hit. The sequence I just listed contains 2 OUTs and 1 IN :)

[@2serveand2protect]

EXCELLENT channel and fantastic content. A million thanks for all your videos!

[@wannabedal-adx458]

Great intro to this subject, I wait for future videos. I liked this video at 1:38, all the previous 5 things do not "Guarantee" survival in air combat. No truer words have been spoken!!! ;) My questions are: 1) What about former soviet fighters having superior "Look Down, Shoot Down" radars to defeat low altitude fighters. and 2) What about some A/A Missiles that climb up to descend down onto targets, such as the Phoenix missile. Don't they extend the WEZ because of their use of energy (even lower air density and gravity going downhill during the terminal phase)?

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

"Look Down Shoot Down" just means a pulse-doppler radar with digital processing. So it is susceptible to notching. I go into more detail in the radar series linked in the description. For your question about the Phoenix: the missile flies an arc which adds some pitch angle to its flight path. So it is one of the 4 As I mentioned (Angle). So yes the WEZ does get larger. But there's another benefit which we'll cover in a later video.

[@greywolf1155]

In the DLZ presentation, in the cockpit of your F-16, there is the Rtr tickmark where the Maneuver Zone begins. The Rtr seems to be like 5nm at the higher altitudes. I would expect this to be the target's MAR, because, by its definition, the Rtr is the range at which the target can be expected to escape if he begins an OUT turn. But 5nm is too short when compared to the MAR we have computed. Now, I know I've got something wrong, would you please expain it to me?

[@juliusEST]

Yesss!🎉

[@Ghost-pz3uy]

Thanks.

[@auqanova]

glad to see this topic getting some in depth explanation! do you plan on including some fox 1 combat information for offense? because i really have a hard time balancing offense and defense when i turning more than 60 degrees away means going fully defensive. also one thing id love to know, if im within enemy range and have to kinematically defend by beaming, how many times should i change direction while maneuvering? i worry that if i turn too often the missile will just find me near its original intercept point anyway.

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

We'll go into more depth on those topics in the future. But I will say that SARH (aka Fox 1) combat is a lot more challenging and dangerous as you correctly point out. Active homing missiles really do help with survival.

[@auqanova]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom glad to hear it, look forward to seeing your future videos!

[@disaster2master]

Does changing the radar elevation to match a target at lower altitude extend the range of the WEZ closer to what it might be at level engagement? As in, does it allow me to extend the WEZ to some extent to make up for ALT difference?

[@janintelkor]

Radar has nothing to do with how the missile flies, changing radar elevation to match the target is necessary

[@rustym.shackelford5546]

Could a Infantry Division have it's own "Tactical Fixed Wing Aircraft Arm"?

[@robertkalinic335]

I get why Nato has calling names for soviet planes but whats the purpose of making up alphanumeric designation for missiles instead of name only. Is it hard to say R27? And then you can just add...adder or only say adder.

[@dani48484]

Hi Mike! At 11:33, shouldn't the Desired Out Range be 24? I believe the Out cost is already calculated into the MAR, which is WEZ + 4, so it looks like you're adding it twice maybe? Great video!

[@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom]

This is a great question. So let's answer it. The Out being counted twice is intentional. The Out range is there to allow a second opportunity to fire and leave. If it wasn't added in then you would only have enough space for one shot at an adversary while keeping enough room to stay out of his WEZ. If you want the option to have a shot at MAR and then an additional shot with an Out before that final shot, then you need to add an Out into the equation. The simple rule to remember is one Out per Launch and Leave shot. We'll go into more detail on this in the next installment of this series. Hope this answered the question and thanks for asking!

[@dani48484]

@@TheOpsCenterByMikeSolyom Yeah it makes sense; I was almost sure I was missing something, but the math didn't add up in my head, and I had to ask. Thanks a lot for explaining, I'm so looking forward to the next installments!

[@JoJo-vm8vk]

The weapon engagement zone isn’t the best representation. The target should be in the zone, the shooter being outside pointing at the target. That way we can directly see the effect of target’s aspect on missile effective range.

[@fouadfouad.d3714]

Hi. Thanks

[@damirfret670]

381 Rodger Expressway

[@KaleighSirman]

47127 Catherine Stravenue

[@RhodesKing-q4r]

Thompson Susan Moore John Williams Jeffrey

[@ShriyaDamayanthi]

🇷🇺👑🌹🤗🤗

[@heinzriemann3213]

There's no Heads-Up-Display. Lern the correct term. Edit: And an oversimplification is by definition an invalid simplification. What happened to good old simplifications?

[@alexb8098]

What IS the correct term then? I'm sure we'd all like to know... why don't you share?

[@heinzriemann3213]

@@alexb8098 It's a Head-Up Display. What's the cockyness? You think I'm as ignorant as yourself?

[@tenzinalexander]

Do you realize that Following your logoc you just created an Invalid definition, thus your argument is invalid?

[@MarcusSetlla]

51244 Audreanne Harbor