THE KING

So I posted this concern in another thread but I will also bring it up here. This is where I see this going in future updates and it has me quite concerned. If and when ED corrects the lofting AMRAAM bug, then that’s fine, I will take realism over gameplay any day, this is a simulator after all. However, what is questionable realism is that currently, aircraft like the Jf-17can jam radars, (either hard locking or soft locking it) AND continue to track targets with its own radar. Now in the last update, it was mentioned that the SD-10 can no longer loft against jamming targets. The problem is however, the Hornet does not appear to be able to jam radars unless they hard lock it. This means that potentially, Jf-17’s will be able to engage non jamming F-18’s in TWS with their alreadykinematically superior Sd-10’s, (that will be able to loft), while the Hornet is stuck firing it’s AMRAAMS that will not be able to loft. In this type of situation, it would be nearly impossible for the Hornet to kill the Jf-17.

Can an AWACS be jammed by an airborne ECM jammer or is it’s own radar strong enough not to get spoofed? If it can be jammed, will we eventually see it in DCS?

Problem is, older aircraft, like the Su-27/J-11, can currently “shut down” the Hornet with their jammers. Again, the reason for this being that their jammers can jam TWS tracks while the Hornets cannot. I think right now things are still very much a work in progress but it would be nice to hear from an ED official what their plans are for ECM and jamming in the future. As I also mentioned, if things continue the way they are now, the Hornet will soon be helpless in a BVR fight with other 4th gen fighters which I do not think is realistic in any sense.

This is where I see this going in future updates and it has me quite concerned. First off, apparently, the Aim-120 should not be able to loft against a jamming target as it does now in game. See this post for more details, If this is a bug and ED corrects it, then fine, I will take realism over gameplay any day, this is a simulator after all. However, what is questionable is that currently, aircraft like the Jf-17 can jam radars, (either hard locking or soft locking it) AND continue to track targets with its own radar. Now in the last update, it was mentioned that the SD-10 can no longer loft against jamming targets. The problem is however, the Hornet does not appear to be able to jam radars unless they hard lock it. This means that potentially, Jf-17’s will be able to engage non jamming F-18’s in TWS with their already kinematically superior Sd-10’s, (that will be able to loft), while the Hornet is stuck firing it’s AMRAAMS that will not be able to loft. In this type of situation, it would be nearly impossible for the Hornet to kill the Jf-17.

So if I understand this correctly, aircraft with SPJ’s cannot just Jam any radar source unless it locks them up, correct? For instance, I would still be able to get all the necessary information on a target with an SPJ that I am tracking through TWS in the Hornet, yes? It’s only when I STT them or when an inbound missile goes active when the jamming starts, right?

Why does turning on the jammer shut the radar off and why does this not apply to other planes with ECM jammers? Will the jammer be able to jam “soft locks” in future updates? Right now, it appears as if it can only jam “hard locks”.

Additionally, couldn’t the AIM-120 receive precise, (or far more precise), range data from the AWACS through data link? I recall reading somewhere that the Aim-120 can be guided via data link but perhaps I misinterpreted this though. Further more, would the AWACS also be jammed by the target, making this guidance method no more effective, or is the radar on it powerful enough to burn through jammers at long ranges? Right now, it’s just hard to know what is and is not a true representation of reality in DCS due to many things still being a work in progress.

Could the missile not initially loft, and start to pitch over onto the target as the jamming signal becomes stronger? I would think that the AMRAAM can tell, as it approaches the target, the strength of the jamming signals coming from it and use that as a rough range estimate.

In the the recent update, Deka announced that they had fixed a bug where the Sd-10 would loft on a jamming target. Should the Aim-120 also NOT loft on a target that is jamming? Currently as of now, when shot in the Hornet or Eagle, it does. Is this a bug or is this how the missile is supposed to behave? Perhaps this is where the AMRAAM becomes superior to the Sd-10????

Y That and fuel tanks, yes.

I heard rumor somewhere that the Jf-17 is modeled such that structural damage will occur should the jet over speed with a heavy load out. Is this true? If so, what are the speed limits in CAS/TAS and Mach number for various loadouts?

I do realize that at this point in the sim, ECM, and how it’s modeled, is far from complete. In addition to this, I would imagine that there are many variables and parameters related to this topic that are still classified and will never be able to be fully modeled in DCS. Below I have formulated a handful of questions that I have regarding how ECM works in game and how it should work in reality. 1: Why does activating the jammer in the Hornet freeze/silent the radar? Is it because it would interfere with the Hornets own radar? This would make sense and leads me to the next question. 2: Why don’t other DCS aircraft with internal/external jammers, such as the F-15, F-14, MiG-29, Su-27, JF-17, etc, exhibit the same behavior as the Hornet when their jammers activate? Is there something special about these aircraft that allows them to leave both their radar and jammers on at the same time or are these systems not yet fully modeled? 3: In regards to the Tomcat and Hornet, by placing the ECM switch to XMIT, does this continuously send out jamming signals from the jammer directed towards radars illuminating the plane, including friendly radars, or does it only activate when the aircraft is “spiked” or hard locked? I do know that in the Jf-17, there are two modes of jamming, type one, which will only jam hard locks, and type 2, which will jam any radars illuminating the aircraft. Does the Tomcat and Hornet have this capability and if not, will they in the future? 4: What function does the forwards, backwards, and forwards+ backwards option do for the Jf-17’s jammer? Does this literally dictate the direction in which the jamming signals will travel? Finally, 5: Can an AWACS’ radar be jammed to the point where it can no longer determine the precise location of a target and if so, will this be implemented in DCS? I apologize for all the questions but it is clear that my knowledge regarding this particular subject is lacking and that I would like to know more.

Track 1: Aim-54A Mk-60 Defeated With One Piece Of Chaff and Notch Track 2: Aim-54C Mk-47 Defeated With One Piece Of Chaff and Notch Track 3: Aim-120B Intercepts Me Despite Outputting a Ridiculous Amount of Chaff While Notching 1.trk 2.trk 3.trk

So right now, the only thing that an aircraft needs to do that is under attack by an active aim-54, is put the missile on the beam and drop 1 piece of chaff. Do this and the missile is trashed. This has made it nearly impossible to score any kills against both AI and Human Opponents. This also makes it virtually impossible to hit larger targets that are beaming such as an AWACS, Tanker, Transport, etc. As you mentioned in another post, the Aim-54 does quite well against Its targets once it goes active. In game right now this is not the case and mostly has to do with the low chaff resistance of the missile. I could see an A version getting spoofed easily but I would think the C could handle it much better. I hope this is considered in the future.

There seems to be an awfully large amount of information, sometimes conflicting, out there regarding future plans for the Aim-54 and how it should work. What is truly the game plan for this missile moving into the future of DCS? What is currently broken now and needs to be fixed? How close are we to getting a finished product? From what I can gather the two biggest problems plaguing this missile now are, 1. It’s very low tolerance of chaff and 2. Unnecessary and violent guidance corrections that bleed off tremendous amounts of energy.

Would you be able to verify whether or not this is a bug? Nothing against the guy on there who says it is not it’s just It would be nice to hear it from an ED official, thanks.

With regards to the Aim-120 and Sd-10, was this just recently implemented? I don’t seem to recall an Aim-120 or SD-10 I fired going stupid if I reacquired a TWS track on the target. Just this last update seemed to change it. As for the Aim-54, this behavior does make sense seeing as how it is an older missile.

So does this mean that the missile should guide onto the “lost”, track and go active when it’s a certain distance away?

This bug report is similar to the one I wrote up about two ago explaining how ARH missiles go ballistic upon complete loss of TWS tracking. However this one that I have discovered recently is much more of a game breaker and has robbed me a handful of kills within the last couple of weeks. If a TWS track is reacquired on a target after it is lost and after a fox three launch, the missile will continue to fly in a straight line, reverting to 1g flight. It will almost always miss the target. The only chance the missile has to hit the target is if when the seeker head goes active, the target is within its radar cone. However, this usually means the missile drastically has to correct its course to intercept the target resulting in a catastrophic loss of energy. I have included tracks outlining this bug for the Aim-120C, SD-10, and Aim-54C. All tracks were recorded in Open Beta 2.5.6.59625 Aim-54 Guidance Failure .trk Aim-54 Guidance Failure 2 .trk AIm-120 Guidance Failure 1.trk AIm-120 Guidance Failure 2.trk SD-10 Guidance Failure .trk

I take it this is something ED plans on addressing eventually right? As you may or may not know, all fox three missiles right now go stupid if TWS track is lost before going active instead of homing onto the targets last known calculated position. I’m a bit confused by this, right now, if a TWS track is lost on a target and then re-acquired after a Phoenix launch, the missile will guide back onto the target. Is this what is supposed to happen or is this a bug?

Here we go. My interpretation of this is that the missile will guide onto the targets last known location and go active at a certain time. In the sim as of now, I do not observe this behavior. Missile will just keep flying on a straight line. My apologies if I interpreted this incorrectly.

So as of now, if a TWS track is lost after an Aim-54 is fired and before it goes active, the missile will go stupid and continue to fly in a straight line. I remember reading a post addressing this issue a while back but can’t seem to find it. Is this a guidance bug or is this how it is supposed to behave? I would think the missile would guide onto the targets last calculated position but it does not.

This may be more of a wishlist topic but will DCS ever be implementing the damaging effects of over speeding with a heavy loadout? For instance, I routinely see DCS Viper pilots exceeding Mach 1.2 with 3 Fuel tanks. From other combat simulators, this would cause airframe damage.

I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, though I am nearly 100% sure that it is, but if a TWS track is lost after an AMRAAM or SD-10 is fired , the missile will continue to fly in a straight line up into the air. Would the missile not try to pitch over and try to intercept the target at its last known location? The AMRAAM and SD-10 do happen to pitch over eventually but only at the last second where it bleeds off a tremendous amount of energy. I would imagine this behavior is because the missile's radar is able to pick up the target at this close range. Below are three tracks, one firing the AMRAAM using the hornet, the other with the viper, and one with the Jf-17 firing an SD-10, all show the same behavior. AMRAAM LOST TRACK2.trk SD10 LOST TRACK.trk AMRAAM LOST TRACK.trk