dundun92

So I can answer 1 and 2 For 1, yes the F-15 radar is seriously underperforming (over 50% compared to the original APG-63, nvm the MSIP one we have). Essentially dont expect to detect fighter sized targets past 50-60nm lookup, and 40nm lookdown. (In reality the numbers should be at 90+ for lookdown) For 2, it's your climb profile. I used to have the same issues. Firstly NEVER take the center bag unless you absolutely need the extra range (which isn't the case on PvP). It has more drag than both wing tanks combined. Just take 2 wing tanks and you'll be fine. Additionally, dont try and accelerate at 40k. That's too high if you are starting under the mach. Instead, climb to 40k, then descend to the mid-low 30s, that's where you really can get fast. Once you get above about M1.2-1.3 you can slowly begin climbing back. This is doable with bags, I should add, as long as you jettison them when empty. Now, once the bags are off, you can do some really ridiculous things, like M1.8 at 50kft+. But proper initial ascent profile is key. There may be a more optimal ascent profile, but this is just what I personally use.

Actually the F-15 RWR specifically does pick up AIM-54s from my testing, but that is the bug yes, no "U" on F-16/18 RWRs

So slightly OT but considering this would it be fair to say that ARH missiles in general (like the AMRAAM) launched in STT should give launch warnings to the STT spiked fighter?

Yes, low aspect (or simply slow) targets have lower detection ranges simply due to the lower closure, this is most emphasized in HPRF.

Are you referring to the AMRAAM or Sparrow?

Im pretty sure neither the M or MH monopulse seekers are compatible with CW, just PDI. Would have to find a source though.

Specifically, I dont know. I dont have terribly many sources, nor have I fully read them. I would assume HB has this info, im simply basing this off the fact that this how all other SARHs behave (including AIM-7s launched from F-14s). Pretty much every SARH missile you can find needs some sort of guidance signal, and I dont see why the AIM-54 would be an exception without specific evidence to the contrary. I would assume that the AIM-54 uses CW based on its age, but again I'm not 100% certain. But I think its clear that infrequent datalink signals cannot guide a SARH missile until impact.

Its not referring to ARH, there was already a section on ARH before it. The "up to 6" has nothing to do with TWS, as its referring to 6 missiles on the same target

Id like you to explain how a TWS track that updates every couple seconds is capable of guiding an AIM-54 terminally. Also, you missed this part of the quote: the missile is guided semi-actively by the AN/AWG-9 radar using both guidance commands transmitted via the radar and radar energy reflected off the target. Why do you think it would suddenly stop guiding off the reflected energy? And irregardless the point is that it is guiding off reflected energy, in this case in conjunction with datalink.

Heres an AIM-54 specific quote about the AIM-54s SARH guidance mode:

@Triggerjo23 You are confusing the term active here. Active has nothing to do with the PD/CW illumination. Its referring to the AIM-54 seeker going into ARH mode. It is impossible to guide a missile to impact on DL guidance. It is not accurate enough. Thats not a sparrow specific thing, thats a missile thing. There are only two options for terminal guidance: the AIM-54 seeker goes into ARH, OR it goes into SARH and guide off of a CW/PDI illumination. Also SARH DOES mean illumination. It means the AIM-54 seeker is guiding in semi-active mode, which by definition implies illumination that the missile can guide on. And nowhere here did I imply FLOOD was used. Datalink simply cannot be used to guide a missile terminally. You will need to switch to either SARH or ARH in the terminal phase.

Nobody is saying that the AMRAAM is unaffected by ECM IRL, thats completely irrelevant. The issue is that ECM has a bug vs the 120 and SD-10 where if you turn ECM on (whether before or after pitbull), then turn it OFF after active the missile has a 0% PK (aka stops guiding). Heres a tacview:

For missiles that use CW (e.g, AIM-7E/F, R-23/24(?)), thats very detectable on RWRs. For missiles on PDI (AIM-7F/M/H, R-27) it generally switches to a high PRF illumination (the F-15 -34 details it in the AIM-7 employment section, and FLOOD mode section for example). Here is one quote from the F-15 -34 detailing AIM-7M/H employment (there is no CW here, AIM-7M/H isnt even compatible with it): As for how specific RWRs respond thats again not something youll find publically. But its very clear that there is a signal change, and I think its safe to assume that RWRs can detect this, and thats the best we can do without knowing classified specifics.

Granted some of this is HB specific. But a SARH cannot be guided in (terminally anyway) on DL, its not accurate enough. It needs SARH illumination for the terminal phase at the very least, whether CW or HPRF PDI depending on the seeker. And the AIM-54 is suppsoed go SARH in PD-STT as HB themselves have said. As for when, idk, perhaps its like the ER, which guides on DL until 25km, where it then switches to SARH illumination. But Im pretty sure the launcher is illuminating all the time from launch to impact irrespective of what the seeker is doing, though I could be wrong. But it 100% is not staying in DL until impact, thats just not possible.

SARH missiles as a whole should give launch warnings, unless theres specific evidence that a particular RWR cannot detect the signal change (something youre not likely to find out publically). STT signals =/= guidance signal. You can see this in the DCS F/A-18C; the radar switches from STT to Pulse Doppler Illumination (PDI) (the PRF indicator changes), which is not CW, but simply a HPRF PD illumination.

Notching works at any range yes. Now, at longer ranges, the target will break lock while beaming simply because it is outside the detection range for beaming targets. But this is much inside that range.

EOS does not track flares in DCS, whereas missile seekers can. And yes the EOS has better tracking than the R-73 seeker.

The shot was a lookdown shot though. You were at 1100ft, he was at 900ft. Lookup/down for SARH only matters relative to you, not the missile in DCS anyway. The missile isnt illuminating the target, and as Pixxel said the radar lost lock (even if for a split second) and likely switched to EOS during the notch, and the missile then stopped guiding. His chaff stopped it from reacquiring.

Going to have to withdraw my entry for this one.

Since the last hotfix, there is a weird new spotting bug where aircraft appear as very visible white dots; wide FoVs emphasize this. Picture attached:

true, but being within the WEZ of a bandit is probably enough of a fair warning, spike/nail or otherwise :).

Looking at the tacview it was 100% notched + chaffed. The lock wasnt broken long enough for you to notice probably, but his turning through the notch + chaff was what defeated it.

Also, fyi there is already a thread for this :)