Callsign JoNay

Gotta love that DCS bug that causes only the first guy in the flight to properly defend while the others maintain straight and level. Also, 30 nm with a Sparrow? I don't shoot outside of 7-ish!

You don't need to depress the trigger for 3 seconds. Is that in the manual? If it is, it's wrong. You just need to pull and release. The weapon just takes 3 seconds to shoot. Pay attention to the hot trigger light. If it's lit up then you can shoot. If the light goes out there is no shot available, or the WCS is in the 3-second process of shooting.

Yes, same. That mission almost always freezes for me in the same point of time. About 60 to 65 mins in.

I was so ready to tell you that it still wouldn't matter, and that maneuvering targets would still defeat the missiles, but it looks like you're on to something. I still think Mach 1.1-1.2 is not effective and you're better off saving your fuel if that's the best speed you can manage, but I did some testing and I'm getting long range kills with around M 1.5. (Tacview attached). The speed of the missile at impact is still iffy at around M 1.7, but I am getting about a 50% PK with this strategy. 65 nm kill on a J-11 in a split-S. The downside is it takes incredibly long to accelerate to M 1.5. (Maybe it's a B thing). And the distance you cover is an even bigger challenge. You can't wait for radar contact at 85nm to start sprinting. You need to be in a sprint way before that. Probably 120+ miles. So you need a good long range vector from AWACS, or a link-4, or use some kind of semi-beam/drag aspect to build speed up before you turn hot. And it burns a ton of fuel. I started the Tacview with 100% internal fuel, and empty bags. Had about 7k remaining after the 2nd bandit splashed. Another nice benefit though, is when you bring that much speed to the bonzai you don't have to worry about zero doppler notch.

MB is the hooked contact's magnetic bearing from the YY. You can see that he's straight East of the converging point of the NAVGRID, so MB 90. And his range is 60.4 from the YY. Also notice to the left of the hooked contact 09B, the "09" being his bearing from the YY and the "B" representing his range somewhere between 50-100 nm. Most people in the DCS Tomcat community set the YY to the Bullseye, so you can use the NAVGRID for relatively accurate bullseye calls. In this case, Bulls 090 for 60.

IMO, getting fast is a waste of fuel. With a 2x2x4 loadout, you'll be lucky to get to Mach 1.2 tops, and it will take you many long minutes and thousands of lbs of gas to get there from a mil power cruise at 0.95 Mach, and it doesn't add much to the missiles. They'll still miss on modern fighters, and do little more than get your targets to turn defensive, which you can do at 0.95 Mach anyway. Save your fuel for the Bonzai, IMHO.

Zero out your slip.

Still lots of testing needed, but I've come to the conclusion that BVR shots on 4th gen maneuvering targets are no longer likely to result in kills, from any speed, altitude, or range beyond 20-ish nm. The challenge is the AI performs a spit-S at 10nm, and I haven't been able to come up with any conditions that allow me to put enough smash on the missile for the terminal phase. There's never enough speed on the missile to chase down and intercept a split-Sing target. I think all longer range shots (40-60nm) should be considered posture shots, with the intention of making your opponents dive and defend so that you can close the range for a <20 nm kill shot with another Phoenix. 10-15 nm shots at medium-low altitudes are effective, but the trade off is dipping your toes into that R-27 ET WEZ. So you better split-S immediately after the shot and flare your butt off. That's my two cents until someone shows me Tacview that indicates otherwise.

Yeah, true. Personally I'm feeling a much larger dead zone than 20-30 through.

Very interesting. I haven't even considered trying As since the patch now that the C has a MK60 motor option. That's super weird. Very nice. Your Phoenixes still had a ton of smash at impact and the near miss. Maybe I've been going about this all wrong trying to test from 20-50 nm shots. Farther shots are better.

With all due respect, that is not a demonstration of a deadly missile, it's a demonstration of abysmal AI. All three hits were well below sub sonic at impact.

With the new September 2nd patch we can probably forget my old 1.5 rule. It's probably closer to 1:1 now, judging by the data we're seeing. If the bandit is at 30k, shoot at 30NM, 20 for 20, 10 for 10, etc. Testing needed to confirm, of course.

Ooof. Looks like my favorite missile in DCS got a significant nerf.

I see. That makes sense. That's really unfortunate that you have to do that.

But you said "DCS does not apply this logic to their missiles, and hence we follow suit". So are you confirming that HB is modelling a pulse radar in the Phoenix? Sorry if I'm being difficult, I'm just trying to get to the bottom of a question that has been bugging me for years.

Very mysterious! Puck sounds pretty sure about what he's saying, but on the other hand I'm sure the HB team has great sources. So if HB is modelling a PD radar in the AIM-54, why would the CM resistance be reduced in the A-variants? What did you guys find? Because as per Iron Mike's post from 2021:

Can we get some more detail on this? I have so many questions. #1- Can you give us a ballpark estimate of what kind of increased and reduced chaff resistance you are intending, so that we can practice and compare our results to your goals? Is the A supposed to be twice as susceptible to chaff now? Three times? Just a little bit more susceptible? #1A- How about the C? Twice as resistant? Just a little bit? Etc... #2- Why were these changes made? What information did you come across to initiate these changes? #3- Something I've always been unclear about... Is the HB AIM-54 radar a PD radar or a pulse radar? In this post you appear to confirm my understanding (as of 2021), that the real life Phoenix housed a PD radar and should be almost totally immune to chaff, but you also said that you allow it to be decoyed by chaff to follow suit with ED's game-isms: But in this clip "Puck" talks about how the 54 had a Pulse radar and that it was quite susceptible to chaff: https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxiOYoC0yTMGaxCZMG6B-fOcNqrePhJGt6 So I guess I'm wondering why was the chaff resistance of the A-models lowered for this upcoming patch? Is it because the HB team was also under the false impression that it housed a PD radar, and are now adjusting it to perform like a pulse radar? Is it a game balance thing to follow suit with ED practices? Is there some other reason? And follow up question, why was the C-model chaff resistance increased? Does it house a PD radar? #4- Since the A-model will be more susceptible to chaff does that mean it's more immune to notching? If it's a pulse radar as "Puck" says it is in the 10% True video, then it should be immune to notching, correct? EDIT: Also in the "Puck" 10% True video he mentions a 29s burn time. Maybe he's misremembering, I dunno, but I thought I'd add that here as well: https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxW9dHXMc9uOAhRSfL7LWkL95y5bhaO0k4

Very interesting. It seems like C-model is the way to go, but now there is an interesting choice between the MK60 or MK47 motor. MK47 motor is slightly better range and smokeless. MK60 is a little bit more AMRAAMy, but makes a lot of smoke.

Took me a few reads to comprehend this sentence.... So the MK60 has a shorter burn time than the MK47, but has better kinetics during that burn time because the total thrust output is the same? So the MK60 gets up to speed faster which grants it some advantages in the earlier phase after weapon release, and the MK47 takes longer to accelerate, but also has the benefit of more endurance than the MK60? Is that correct? It sounds like the MK47 will be better optimized for longer range shots than the MK60, but the MK60 will be a better medium and short range missile. I'm eager to test it.

So, the Mark-60 burn time is 20.6 seconds. What is the Mark-47's burn time again?

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxrNMdwRwYZfF3OmAk74knJj3Vjr6vLem-

Did all the Tomcat pilots crash at the same time? Or within 30 seconds or so of each other? I don't think it's related to Tomcat AI. The most common place I have these freezes are on the Hoggit training server, and AFAIK there are no AI Tomcats flying around. Lots of tankers, AWACS, and L-39s flying around for target drone practice though.

Seriously?

Maybe the friendly didn't turn on their IFF.

Looks like I jinxed myself. Me and another Tomcat pilot just experienced the dual freeze exactly like the video I posted on Jul 13 in this thread. It's so strange how one person's freeze causes someone else in close proximity to experience the same. The server we were on did not crash and wasn't restarted. Our DCS applications just stopped responding, frozen screen, audio continuing/looping, until we got the "not responding" pop up and had to end task.