ARMs guiding on silent radars?

I did a test mission putting up a Hawk-site and a trigger with radio-command to turn off the Hawks AI (since I dont have CA yet and cant do that in the command view). Up in the air I fired a Kh58P at the radar at max distance, and as soon as the missile left the rails i triggered the radio-command to turn of the SAMs AI which made it turn off its radar. The radar disapeared from both the Phantasmagoria and the "RWR" but the missile continued guiding, hitting the search-radar with pin-point accuracy. This is kind of disapointing since I have been looking forward to some real cat-and-mouse games with the SAMs once CA comes out...

I'm not a expert on this, but from what i have been reading its already to late to switch of the SAM's search radar when the target is aquired already. If the target is not moving the Missile will simply remember the last known position of the target you already aquired.

Maybe somebody els can confirm this to be true or false.

I very much doubt the inertial guidance system in the Kh-58 would guide the missile to hit a target within a meter from a distance of 160 km...?

The 58 does not have a range of 160km - not even close to that. More likely 50km. I'll have a closer look.

The 58 does not have a range of 160km - not even close to that. More likely 50km. I'll have a closer look.

It's hard to pinpoint the range of the 58 becouse it depends heavily on the altitude of the launcing platform.

Yeah - was referring to the Toad.

160km (just a number I took of Wikipedia), 50km, whatever! Don't get OT... :)

Edit: Besides, It would require the radar receiver in the Kh-58 to be able to pinpoint the location of the radar from that distance, which I also doubt. AND correct for wind at different altitudes etc. In case I have to clarify this, It's not the specific capabilities of the Kh-58 im talking about here, but all ARMs in general.

I'm waiting for you to get on topic by providing a track/mission file :)

I'm waiting for you to get on topic by providing a track/mission file :)

Here you go! Kh-58 was launched at max range which I believe was 38km at 3000m altitude (so now thats settled :D). The radar was turned off the same instant the missile went off the rails.

ARM guiding at silent radar.trk

Radar test.miz

Ta for that :)

I'll verify with the internal build and report as necessary.

So you DO think its an issue not a feature. And here I was thinking up arguments as to how ARMs couldnt be super-über-weapons. Heres one anyway: If a 1980's weapon could hit something with that accuracy at that distance, why develop laser-guided and gps-guided weapons? :smartass:

My understanding of ARM in the sim is that they will guide to the last known position of a target which was emitting. If the target moves after turning the radar off, the ARM should miss.

I'm not sure that was ever modelled - at least it hadn't needed to be previously, as the capability to control radars is new.

Nate

IMHO the ARM should miss. It could hit close to the target or in the general area of the target but not hit it every time.

As for the inertial guidance system I would speculate this is something akin to the guidancesystem on the WWII-era V2-rocket. It flies in one direction for a set time or distance and then begin searching for a target. If you ever tried the POS-feature of the HARMs in Falcon BMS you would know what I am talking about.

My understanding of ARM in the sim is that they will guide to the last known position of a target which was emitting. If the target moves after turning the radar off, the ARM should miss.

That got me thinking that there may very well be truth to the concept at present.

In-SIM the 58 will guide to target even when the SAM has been destroyed by the first 58 in a volley of two. The MPU's on the other hand will immediately self-destruct when the SAM is hammered, leading me to believe that there is an intentional distinction between the two HARM's.

Why so if not indicative of RL functionality? Or merely a bug?

I'll tinker further.

I'm not sure that was ever modelled - at least it hadn't needed to be previously, as the capability to control radars is new.

 

Nate

Not exactly. Group AI on/off has control over AI sensors, including radar. There was a bug early on with WH where SEAD assets where able to launch ARMs against non-emiting targets way outside of the radars detection zone. Now if a radar is off the AI can't fire a ARM at it.

It appears setting status to Green does not effect player controlled units... AI was still able to fire ARM at me, and I was able to lock and fire on him. On the plus side apparently TORs can lockon and kill incoming HARMS.

Grimes what happens if you momentarily AI ON the Sam unit. Does the SEAD AI still log it's position and launch? Also what happens if after the aircraft fires its harm the Sam stops emmiting and moves, does missile still track and destroy? Can't test this atm.

Think the radar needs to be active in order for the AI to fire.

On the plus side if the AI goes radar off and moves, the HARM will still track the last known position of the SAM. If the SAM moves far enough away it should be safe.

Great, they've fixed it all then.

Great, they've fixed it all then.

Guys, am I the only one thinking this is unrealistic behavior? :( As I mentioned in a earlier post, is it really reasonable to think that a Inertial Guidance System would hit anything with that accuracy at that length (38km?)? Plus, why wouldnt they put that über-accurate passive radar receiver in the actual plane as a RWR - the enemy would only turn on his radar and I'd known where he is EXACTLY (horizontal, vertical, distance) from almost 40km (thats 21.5nm) out!

EDIT: Aaaaand why put a passive seeker in the missile itself if the phantasmagoria can do that accurate pinpointing and the IGS in the missile is the only thing needed to hit the target?

Guys, am I the only one thinking this is unrealistic behavior? :(

No.

As I said earlier, it's on my to-do list.

This depends on the ARM you use, and how close to the target radar the ARM is when the radar is turned off.

For the -58, olders versions of the 88, etc etc, turning off the radar past some 7-10km range (missile to radar) should almost always cause a miss. Closer than that, the closer you get, the more likely to get a close call/lethal hit (to the radar antenna).

However, missile guidance is not yet very advanced in the sim, and I think it will be a little while before it gets a whole lot more realistic than it is right now.

Guys, am I the only one thinking this is unrealistic behavior? :( As I mentioned in a earlier post, is it really reasonable to think that a Inertial Guidance System would hit anything with that accuracy at that length (38km?)? Plus, why wouldnt they put that über-accurate passive radar receiver in the actual plane as a RWR - the enemy would only turn on his radar and I'd known where he is EXACTLY (horizontal, vertical, distance) from almost 40km (thats 21.5nm) out!

 

EDIT: Aaaaand why put a passive seeker in the missile itself if the phantasmagoria can do that accurate pinpointing and the IGS in the missile is the only thing needed to hit the target?

This depends on the ARM you use, and how close to the target radar the ARM is when the radar is turned off.

 

For the -58, olders versions of the 88, etc etc, turning off the radar past some 7-10km range (missile to radar) should almost always cause a miss. Closer than that, the closer you get, the more likely to get a close call/lethal hit (to the radar antenna).

 

However, missile guidance is not yet very advanced in the sim, and I think it will be a little while before it gets a whole lot more realistic than it is right now.

It might not be a game-breaker, but it does have tactical significance (and I guess we shouldn't expect anti-ARM decoys, microwave ovens, anytime soon). I fully understand though if this is quite low on your priority-list, but I thought I just put it out there. This sims are so near perfection that you come to expect these little details be covered.

What's hard about sticking a few independent radars of the same type out there to act as decoys? I've done this to people before ;)

(and I guess we shouldn't expect anti-ARM decoys, microwave ovens, anytime soon).

What's hard about sticking a few independent radars of the same type out there to act as decoys? I've done this to people before ;)

:wassat:

Well if money is not a problem... ;)