Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

In a look up situation with radar lock maintained at all times. No ground clutter. The second you enter the beam is the second the ER diverts to chaff 100% of the time. Even if the chaff is not in its line of sight.

Tracks and tacviews attached.

Edit: see posts 73 for more tacviews.

Edit 2: More videos.

Missile testing.trk

Missile testing 2.rar

Missile testing.rar

regarding chaff effectiveness

reference

note: modern 4th gen fighter, would be safe to assume it has modern, state-of-the-art and capable ECCM - with a medium-size fighter radar antenna (much larger than a missile radar antenna) - at close range (within 3000ft - a half mile)

the defender calls chaff - and radar lock is lost - you can see the radar struggle with the contact - losing it, regaining, losing again ---- the target designator box disappears and the gun director site is replaced with a funnel site (ie.. no lock so the aircraft is simply showing you were the bullets would go if fired now)

thus, one can reasonably ask.. if a modern fighter radar loses lock due to chaff countermeasures at such close range....... is it really so inconceivable that chaff could be similarly effective against missile radar systems from much further away??

I'm sure this is just a passing bug. It will be corrected "look-up" factor, I'm convinced. Developers will not throw logic that are painstakingly built in their former versions. I expect improvement. I watch bugs in first openbeta 1.5, it was not chaff function, ever, in all sutuation. Nex fix, chaff is ON, but ARH not recognise chaff. Nex fix, ARH recognice chaff but all, ARH and SARH see chaff on look-up every time, every situation in 3-9 aspect or L/R ~ 140 with < 700km/h.

NEX FIX WILL BE ALL RIGHT, I'm SHURE!!!

Just to avoid this turning into another pissing match lets leave the discussion out of the bug reporting subforum. Its for the devs to respond.

In "missile testing.acmi" at around 7.20min I fail to understand why it looks like the radar is locking on to the already deployed chaff. <- The ER's are kind of turning back in like they acguired new lock. Unless your radar/HUD shows exatly that is the problem/bug to be found in the chaff or in the radar ? (im not trying to be naughty/troll - im just that stupid and really don't understand what is going on) - It looks like your radar is beaming the chaff and totally ignoring the airframe.

EDIT: Trying to be more precise in my question :)

OMG that track file...it's even worse than the one i uploaded. Let's wait and see what devs say regarding this bug.

I make a tiny change - a small mod for JSGME, if someone wants to try I'll probably impact.

To be clear, I do not think that if should be corrected a bug, or such values. I have not tested in all situations, but only in those situations that discriminate "look up - look down" behavior.

Look my tacview and try my little changes mode.

Do we want this kind of successful missile?

Personally, I want only what is real, regardless of superiority or inferiority, but finally once we know what is real.

example.rar

Was it fixed in today's patch?

Was it fixed in today's patch?

no

@SITHSPAWN:

. Do you have any information from devs regarding this bug corrected or not under current patch?

. If not, do you know if they take under consideration this report for the next patch?

How's things going with AMRAAM's now?

How's things going with AMRAAM's now?

Field of view is as crazy as in FC2. R77 too.

I make a tiny change - a small mod for JSGME, if someone wants to try I'll probably impact.

To be clear, I do not think that if should be corrected a bug, or such values. I have not tested in all situations, but only in those situations that discriminate "look up - look down" behavior.

 

Look my tacview and try my little changes mode.

 

Do we want this kind of successful missile?

 

Personally, I want only what is real, regardless of superiority or inferiority, but finally once we know what is real.

I'd buy into that (briefly from what i've seen of it). But does aircraft RCS make a difference with your experimentation (ie look up chaffing target is Su27/F15/Mig29)? What about number of chaff released and aspect?

I can't read russian. What parameter did you change?

I'd buy into that (briefly from what i've seen of it). But does aircraft RCS make a difference with your experimentation (ie look up chaffing target is Su27/F15/Mig29)? What about number of chaff released and aspect?

 

I can't read russian. What parameter did you change?

I have experimented with what I have tacview file. Recorded experiment, I see that works, and I'm no longer used mode. For the rest behavior, I do not know. Changes in lua sending PM :thumbup:

Field of view is as crazy as in FC2. R77 too.

I swear those things went pitbull on me while having already passed me (head on)

Should have kept the track.

Was it fixed today?

Was it fixed today?

nothing

Any update on this? Guys, the ground/sky clutter parameters need fixing. It's not really the missiles that are the problem...

Has this been reported for a review?

Sent from mobile Android via Tapatalk

Any update?

if anything, ground clutter needs to be INCREASED

low alt radar performance needs to be reviewed

the whole radar model needs to get a "PFM" (PRM?)

==edit==

be careful what you wish for

if anything, ground clutter needs to be INCREASED

 

low alt radar performance needs to be reviewed

 

the whole radar model needs to get a "PFM" (PRM?)

==edit==

be careful what you wish for

*couch*

Lawn mower jets

*couch*

heh! they'll find out real quick why that's not a viable tactic in the real world

8)

R-77 vs. AIM-120C, losing target by chaff differently?

I wonder if the R-77 easily looses the target as soon as F-15C pops few chaff, while AIM-120C nearly every time hits MiG-29 even though popping tons of chaff. Is there difference between these two missiles in current DCS?

Also, are R-77 and AIM-120C acceleration, burn-time/speed and max G values quite different?

And does both missile's intercept trajectory calculation difference somehow? I had weird experience the past week.

R-77 is comparable to 120A which by accounts should have some chaff issues. The 120C is almost immune by comparison.

And yes burn times, drag etc are different.

Trajectories are done with the same calculations.

Can you please provide burn-time/speed ad drag values?