Flares effectivness

[Supersheep]

Is there a reference that says data =+ flares etc?

The only mention I can find is data = distance and speed.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Supersheep
spelling

[howie87]

Can't say I noticed the sun affects IR missiles. Done plenty of tests in 1.2.7 also. I really hope someone from ED steps in here and corrects our resident expert...

[Supersheep]

I much like to be corrected, as that would mean that the sim is more sophisticated than I experienced. The odds for that are not clear to me however.

[howie87]

Hmm... I wonder why nobody else has ever noticed any of these things. I think you might be imagining them expert.

[Pikey]

This thread went from a question to a philosophical debate, it reminded me of the episode of The Big Bang Theory and Schrödinger's cat.

 

ED, please don't let the cat out of the bag, the mystery is the charm :)

[Supersheep]

We can play rock-paper-scissors-lizzard-spock to settle it.

But you have to stop playing spock!

[jib]

As others have said, I very much doubt that coming out of the sun effects IR SAM in this SIM.

Have you seen how basic the locking of air to ground missiles is! and that is for the Player image how much simpler the code for the AI will be.

 

It doesn't simulate real optics etc. It is not real life, it is just game code it has to be vastly less complex.

[Flagrum]

So, what am I doing wrong here then:

A-10C vs. SA-18, directly approaching at 3500 ft AGL, starting to constantly popping flares at ~ 6 nm out

 

Results:

with 1 flare per 1 sec.: Igla launches at ~1.2 nm (TGP slant range) and hits

with 1 flare per 0.5 sec.: same, but first Igla heads for the flares, second hits

[Supersheep]

Edited out, I don't follow you down there.

 

Sorry but your last post sums this thread up perfectly, albeit differently than you'd like to think.

Thanks, I now know what to think about it.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Supersheep
language

[karambiatos]

As others have said, I very much doubt that coming out of the sun effects IR SAM in this SIM.

Have you seen how basic the locking of air to ground missiles is! and that is for the Player image how much simpler the code for the AI will be.

 

It doesn't simulate real optics etc. It is not real life, it is just game code it has to be vastly less complex.

 

 

The sun does affect the IR sam, any IR missile will pretty much always lose lock when the target is against the sun.

 

Just because its game code, it doesnt mean it cant simulate it, because it doesnt simulate real optics.

[Flagrum]

Btw, @expert, there is that lua script, made by MBot, that tweaks the behavior of ground units in regards of aircraft detection to a more realistic way. Can you confirm that this is not used on the server you are flying? That we all here talk about vanilla DCS SAMs?

[ZaltysZ]

Where 'data' includes the target's physical parameters, like heat and radar signature, as well as countermeasures, like flares, and the environment, like the Sun.

 

You are reading too much into this. Russian change log is more precise, it explicitly mentions just "target's flight parameters" ("параметры полета цели").

 

Basically, SAMs used to check only the range (if target got into the pre set "zone" around the launcher, then missile was launched - poor man's DLZ). Now, target's position, speed, direction and altitude should be able to distort that zone. I.e. Ka-50 flying into the SAM should get launch at it way closer to the SAM, than F15C doing the same at near supersonic speed.

[Kearf]

I never had success with pre-emptive flares and i think i did test it quiet intensive. I would love to see videos about using pre-emptive flares successfully against manpads in DCS-World because then i can learn something and i always wan't to learn something about air combat tactics.

As an example i didn't know that the sun can have an effect with IR-Seekers. If this is the case, where can i read about it ? (real life and DCS-World documents/statements)

 

As far as i know the Sa18 in DCS-World does not work as its real life counterpart. I don't know for sure, because i am not a trained proffessional, but i think it should work pretty similar to the Mistral missile because they are both 3rd generation IR-seeker missiles.

The Mistral missile, once locked and fired, will hit the target no matter how many flares you pop. But you can delay or prevent the lock-on with pre-emptive flares. Thats what i was told from a trained proffessional.

 

Also i am very curios how this single guy with an igla can see me coming when i fly treetop level and shot me from max range. It just is very strange und from my perspective very unrealistic and also not fun.

 

The best is always to stay high enough to not get hit(above 12.000ft AGL), but there are times when you know there are other threads which force you to go low and dirty and for me thats the most fun part of flying the A10.

 

My current fix is to use the

Detection scrip mod

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=117424

and to be ready to pop flares like crazy as soon as i get a missile launch.

Its much better with the mod but also far from perfect.(sadly)

Or to only fly missions without manpads at all.

 

If someone is skilled enough to know how to use the A10 in a high threat environment, which prevents flying high, with possible manpads, which are always possible because they are stealthy and lightweight, then i highly wan't to know about this tactics and i am sure many others want to know them too. :thumbup:

[Darkwolf]

gentleman, instead of killing each others, why you just don't make scientific style studies within DCS, such flying over SAM's and calculate average time before shoot, w/ and W/out flares? Takes a few minutes and will sort the conversation, versus comparing your "experience" and just checking who has the biggest ---censored--- :)

[Kearf]

@eXPeRT

So you will tell me that only proffessionals who earn money with a specific kind of information are legitimate to have some idea about something? 99% of all discussions would be dead at the beginning then and nearly all forums empty.

I just tryed to be polite and didn't had any intentions to sound like a smartass, thats why i adressed that i am not a professional and don't know for sure, but wan't to know for sure. (But i got information from a professional)

 

Can i assume then that you are a trained professional and can clarify this subject with hard facts/data?

 

I would appreciate it.

If not, maybe we can meet someday (we can arrange a date with PM's) and i will be your wingie for a mission to learn from you?

 

Thank you

[howie87]

I think expert is just trolling. Maybe he actually believes what he's saying but somehow I doubt it. I'll test when I get home and put this thread to rest.

[Dima89]

Regardless of your experience or knowledge, =Scorpion=, the manner in which you present them is far from savoury, but I suspect you know this as you have already preempted a negative response earlier in the thread. None the less, it does make for interesting reading with what you say and contradicts the main opinion.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Dima89
Addition.

[159th_Viper]

Ran a quick test in a controlled environment with latest build against a Strela-10, flying a T-Toad.

 

Let's see what the SIM says:

 

 

 

 

Engine Full No Flare:

 

3010m AGL

750km/h IAS

Launch at 4km as indicated on Shkval

 

HIT

 

Strela Engine Full No Flare.trk

 

 

 

 

 

Engine Full and Pre-Emptive Flare Deployment:

 

3020m AGL

750km/h IAS

Launch at 3.9km as indicated on Shkval

 

HIT

 

Strela Engine Full and Flare.trk

 

 

 

 

Engine Idle No Flare

 

3010m AGL

620km/h IAS

Launch at 4km as indicated on Shkval

 

HIT

 

Strela Engine Idle No Flare.trk

 

 

 

 

Engine Idle and Pre-Emptive Flare Deployment

 

3000m AGL

600km/h IAS

Launch at 4km as indicated on Shkval

 

MISS

 

Strela Engine Idle Flare.trk

 

 

 

 

Conclusions derived from above-mentioned tracks/data:

 

1 - As evident, pre-emptive flares have no effect on range where launch takes place. SAM will launch when target is within SAM NEZ, irrespective of flare deployment.

 

2 - The only factor that seems to influence the probability of effective evasion/countermeasure success is the state of one's engines: With throttles at Idle, missile will fall for flare decoy. Conversely, throttle not at Idle will see missile track aircraft.

 

 

Above results confirmed whether target is prosecuted from the Sun or not. As previously mentioned by ZaltysZ, the target's flight parameters (ie aspect in relation to sun, altitude etc etc) are relevant ONLY INSOFAR it relates to the DLZ (ie in the instance of factoring in the position of the Sun, it leads to a decrease in the NEZ).

 

Again, only pertinent factor that seems to have an influence is Aircraft Throttle positioning which aids in defeating the missile/Countermeasure success: Pre-emptive release of flares has no effect whatsoever.

[camsr]

What about gliding into the DLZ?

[159th_Viper]

What about gliding into the DLZ?

 

No effect on DLZ/NEZ. Results basically on par with Engine Idle No Flare and Engine Idle and Pre-Emptive Flare Deployment as detailed in my post above: Gliding in, the former results in a HIT whilst the latter results in a MISS.

 

Strela Engine Off No Flaretrk.trk

 

Strela Engine Offand Flaretrk.trk

 

Obviously goes without saying that you should NEVER be gliding into FEBA in any event, unless you've been sodomised a few seconds earlier.

[howie87]

Thanks for taking the time to prove what most of us were already saying Viper. I appreciate hard data much more than the "I have X number of hours flying X aircraft so I know everything" rubbish that expert was chatting.

[camsr]

Yeah, thanks. Seems even with engines off the heat signature is enough to get locked.

[Darkwolf]

Thank you Viper !

Hard data - only thing that matter !

[Crescendo]

Time for some SCIENCE!

 

---

 

Studying the effectiveness of preemptively using 'Delay/Deny' flare programs with the A-10C in DCS World 1.2.7 (lol - :smilewink: )

 

1.0 Definitions

 

“Delay/deny” – A flare program designed to be run preemptively (before any SAM launch), with the goal of delaying or denying a seeker lock and subsequent SAM launch. In other words, a delay/deny program attempts to prevent a SAM launch.

 

"Flare density" - a measure of the number of flares and the rate at which they are dispensed. For example, dispensing 2 flares every 1 second has a higher flare density than dispensing 1 flare every 5 seconds.

 

2.0 Testing parameters

 

• DCS version: 1.2.7
  

 

• Threat: 1 x SA-13 set to "expert" skill, oriented directly toward player aircraft.
  

 

• Player aircraft: 1 x A-10C flying at ~250KIAS, 7800t, straight and level directly over threat.
  

 

• Countermeasures: Delay/deny flare program started at 3.5 miles slant range to target, runs continuously thereafter. Care was taken to ensure the delay/deny flare program is running before the SAM activates and begins tracking.
  

 

• Flight is repeated five (5) times with various levels of countermeasures.
  

 

• Tacview measures slant range to the SA-13 at the exact moment of the SAM launch. Slant range at SAM launch is used as a crude measure of any delay in the launch due to flare employment.
  

 

• Experiments 1-6 were performed with the aircraft throttles set to military power. Experiment 7 was performed with the aircraft throttles set to idle before the SAM activated.
  

3.0 Results

 

3.1 Experiment 1 - No countermeasures with full throttle

 

Slant range at launch: 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.6.

 

3.2 Experiment 2 – 1 flare / 1 s

 

Slant range at launch: 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.6.

 

3.3 Experiment 3 – 2 flares / 1 s

 

Slant range at launch: 1.7, 1.7, 1.6, 1.6, 1.7.

Average slant range: 1.7.

 

3.4 Experiment 4 – 3 flares / 1 s

 

Slant range at launch: 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.6.

 

3.5 Experiment 5 – 4 flares / 0.75 s

Slant range at launch: 1.6, 1.6, 1.7, 1.6, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.6.

 

3.5 Experiment 6 – 3 flares / 0.5 s

 

Slant range at launch: 1.7, 1.7, 1.6, 1.7, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.7.

 

3.7 Experiment 7 – 3 flares / 0.5 s with throttles idle

 

Slant range at launch: 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6.

Average slant range: 1.6.

 

All 35 individual tests (in Tacview format) are provided in the zip file attached to this post.

 

4.0 Conclusions

 

The data shows that the slant range of Experiments 2-7 was identical to the slant range of Experiment 1 (the control).

 

Therefore, if we consider the slant range between the A-10C and SA-13 at the moment of SAM launch:

1. Preemptively employing a ‘delay/deny’ flare program has

no

effect.

2. Flare density has

no

effect.

3. Lowering throttles to idle has

no

effect.

 

5.0 Final thoughts

 

The influence of the Sun in terms of delaying/denying SAM launches was not tested.

 

Suffice to say, if the presence of the Sun does in fact delay/deny SAM launches, I think its effects simply overpower the worthless preemptive flares. In other words, I suspect that the Sun's delay/deny effects (if any) are separate and/or unassisted by flare use.

 

That said, I might be wrong. Maybe delay/deny flare programs only work in presence of the Sun. I've spent enough time on this (:cry:), so perhaps someone else can test it (but please, don't just assert that it works).

Crescendo_preemptive_flare_experiment.zip

Edited February 19, 2014 by Crescendo

[cichlidfan]

Thank you Viper !

Hard data - only thing that matter !

 

There is one other thing that matters. What does the person that wrote the code think is supposed to be happening? Is the current performance 'working as designed'?