BVR Tactics

[TAW_Blaze]

For reals? You already inferred it earlier through your comments on pursuit curves going for the kill.

 

Example: two aircraft are at significant range. Both are doing 500 knots.

 

a. If both aircraft are pointed at one another, the rate of closure is 1000 knots.

 

b. If one aircraft is pointed 90 degrees perpendicular to the other, the rate of closure on the beam is 500 knots. Ahead of the beam (lead) the closure is better than 500 knots. Aft of the beam (lag), it's worse and the only way to generate real closure is acceleration.

 

c. It stands to reason then, that if one aircraft turns at an angle less than perpendicular, that even if the other aircraft turns in lead, the rate of closure is *less* than 1000 knots.

 

Look at a right triangle. If the aircraft are at the hypotenuse corners, and were closing in pure pursuit on one another, the intercept would be at its fastest possible rate because the distance travelled is the smallest it can be. But if one aircraft turns away and the other turns to pursue, you're extending the amount of distance to travel, meaning that you're also extending the amount of time. Ergo, closure rate is decreased as a factor of the amount of offset.

 

edit:

 

I just realized you meant "Throttle, yes. Angular offset, no." as an answer to "That however will make you less effective offensively.". I thought you meant cranking has no effect on DLZ, which makes no sense at all.

 

I have just horribly failed at comprehension, in my own defense I was really tired though.

Edited February 27, 2014 by <Blaze>

[TAW_Blaze]

It's not bias. We should have AIM-9X's.

 

Don't get me started. :D

 

One thing that we really SHOULD have, is datalink, but that ain't even near until DCS:F-15C is out. :(

 

I find it extremely hard to think of al the parameters when flying without a wingman or two. And in most cases when i finally think about it they are 3 steps ahead already.

Practice, practice, practice. The more you do it the more instinctive it becomes, and you'll do a thousand things without ever thinking about it.

 

But all these smart people intimidate me a little, so i rather learn most of it on my own first before i take the step to join a team or something.

Why? We don't bite. :D

 

What the bigger problem here is that it takes a lot of time and passion. If you don't fly regularly then it's really hard to learn anything. You need to make the same mistake not once or twice till you finally understand what you're doing wrong.

 

Much to your surprise, it is actually HARDER flying with more people.

 

Oh yes, especially at the start. Once you built up your lone wolf instincts, you have to fight them everytime you fly with someone.

Edited February 27, 2014 by <Blaze>

[Oberst Zeisig]

Yeah, that's it the SIM is just what You make of it. Don't be upset and search for simple solutions to get a kill, have fun flying and look at things in tacview or maybe single player with labels on just to get a feeling how things are here and what Your options are, then get creative in using them. That's all about how I did it.

 

The whole thing is getting too theoretic for me anyway. Just look at things how they are now, when things change due to a new modelling of missile AFM look at them then and just adapt. I'm looking forward to do so. :)

[Pyroflash]

Don't get me started. :D

 

One thing that we really SHOULD have, is datalink, but that ain't even near until DCS:F-15C is out. :(

 

There are a bunch of things in the MSIP that I wish we had. Datalink is but one of them. I also want a RADAR that actually works halfway decently. This isn't DCS: Air Traffic Control.

 

Practice, practice, practice. The more you do it the more instinctive it becomes, and you'll do a thousand things without ever thinking about it.

Just don't practice the wrong stuff. It is harder to unlearn than to learn.

 

What the bigger problem here is that it takes a lot of time and passion. If you don't fly regularly then it's really hard to learn anything. You need to make the same mistake not once or twice till you finally understand what you're doing wrong.

Once or twice a week for ~ two hours recommended as a minimum.

 

Oh yes, especially at the start. Once you built up your lone wolf instincts, you have to fight them everytime you fly with someone.

Well, not EVERY TIME. Fair enough though, it is pretty difficult to start thinking of yourself as not just yourself. Once you have a wingman out there, a whole new world of options opens up to you. The only issue is that you might be a little skiddish at first because it is hard to think that way. Typically communications are the first thing to break down. Even when you start to realize that he's there, you don't really know how to best take advantage of anything another person brings to the table so you end up hanging along for the ride.
Edited February 27, 2014 by Pyroflash

[TAW_Blaze]

/comment deleted due to a request/

Edited February 27, 2014 by <Blaze>

[Frostie]

When you go from lone wolf to being in a flight, especially a four ship, one of the toughest parts is staying disciplined, its so easy and tempting to go chasing a bandit, hide low in a notch and do your own thing, but when that happens it can quickly destroy a flights SA. As a 4 you want to control the airspace, to do this requires the flight stays in shape, co-ordinated with clean comms. This allows every member to have the confidence to visualise the flight and have a good SA on the shape. Tacturns are the staple diet in our trainings this allows new guys to get a feel for staying in shape without having the need to acquire a visual.

 

This is what makes it more enjoyable in my opinion, its easy but messy to fly loose and call bandits and extends without any shape, but to fly with constant co-ordination will eventually break up a mess of bandits with superior SA, on the flip side it can quickly become a disaster if out of practice.

 

This for me can make an average group of guys a much tougher unit and is the main reason we fly in the 51st.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Frostie

[Axion]

Absolutely Frostie, this is what all virtual Fighter Wings should aspire to. The satisfaction gained by working together as a well oiled machine and achieving results, is second to none in my opinion. It's the discipline and practice that ultimately wins the day.

[Exorcet]

That's a different thing IMO. A jet has relatively infinite power compared to a missile, and when you start the drag the motor's usually burnt out already. So again you make it slow down quicker while you're keeping up your speed if not increasing it. That in theory will reduce the effective range it can travel, while you're pretty much flying the same distance away from it. That would imply you reduced it's range, wouldn't it?

A missile has limited energy yes. That energy is only forever lost to friction. Gravity only stores/releases energy. If you reduce fiction, you reduce energy loss (fly higher when possible).

 

The missile's source of energy comes from its fuel and launch platform. Fuel is fixed. Launch platform may not be. You gain 0 energy from SAM at sea level. A fighter at 30000 ft that isn't moving adds about 10 million joules of energy. A missile at ~ Mach 3 has about 50-75 million joules of kinetic energy (and the KE at peak speed is equal to the chemical fuel energy outside of friction losses and gravity storage). Just being carried by a blimp can give 20% more energy to the missile. That 120% energy will then deplete more slowly if the missile cruises at altitude. If the missile doesn't cruise, then gravity is helping it against the denser air (this is accounted for with the extra 20% energy) while a ground launched missile is fighting gravity and friction (technically, there is no loss with gravity, but if the missile is lower than the target there is no chance at an intercept).

 

Note the bit about gravity in the last paragraph. If you lower your altitude, you increase the energy advantage the missile has over you. It's equivalent to giving the missile more fuel/longer burn.

[TAW_Blaze]

I'm pretty sure drag outweights a fraction of 1G at those speeds.

[BadK]

Great discussion here, guys! Can't wait to see how the higher-alt stuff as mentioned earlier is modeled within DCS: World in the near future.

[GGTharos]

I'm pretty sure I can glide an F-15 about 1nm/1000' altitude, and that sucker's a whole lot draggier than a missile. Even the big fat Phoenix can stay supersonic all the way down to the ground in a loft-glide intercept.

 

I'm pretty sure drag outweights a fraction of 1G at those speeds.

[TAW_Blaze]

That has nothing to do with this. The point is that the drag will make it bleed more speed than what the extra fraction of a G would benefit IMO. Assuming the missile doesn't loft and doesn't hold on to it's altitude.

[GGTharos]

It has everything to do with it :)

 

That has nothing to do with this. The point is that the drag will make it bleed more speed than what the extra fraction of a G would benefit IMO. Assuming the missile doesn't loft and doesn't hold on to it's altitude.

[Exorcet]

I'm pretty sure drag outweights a fraction of 1G at those speeds.

 

Really rough, if I assume a CD of .5, AMRAAM's terminal velocity at sea level density is about 2125 mph (M 2.8) if the fuel fraction is ~.5. I don't know what the CD is at supersonic speed though, so if you want to make it 2, you still get to 1000 mph. That same 2.0 CD means that if the missiles is in a 10 degree dive drag stop slowing it down at ~450 mph.

 

I'm pretty sure I can glide an F-15 about 1nm/1000' altitude, and that sucker's a whole lot draggier than a missile. Even the big fat Phoenix can stay supersonic all the way down to the ground in a loft-glide intercept.

 

Gliding is more about L/D and the F-15 should win that contest easy. Lofting is about removing the need for L at all and lowering D by flying high as you know. While the plane glides better, the missile should loft better. Hopefully we can test this with F-15 AFM soon.

 

Bringing up gliding is still a good point to make though. Set up a mission in the ME with a plane flying a constant speed and altitude. See if you can catch it starting from 600 knots with only 20 seconds of fuel allowed. Then make it dive and see if it gets easier. It won't be exact science since the plane isn't a missile, but it should demonstrate the point.

[winchesterdelta1]

The advice helped me out a little bit. Maneuvring before even fioring a shot made me survive way longer. And TWS shots at around 14nm gave me some great kills. It also helped to have a buddy with me. But we both have to grow some disipline and we both have no clue how to work effectivly as a team yet.

TWS shots make the bandit do way more aggresive evasive maneuvres, buying me some time or actually hit them at ranges above 10nm.

I need more of this BVR talk :)

 

Anybody has some good advice or pointers on how to maneuvre with a wingman in a BVR/WVR fight?

Edited February 28, 2014 by winchesterdelta1

[winchesterdelta1]

Is this any good reference to start with? It's an old USAF instructional Film from the 1960s.

 

[FLANKERATOR]

The advice helped me out a little bit. Maneuvring before even fioring a shot made me survive way longer. And TWS shots at around 14nm gave me some great kills. It also helped to have a buddy with me. But we both have to grow some disipline and we both have no clue how to work effectivly as a team yet.

TWS shots make the bandit do way more aggresive evasive maneuvres, buying me some time or actually hit them at ranges above 10nm.

I need more of this BVR talk :)

 

Anybody has some good advice or pointers on how to maneuvre with a wingman in a BVR/WVR fight?

 

Tacview is worth a thousand words, scroll down, download and watch the Final, it's a good example of teamwork and F-15/Su-27 rivalry in DCS:

http://forum.51st.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2703

[TAW_Blaze]

No, tacview is worth a lot more than a thousand words. :D

[TaliG]

Nice thread.

I would like to ask what would you do if you where in a rusian plane, BvR with an f15,

1vs1, and the 15 comes towards you launching aims every 5 secs.

If he is not going to take evasive manoeuvres he is destined to die, Is there any other tactic to fight this guy?

I mean, the only way you ll now he is a suicide guy is when you see him coming towards you with out making any defensive manoeuvres.

But again how is it possible to know how many amraams did he launched towards you even if he took the defensive maneuver (180degs) so you can turn back and soot the ''good one'' ?

[blkspade]

Nice thread.

I would like to ask what would you do if you where in a rusian plane, BvR with an f15,

1vs1, and the 15 comes towards you launching aims every 5 secs.

If he is not going to take evasive manoeuvres he is destined to die, Is there any other tactic to fight this guy?

I mean, the only way you ll now he is a suicide guy is when you see him coming towards you with out making any defensive manoeuvres.

But again how is it possible to know how many amraams did he launched towards you even if he took the defensive maneuver (180degs) so you can turn back and soot the ''good one'' ?

 

This depends very much on the pilot, but most the time you'll have at least/most 2 120s inbound. The F-15 is highly unlikely to make a 180 1v1 unless the Russian pilot it firing R-77s, even then its not guaranteed. That's also assuming he didn't waste his entire load on you, from outside of 15nm.

[Oberst Zeisig]

That has nothing to do with this. The point is that the drag will make it bleed more speed than what the extra fraction of a G would benefit IMO. Assuming the missile doesn't loft and doesn't hold on to it's altitude.

 

This is a good thread and leads to some fundamental understanding of myself, even if I keep having troubles with my english .... and mental flexibility ;). But I´m beginning to understand the missiles suffers more from denser air when diving then it gains from its potential energy while diving at a certain angle.

 

Gliding is more about L/D and the F-15 should win that contest easy. Lofting is about removing the need for L at all and lowering D by flying high as you know. While the plane glides better, the missile should loft better. Hopefully we can test this with F-15 AFM soon.

 

Like an archer arrow then, which needs aerodynamics only for stability.

 

Bringing up gliding is still a good point to make though. Set up a mission in the ME with a plane flying a constant speed and altitude. See if you can catch it starting from 600 knots with only 20 seconds of fuel allowed. Then make it dive and see if it gets easier. It won't be exact science since the plane isn't a missile, but it should demonstrate the point.

 

Also interesting point for understanding and regarding that a missile suffers even more from denser air when turning in it in stead of just lofting due to its much worse aerodynamics which are only built to have little drag and not to produce lift.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Oberst Zeisig

[Oberst Zeisig]

Nice thread.

I would like to ask what would you do if you where in a rusian plane, BvR with an f15,

1vs1, and the 15 comes towards you launching aims every 5 secs.

If he is not going to take evasive manoeuvres he is destined to die, Is there any other tactic to fight this guy?

I mean, the only way you ll now he is a suicide guy is when you see him coming towards you with out making any defensive manoeuvres.

But again how is it possible to know how many amraams did he launched towards you even if he took the defensive maneuver (180degs) so you can turn back and soot the ''good one'' ?

 

You coordinate Your maneuvers to him just referring to Your distance to him (rwr), so its no matter how many missiles he launched, it even doesnt matter if he launched at all (tws shots you don´t know about btw), as air combat is about defeating missiles still on the rails, if it´s no totally wasted shot at 15nm but these are riduculously easy to defeat.

[GGTharos]

Actually it's aerodynamics are very, very good for what it needs to be doing. The maneuverability of a missile at speed is downright scary - missiles are capable of pulling enough g to destroy themselves and they are prevented from doing this by limiters.

 

An AIM-9 (a missile on which we have some of the best data available) can pull more than 40g at sea level, and can reach out and touch your plane at 3-4nm at that altitude, and 10nm at 30000' (head on, requires target to have AB on for the seeker to lock on). This is a non-lofting missile, and it is a LOT draggier than an AIM-120 or AIM-7.

 

Also interesting point for understanding and regarding that a missile suffers even more from denser air when turning in it in stead of just lofting due to its much worse aerodynamics which are only built to have little drag and not to produce lift.

Edited February 28, 2014 by GGTharos

[GGTharos]

No, it's obsolete even for BFM. Fighting wing is still used as necessary, but it is one of the formations and nothing like 'the main thing'. That's not to say the video isn't useful, it gives you some ideas but again - it's one of the very many things that can be done, and not even the best one. It's tactics for guns ONLY, no missiles - and even then loose-deuce is usually a much better mindset instead of fighting wing.

 

Speaking of which, I saw you flying and you don't even fly FW properly - you fly some form of trail with your wingnut stuck out to the left or right of your HUD, right in the path of your weapons.

 

'But GG, it's comfy I don't have to turn my head' ... not an excuse, in fact, a horrible, terribad reason. Your head's supposed to be on a swivel clearing everyone's six. And you've got missiles in the equation ... so ... why are you anywhere near your wingman?

 

As far as FW goes and BVR, or even BFM, ask yourself this ... why is it that you've turned two radars and two missile platforms into a single platform by stringing out your formation like that?

 

Sadly I don't have very handy examples to show you what happens when you insist on flying 'as one', but suffice it to say that the other two-ship will happily 'break up' for you, as shown in this video, and the guy you are not after will come around and gun you both while his buddy drags you.

 

I suggest you read Robert Shaw's book as a minimum: http://www.amazon.ca/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

 

There is a lot written about BVR tactics on various websites. None of it is enough for you to really learn, there are no particularly in-depth explanation of anything, but they should at least be somewhat helpful, and better than nothing.

 

Realistically, you need to start by learning to fly your plane and fly formation (and I don't mean a single formation) before you can employ those in combat ... these lessons start before any weapons are ever used or considered for use. Most people don't get to do anything like that.

 

Is this any good reference to start with? It's an old USAF instructional Film from the 1960s.

Edited February 28, 2014 by GGTharos

[blkspade]

Actually it's aerodynamics are very, very good for what it needs to be doing. The maneuverability of a missile at speed is downright scary - missiles are capable of pulling enough g to destroy themselves and they are prevented from doing this by limiters.

 

An AIM-9 (a missile on which we have some of the best data available) can pull more than 40g at sea level, and can reach out and touch your plane at 4nm at that altitude, and 10nm at 30000' (head on, requires target to have AB on for the seeker to lock on). This is a non-lofting missile, and it is a LOT draggier than an AIM-120 or AIM-7.

 

I've been getting impressive results out of the AIM-9s lately. There was a time where it felt detrimental to even bother with them, but now I basically never leave home without them. I got like a 6nm kill from medium altitude the other day. My sparrows are now in the wildcard position.