F-15 useless against EOS

[JNASova]

Radar missiles as they stand in 1.2.7 are a joke. IR technology and visually acquiring targets owns the game right now.

 

I would not agree entirely with this.Radar missiles are not allmighty in real life,and same at Lock on at this moment.No more FC 2 lucky shots with AIM 120 C at 40 KM.Now,you have to come closer,where enemy also has "solution".You must to build position for you self,need knowledge and expirience.

Things are much better now.

[Bandit.]

also, get used to looking out of the cockpit. in most situaions you should be able to see the missle plume after an et launch. its not ideal but it works. et's are easy to dodge. the problem is knowing if one has be launched

[TAW_Blaze]

I would not agree entirely with this.Radar missiles are not allmighty in real life,and same at Lock on at this moment.No more FC 2 lucky shots with AIM 120 C at 40 KM.Now,you have to come closer,where enemy also has "solution".You must to build position for you self,need knowledge and expirience.

Things are much better now.

 

You obviously never saw a single ACMI. When you end up having a missile fired at angels 40 at a target flying in the dirt inside 15 miles and the slammer lofts 20 dgr nose up then pulls vertically down and blows all of it's speed the only thing you can do is facepalm really. There are n+1 other scenarios where the missile flies completely retarded and misses due to that. Some of them are guidance issues, others are network related.

 

Not trying to bash the ED developers, just pointing things out.

[JNASova]

also, get used to looking out of the cockpit. in most situaions you should be able to see the missle plume after an et launch. its not ideal but it works. et's are easy to dodge. the problem is knowing if one has be launched

 

Thats right.

[JNASova]

You obviously never saw a single ACMI. When you end up having a missile fired at angels 40 at a target flying in the dirt inside 15 miles and the slammer lofts 20 dgr nose up then pulls vertically down and blows all of it's speed the only thing you can do is facepalm really. There are n+1 other scenarios where the missile flies completely retarded and misses due to that. Some of them are guidance issues, others are network related.

 

Not trying to bash the ED developers, just pointing things out.

 

I have Tacview program.Things what are you talking abouth sounds more like technical problems with modeling.Cant understand fully,but i think i get the point.

I dont say it is perfect,but it is better than it was.

Keep in you mind guys that we have here missiles from `80,not 21-st century.

[TAW_Blaze]

120C ain't from the 80s. Not sure about the R-77. :D

[pyromaniac4002]

Well. We sukkhoi pilots have the EOS.

 

 

.... you have Fire&forget Amraam.

 

Correction: We Eagle pilots have "fire & forget about it hitting outside of 10 nm AMRAAM."

[GGTharos]

What you're not getting is this: You should be at a severe disadvantage against an AIM-120 equipped aircraft. 40km kills should be achievable with moderate success against evading targets. Get to 25km and you should have no escape other than to notch.

 

Get it dropped from great height and with great speed, and these speeds open up. The R-27 series, even if the bigger boost motor, are not capable of competing with the 120 series. That's why the R-77 was made, and while it has some disadvantages compared to a 120, it is much more feared and much more capable than an R-27. Again, not represented in-game.

 

So yes, there are a lot of modeling problems - but they're not just with the 120.

 

I have Tacview program.Things what are you talking abouth sounds more like technical problems with modeling.Cant understand fully,but i think i get the point.

I dont say it is perfect,but it is better than it was.

Keep in you mind guys that we have here missiles from `80,not 21-st century.

[JNASova]

GGTaros - More less I agree.(Hoppe I understud OK)

Blaze,my friend helped me to translate your post.

I dont found much strange.You was very high,target very low.Missile had interuptions from the ground.It is possible to mist,especialy if target do sharp turnings or go defansive for some time.Dont know how all that is modeled at 1.2.7.

[GGTharos]

Sharp turns should not help. The only thing that should help is to get in the notch and stay in the notch.

[JNASova]

120C ain't from the 80s. Not sure about the R-77. :D

 

Yes `90 s,not `80s.My mistake.

[TAW_Blaze]

Point is that I didn't lose the lock till pitbull and the missile itself didn't lose lock after either, that was very obvious from the tacview. So what happens is that the missile pulls a full retard move and then tries to correct it instead of not doing it in the first place. Might be a fault of logic with lofting, you should never loft in a close range high-to-low shot because it's both unnecessary and unfavorable.

[*Rage*]

When did 8nm become 25km?

[JNASova]

It will be interested to see situation afther IRST for F 15 is done.

Data link with AMRAAM?

Sukhois geting ability to fire ET with PPS mod?

Perhaps this is the calm before the storm?

[GGTharos]

I don't think we will see an IRST for F-15. Some F-15Cs have one, but it is a very recent addition and the order was cancelled after a bunch of units were fielded.

 

Really, what needs attention is the radar on the F-15 itself and the guidance logic on the AIM-120, as well as the airplane-missile datalink.

 

Same stuff applies to R-77, and a few of the older missiles (older missiles have a subset of the features of the most modern ones, so model the best one you can/know how to, and you're able to do things for the others).

 

Regarding the topic of the thread, yes, EOS should be a real concern in ambush situations or if you are defensive (it doesn't matter what plane you are flying :) ). In a fight that starts 'fair' though, the EOS shouldn't really be a concern. Mind you, this doesn't account for things that players do, like chase people into mountains etc.

 

 

It will be interested to see situation afther IRST for F 15 is done.

Data link with AMRAAM?

Sukhois geting ability to fire ET with PPS mod?

Perhaps this is the calm before the storm?

[will-]

 

Really, what needs attention is the radar on the F-15 itself and the guidance logic on the AIM-120, as well as the airplane-missile datalink.

 

 

I couldn't agree more, but this is just my opinion for what i presume this radar is capable of..

 

as far as the 77th server goes, I would say any server that does not model awacs or a EWR and has a Air-to-Air role in it... well migs (inc su's) suffer. F-15's i feel have the air superiority at that point.

 

If you want to know how or why I can easily explain my reasons. Now I cannot agree w/ OP at all. But think EOS is highly exaggerated in the game, as a few people have already mention to the recent changes to EOS. IE someone in afterburner you can see them across the world essentially. If the migs MFD is not cluttered with recent kills/past kills and showing all friendlies and bandits.... really?? your just plucking things out of the air all day long kinda feels like a video game(no pun intended)... but i degrees.

[Frostie]

Yes EOS feels arcade right now and I'm struggling to find the desire to fly Russian fighters because of this balls up. It's a double edge when you have a godlike view without radar but have to sift through a muddle of contacts from 10-200 km, I long for the FC2 EOS that was just a backup to the BVR engagement rather than the primary sensor it virtually is now.

 

The AIM-120C-5 in DCS is a 21st century missile and its clear to most that all missile trajectories need addressing. Most understand that the real C-5 should be a superior weapon to the R-27 in regards of technology and also radar/datalink/ins on missiles is either poor or not modeled. But if we are to have a more realistic AMRAAM then that should go hand in hand with a more effective jammer. Right now all we have is a very basic version of barrage jamming, if you're going to up the complexity of offensive weapons then these modern aircraft need equally realistic counters. Adding deception and DRFM jammers should result in jamming being much more effective against TWS, STT and active missiles.

 

The balance of realism level should remain equal, is it now, real world missle Pk figures would tell you it's not too far off.

[TZeer]

Yes `90 s,not `80s.My mistake.

 

Both yes and no.

 

AIM-120B are from the 90's, deliveries began in 1994.

 

AIM-120C came in 1996, but they have been upgraded multiple times. AIM-120C-7 was tested in 2003 and I believe is the one that is being exported.

 

Which one DCS models I don't know.

 

But there is a big difference in between the different models.

 

There's also the AIM-120D, that came in 2008, but is not yet modeled in DCS World.

 

Small edit:

 

I see Frostie posted that it's the AIM-120C-5. If that's the case, that one came in 2000, so no longer 90's missile.

Edited March 9, 2014 by TZeer

[otto]

Yes EOS feels arcade right now and I'm struggling to find the desire to fly Russian fighters because of this balls up. It's a double edge when you have a godlike view without radar but have to sift through a muddle of contacts from 10-200 km, I long for the FC2 EOS that was just a backup to the BVR engagement rather than the primary sensor it virtually is now.

 

The AIM-120C-5 in DCS is a 21st century missile and its clear to most that all missile trajectories need addressing. Most understand that the real C-5 should be a superior weapon to the R-27 in regards of technology and also radar/datalink/ins on missiles is either poor or not modeled. But if we are to have a more realistic AMRAAM then that should go hand in hand with a more effective jammer. Right now all we have is a very basic version of barrage jamming, if you're going to up the complexity of offensive weapons then these modern aircraft need equally realistic counters. Adding deception and DRFM jammers should result in jamming being much more effective against TWS, STT and active missiles.

 

The balance of realism level should remain equal, is it now, real world missle Pk figures would tell you it's not too far off.

 

I could not agree more.What is the point of realistic missile behaviour without jammers.

[TAW_Blaze]

I'm all for better ECM, would add so much variety in BVR. But I can imagine how heavily these things are classified. :D

[otto]

I'm all for better ECM' date=' would add so much variety in BVR. But I can imagine how heavily these things are classified. :D[/quote']

 

Ok but without ECM it's pointless to have realistic missile behaviour isn't it ?

[Pyroflash]

While I agree with the remark about more effective jammers being necessary, there is a stipulation that when you go down that road, you need to start looking at other things like ECCM. I mean, arguably, it might not even matter what kind of jammer an Su-27S has. For all we know, the real APG-63 may be able to completely defeat it. Same goes for the AIM-120C. Nobody really knows, and the people who do know, aren't saying anything.

[Exorcet]

While I agree with the remark about more effective jammers being necessary, there is a stipulation that when you go down that road, you need to start looking at other things like ECCM. I mean, arguably, it might not even matter what kind of jammer an Su-27S has. For all we know, the real APG-63 may be able to completely defeat it. Same goes for the AIM-120C. Nobody really knows, and the people who do know, aren't saying anything.

True, but I can settle with some realistic creative license. One of my biggest issues with ECM as it is now is how it's even displayed on screen. If it works the same way in real aircraft I'd think the people programming the display would work for the enemy.

 

Any jammer on screen basically shields anything along its bearing. It's one thing to say that a jammer could effect your ability to detect other targets, but it clearly doesn't in the sim, if a non jamming aircraft is in front of a jammer, you see it clear as day, but trying to lock on results in you locking the jammer. Whatever the behavior of jammers, unless this is confirmed to be realistic, that should change.

 

Regarding things like ECCM, it depends. Do you want a viable jammer model or do you want to create exactly the EW component of F-15 vs Su-27. Ideally I'd like the latter, but we're dealing with a desktop sim, corners are cut everywhere out of need. A more believable jammer model is good enough for me. Falcon's made more sense in my opinion, though I'm not expert on the matter.

[GGTharos]

Most understand that the real C-5 should be a superior weapon to the R-27 in regards of technology

 

The 120A should be. The C is ages ahead of that already.

 

But if we are to have a more realistic AMRAAM then that should go hand in hand with a more effective jammer.

 

A more realistic jammer.

 

Adding deception and DRFM jammers should result in jamming being much more effective against TWS, STT and active missiles.

 

Adding DRFM jammers would mean you could forget about using 27R/ERs. And you wouldn't get one anyway, since you don't have an aircraft capable of carrying one.

DRFM jammers aren't effective against TWS. No jammer other than a noise-jammer is, because SPJs operate automatically and based on being attacked - ie. locked in STT.

 

The balance of realism level should remain equal, is it now, real world missle Pk figures would tell you it's not too far off.

 

If you really want to talk about real world missile Pk figures, 60% of 120's should hit, and 5% of R-27's should hit - if you really want to go there, that is.

[Frostie]

If you really want to talk about real world missile Pk figures, 60% of 120's should hit, and 5% of R-27's should hit - if you really want to go there, that is.

The USAF has fired 13 AMRAAMS BVR and achieved 6 BVR kills with the AMRAAM, that equals a Pk of 0.46 against non maneuvering enemy without countermeasures and sometimes without radar and this is with US numerical superiority.

 

The EE war was very different scenario, a face off between similar opposition, Su-27 and MiG-29A who engaged each other and defended themselves with equal aggression. The Pk of the R-27R was diabolical and really resulted in forcing the opponent defensive so they could chase down and finish off with R-73, pretty much like it is in DCS. Have you ever tried R-27R/R-73 battles in DCS/FC? It's the EE war all over again.

 

 

Adding DRFM jammers would mean you could forget about using 27R/ERs. And you wouldn't get one anyway, since you don't have an aircraft capable of carrying one.

DRFM jammers aren't effective against TWS. No jammer other than a noise-jammer is, because SPJs operate automatically and based on being attacked - ie. locked in STT.

 

 

Nonsense, deception jammers react to radar reflections, threats, the radar signal is received, delayed, amplified, modulated, and retransmitted back to the radar, STT or not. What would be the point of a deception jammer if you appear on the bandits radar in the exact same spot that you are.