Missiles useless in version 1.12a?

[aimmaverick]

I have a feeling that I am using first generation missiles from Vietnam era rather than most modern ones in this version. They have become ineffective against air targets which are releasing chaff or hardly maneuvering. Even at longer ranges the missile will go after a single chaff and be wasted. Unbelievable! The air combat is prety much impossible or frustrating now because it doesnt matter in which aircraft you are. I was flying in Mig-29 and fired r-77,r-27 on escaping B-1B and I couldnt hit it. The missiles got spoofed as soon as he released chaff. They are extremely vulnerable to ECM now.

[Pilotasso]

you have to get closer. Fire 1 missile at 20 miles and then fire another at 15. Migs will run out of countermeasures very soon. and if someone is apparently dodging missiles in a straight line just throw him a heat seeker. That will take him out.

[Kenan]

I think russian SARH missiles are modelled pretty realistically. They are not perfect in terms of 100% pk, but if you know how to use them, if you know the right procedures, you can make maximum out of them and you'll soon realise, in online LOCKON, they're very deadly.

 

And, ET is also nice...<runs away from angry mob> :D :D :D

[Pilotasso]

You dont know anything about the R-77 as it was never even been properly tested fully nor even used in combat.

 

Experts still say that the AMRAAM has a better seeker. Even the engineers at Vympel admit this. So be carefull with your "realism aprovals".

 

What hapens in this game is that since the R-77 has a more powerfull motor it will have a faster aproach rate wich causes the seeker to keep a batter grip on the target. But this is due solely to the reason that both msisiles have their seekers 100% modeled the same way in this game.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

You dont know anything about the R-77 as it was never even been properly tested fully nor even used in combat.

:smartass:

 

Experts still say that the AMRAAM has a better seeker. Even the engineers at Vympel admit this.

 

If R/77 is not properly tested how do YOU know how good it is? Also how do YOU know the Kenan DON’T KNOW ANYTHING about the R-77? What is the source of your statement about Vympel engineeres?

[59th_LeFty]

Sometimes I also noticed strange things online, like that:

 

4 AI F-16Cs against 4 clients, head to head on spread line. 3 vipers were busted, and one made it safely after 2 fired R-27Rs. After that, all four MiGs fired ALL their remaining munitions (I fired the 2 R-27s and after catching the evading viper, 4 R-73s in No escape zone), about 10-15 missiles and all of them missed the lonely viper. Most of the missiles were busted by a pair of flares, while the target was always at afterburner. Is THIS right??

[Pilotasso]

:smartass:

 

 

 

If R/77 is not properly tested how do YOU know how good it is? Also how do YOU know the Kenan DON’T KNOW ANYTHING about the R-77? What is the source of your statement about Vympel engineeres?

 

It was stated by someone who knows that ED has sources on this, on one infamous thread I made with about 40 pages. Good luck in finding it.

 

And the R-77 is still in development, with no finished previous versions in service. What has been exported so far are not the final product russia wants to have (of course, "wants" doesnt mean it "can" just yet). Because when you want to export downgraded variants you dont have to worry about if it doesnt have all the finished features.

 

And the same way I cant tell you how good it is , no one can, but I see somebody already saying how well it matches the real thing...duh!

It still doesnt mean the engineers are wrong about it being inferior to the AMRAAM seeker, we simply dont know how good it is the same way we dont know how worse it compares.

 

I dont want to say the R-77 is a weak missile. I would be worried to face a Su-30MKI with 10 of them. Thats for sure.

[Kenan]

You dont know anything about the R-77 as it was never even been properly tested fully nor even used in combat.

 

Experts still say that the AMRAAM has a better seeker. Even the engineers at Vympel admit this. So be carefull with your "realism aprovals".

 

Erm..I suggest you re-read my post again:

 

I think russian SARH missiles are modelled pretty realistically..

 

SARH = Semi Active Radar Homing ie. R-27R/ER/EM

I made no mention of R-77, and to be honest, if you look at my 504th stats, I'm hardly using it. To say the least. ;)

[Pilotasso]

Sorry my mistake. I still think all SARH missiles are too good in this game IMHO, including the Sparrow. With the AMI-7 I suspect I should be more carefull positioning the nose than what is needed in this game since the missile wont have the target locked on at launch but rather has to connect in flight wich requires certain geometric conditions to achieve this, and indeed IRL lots of them flew blind and never connected.

 

Russian R-27's have datalink I think but then they showed worse combat kills than the Sparrow (remenber that the migs targeted by them were pretty much of the same standard as those targeted by AMRAAM's) indicating most likely that the R-27 doesnt have as good a seeker as this game shows.

 

I feel the ER and EM's are so formidable in this game that the only way to escape them is to break radar lock or exploit the games net code.

Online I dont get kills as many times with them because the enemy tends to turn tail when they realise they have been shot at from bigger distances than the AIM-7 would be capable off. The reason why you or me dont get as many R-27's kills is because it betrays your intentions early. I get many Sparrow kills in the F-15 because I know I have to come much closer anyway, and the oponents wont have enough time to turn away in time.

[Raploc]

Russian R-27's have datalink I think but then they showed worse combat kills than the Sparrow (remenber that the migs targeted by them were pretty much of the same standard as those targeted by AMRAAM's) indicating most likely that the R-27 doesnt have as good a seeker as this game shows.

 

Cool any official reports on this? Where can I find these reports? Are these reports written by UN or USA officials? If so where can they be reached?

[Pilotasso]

I have a detailed report on an old issue of air forces monthly.

[GGTharos]

If R/77 is not properly tested how do YOU know how good it is? Also how do YOU know the Kenan DON’T KNOW ANYTHING about the R-77? What is the source of your statement about Vympel engineeres?

 

 

One source is ED.

 

After all is said and done however, to quote a USAF pilot who will remainunnamed: "We have a lot more respect for the adder than most people give it credit for"

 

While there were no specifics mentioned, from the conversation to me it sounds like the 77 is more or less at or a little less than the level of the first-gen amraam, which was -still- pretty deadly.

[Pilotasso]

hehe the USAF has been known to grossely over and under estimate military capability of aircraft in the past. ;)

[GGTharos]

Sorry my mistake. I still think all SARH missiles are too good in this game IMHO, including the Sparrow. With the AMI-7 I suspect I should be more carefull positioning the nose than what is needed in this game since the missile wont have the target locked on at launch but rather has to connect in flight wich requires certain geometric conditions to achieve this, and indeed IRL lots of them flew blind and never connected.

 

The sparrow does have to ride a beam, however the Sparrow modelled in LOMAC is the one with datalink ... it shouldn't be flying off straight, which I just don't get. Maybe it's some sort of early loss of lock.

In GF1 already Sparrow had a -very- high Pk if you consider that it was launched in extreme conditions (ie. Rmax shots against retreating targets etc) ... current generation of Sparrow is very dangerous, and likely fairly immune to chaff.

 

Russian R-27's have datalink I think but then they showed worse combat kills than the Sparrow (remenber that the migs targeted by them were pretty much of the same standard as those targeted by AMRAAM's) indicating most likely that the R-27 doesnt have as good a seeker as this game shows.

 

To be more precice, the E-E debacle showed us that R-27 can't hit squat. HOWEVER ... this may not be a problem with the missile itself, but with the fact that most of the existing R-27's are decades old war-stock which may or may not have been properly stored and reconditioned.

 

I feel the ER and EM's are so formidable in this game that the only way to escape them is to break radar lock or exploit the games net code.

Online I dont get kills as many times with them because the enemy tends to turn tail when they realise they have been shot at from bigger distances than the AIM-7 would be capable off. The reason why you or me dont get as many R-27's kills is because it betrays your intentions early. I get many Sparrow kills in the F-15 because I know I have to come much closer anyway, and the oponents wont have enough time to turn away in time.

 

Actually they're quite vulnerable to chaff, and if you time your evasion carefully they'll never touch you.

[GGTharos]

hehe the USAF has been known to grossely over and under estimate military capability of aircraft in the past. ;)

 

Maybe, but their estimation is more likely to be spot on than yours and mine.

And don't forget, they likely have access to RVV-AE through allies.

[Pilotasso]

The sparrow does have to ride a beam, however the Sparrow modelled in LOMAC is the one with datalink ...

 

I thought that was the cancelled AIM-7P? Or did I made mistake with it being an ARH?

[GGTharos]

The existing AIM-7's have been getting datalink upgrades, IIRC.

[nscode]

Russian R-27's have datalink I think but then they showed worse combat kills than the Sparrow (remenber that the migs targeted by them were pretty much of the same standard as those targeted by AMRAAM's) indicating most likely that the R-27 doesnt have as good a seeker as this game shows.

...or that it's seeker wasn't maintained properly

 

PS: would be cool to see missile failures in lockon :D

[Pilotasso]

FYI the fighters pilots and the missiles were all russian.

[GGTharos]

...or that it's seeker wasn't maintained properly

 

PS: would be cool to see missile failures in lockon :D

Well I'm hoping to see some of those crazy 'early lock loss' missile maneuvers from heat seekers like in Archer F-15 training video :D

 

And yes, that's what I think too, that it's just old, poorly maintained war stock ... mind you because it is also old, it's probably not up to snuff against a modern air force which will at this point be able to properly jam/counter this missile.

[nscode]

Oh, and yes.. it doesn't have to be just the missiles. Since they are SA, the aircraft radar could be to blame too.

 

Our mechanics sometimes had to go the local elecronics store, get some resistors, transistors and stuff and replace radar parts one by one. That.. you don't do to a radar you want to work. You just order the whole replacment board. Can't do that when you're under sanctions, and even if you weren't, got no money for it.

[S77th-konkussion]

Sometimes I also noticed strange things online, like that:

 

4 AI F-16Cs against 4 clients, head to head on spread line. 3 vipers were busted, and one made it safely after 2 fired R-27Rs. After that, all four MiGs fired ALL their remaining munitions (I fired the 2 R-27s and after catching the evading viper, 4 R-73s in No escape zone), about 10-15 missiles and all of them missed the lonely viper. Most of the missiles were busted by a pair of flares, while the target was always at afterburner. Is THIS right??

 

NO, man. . It's AI, scripting, whatever you want to call it. I'm not picking at you- seriously- quit worrying about what happens when AI is in the picture. They are not doing anything that even resembles reality. Super- spoofer chaff, turns that you can't pull, etc etc..

[Kenan]

Well, the fact is, it still takes a lot more skill in LOCKON to make a kill with SARH R27 then to do the same with AIM120 or R77. Modelled as ueber missile or not, I'm quite proud to score a kill like that, and not do a hit and run with Amraam/Adder or even ET.

 

As for the E-E conflict, have you ever thought about the fact that it was a real life-at-stake Air to Air engagement? Would the pilots wait for the "perfect" range to fire those missiles, or would it just be, first sight/LA launch, regardless of the 'perfect' range? I'm sure they didn't want to calculate and take any chances so it's quite possible there was lots of missile spamming out there, just to drive off the enemy.

[GGTharos]

Well, the fact is, it still takes a lot more skill in LOCKON to make a kill with SARH R27 then to do the same with AIM120 or R77. Modelled as ueber missile or not, I'm quite proud to score a kill like that, and not do a hit and run with Amraam/Adder or even ET.

 

As for the E-E conflict, have you ever thought about the fact that it was a real life-at-stake Air to Air engagement? Would the pilots wait for the "perfect" range to fire those missiles, or would it just be, first sight/LA launch, regardless of the 'perfect' range? I'm sure they didn't want to calculate and take any chances so it's quite possible there was lots of missile spamming out there, just to drive off the enemy.

 

Um, the immediate follow-up kills were done with R-73's ... yeah, I think they did what they could to get into 'perfect' range, esp. considering most of their opponents were poorly armed MiG-29A's.

[tflash]

I wonder what data are used in a ACMI range to calculate a kill in dissimilar BVR air combat scenario's.

 

Are they guesstimates of the performance of possible threat systems or are they based on the published data?

 

I suppose it would be wise to use optimistic interpretations if you are training to fight an enemy system. It would be a little unwise to train for an adversary with R-27's "that can't hit anything" or R-77's that are inferior to Amraams.

 

So then I think the same should hold in Lockon, since it is also a simulation. In my view it should try to emulate the threat to its full claimed potential and not to its suppose RL performance.

 

What we learn is that the R-77 seams to have an edge in Lockon, due to the fact, amongst other things, that its speed is higher. This is an interesting outcome of the sim, I think.

 

So IF the R-77 is indeed faster AND it has a seeker performing as claimed, it would be wise to be prepared for it. If it doesn't, well, then you're lucky anyway!

 

In this sense a sim is always realistic, since the computer simulates the parameter conditions that you specify. Add a correct interpretation to it and you have for yourself a good sim.