FC3 MIG-29 simulated radar

[Svend_Dellepude]

I can't think of much difference in suicide going against four F-15s with MIG radar on and hoping to win at least Pepins idea utilises the only strengths the MiG has over the F-15.

I've used these tactics plenty of times with great success shooting down plenty of squads and 3 ships.

The EOS in DCS when used right is a powerful tool as for the radar it's a bag of..

 

I did not say anything like that. What I said was that without sa your chances of survival is smaller and I believe the radar does that better than the EOS.

Going against three bandits is unwise no matter what but is more convenient to find yourself outnumbered at 40 nm than at 20 if you Know what I mean. ;)

 

But again. If that works for you, who am I to say it doesn't.

[Teknetinium]

Unfortunately not sorry.

 

Just an AAR. It was a really interesting match up.

 

 

 

 

Good old times Frostie.

I would say that Mig-29 need to pick where to fight compere to F-15. EWR/AWAC-support and terrain can make life very hard for any fighter out there approaching Mig-29s.

 

But it would be silly to think that Mig-29 can take F-15 1vs1 over Nevada.

[JunMcKill]

I think Pepin's point is that you do this in a heavy mp environment and certainly don't fly head on against radars, there is a time to use your radar and you shouldn't ignore it but to be stealthy requires radar silence. You'd be surprised how effective and invisible you can be by paying attention to the RWR and EOS whilst using jammers effectively.

 

The MiG in BVR is heavily outmatched the R77 is slower and shorter legged than the 120C plus you don't get a proper TWS to use those qctives effectively. Fighting an intense BVR fight will use up a lot of fuel something the MiG doesn't have a lot of so not ideal if you want to concede the fight.

 

It works in BVR for sure but to take down good pilots there are few options they either need to fix the TWS or you adopt out of the box tactics. And altitude is optional.

 

Where is the information about the R-77 profile and speed? it's supposed that the lattice fins reduce the drag vs the standard fins AIM-120C style, in all internet sites shows the max range of the R-77 as 80km, and R-77-1 as 110km, why in DCS the launch Rmax in game is 30km.

 

It is a simple question guys, not to begin a fight. :pilotfly:

 

RuSH

[GGTharos]

Here's some analysis to answer your question:

 

1. R-77-1 doesn't exist (as far as we know). In any case, you're not in danger of getting it in this game.

2. The 80km range, according to Vympel brochure, comes from an M2 launch against an M2 non-maneuvering head on target at 20000m (numbers may be slightly inaccurate ... but you get the idea)

3. Range of AIM-120A from MiG-29 combat manual under the same conditions is 100km+

 

The lattice fins have less drag in some circumstances, but the missile is overall draggier than an AIM-120 (The R-77 has large strakes and also, it is wider which by itself increases the drag force). You have to look at the entire missile, not just the fins. The overall drag coefficient for the entire missile (when no maneuvering, 0 AoA) is made up by adding nose drag, fin/wing/strake drag and tail drag basically - there's more to it, but you get the idea.

 

As a small point of interest, while the rocket motor is firing, the tail drag is 0 - it's not modeled in this game though :)

 

The rocket motor propellant mass is known, and the rocket motor burn time is known. These parameters are known for AIM-120 as well, but with less precision for burn time.

 

Only fairly simple math is required to see that R-77 is barely competitive with AIM-120A in this case (so AIM-120A-C4), and then instantly out-performed by C5+ (new rocket motor).

 

We don't know if R-77 does any lofting, and if it does not, this further reduces its range compared to AIM-120 (note that high altitude ranges may seem almost similarly long for a lot of missiles - this is because speed loss at those altitudes is slow - ie. drag FORCE is low due to there being less air).

 

Naturally, as you go lower in altitude, the missile's flight distance, and thus missile range, decreases.

 

Despite this, consider that the range of R-27R according to MiG-29/Su-27 combat manuals is around 30-35km at 10000m, but R-77 will fly this distance at lower altitudes IIRC.

 

Electronically, R-77 is allegedly more like AIM-120A (I personally prefer to think AIM-120B).

 

Where is the information about the R-77 profile and speed? it's supposed that the lattice fins reduce the drag vs the standard fins AIM-120C style, in all internet sites shows the max range of the R-77 as 80km, and R-77-1 as 110km, why in DCS the launch Rmax in game is 30km.

 

It is a simple question guys, not to begin a fight. :pilotfly:

 

RuSH

Edited July 14, 2015 by GGTharos

[JunMcKill]

Thanks ggtharos very instructive and comprehensive response!

 

Here's some analysis to answer your question:

 

1. R-77-1 doesn't exist (as far as we know). In any case, you're not in danger of getting it in this game.

2. The 80km range, according to Vympel brochure, comes from an M2 launch against an M2 non-maneuvering head on target at 20000m (numbers may be slightly inaccurate ... but you get the idea)

3. Range of AIM-120A from MiG-29 combat manual under the same conditions is 100km+

 

The lattice fins have less drag in some circumstances, but the missile is overall draggier than an AIM-120 (The R-77 has large strakes and also, it is wider which by itself increases the drag force). You have to look at the entire missile, not just the fins. The overall drag coefficient for the entire missile (when no maneuvering, 0 AoA) is made up by adding nose drag, fin/wing/strake drag and tail drag basically - there's more to it, but you get the idea.

 

As a small point of interest, while the rocket motor is firing, the tail drag is 0 - it's not modeled in this game though :)

 

The rocket motor propellant mass is known, and the rocket motor burn time is known. These parameters are known for AIM-120 as well, but with less precision for burn time.

 

Only fairly simple math is required to see that R-77 is barely competitive with AIM-120A in this case (so AIM-120A-C4), and then instantly out-performed by C5+ (new rocket motor).

 

We don't know if R-77 does any lofting, and if it does not, this further reduces its range compared to AIM-120 (note that high altitude ranges may seem almost similarly long for a lot of missiles - this is because speed loss at those altitudes is slow - ie. drag FORCE is low due to there being less air).

 

Naturally, as you go lower in altitude, the missile's flight distance, and thus missile range, decreases.

 

Despite this, consider that the range of R-27R according to MiG-29/Su-27 combat manuals is around 30-35km at 10000m, but R-77 will fly this distance at lower altitudes IIRC.

 

Electronically, R-77 is allegedly more like AIM-120A (I personally prefer to think AIM-120B).

[Valium]

What about it?

[JunMcKill]

Yeah, this is part of the N019M Topaz radar options, that let you engage two targets at the same time with ARH missiles (R-77), the bad thing is that mode only works without active ECM from the enemy side, differs from the F-15 in TWS that can launch in this mode the AIM-120 to four targets at the same time in a heavy ECM environment.

 

What about it?

[GGTharos]

Unfortunately we know very little about this radar - I have a video of it tracking two targets in TWS (well, HuD view). This is some form of hardware-in-loop test, because the radar and HuD are on the ground, in a room :)

 

We know that the older MiG-29/Su-27 radar processor could not handle enough data in a reasonable amount of time so it is not able to run SNP, which requires a lot of memory and processing (compared to other modes), while dealing with ECM.

Probably the newer radar deals with it better. The problem is that the number of aircraft with that radar is very small - ie. the MiG-29 9.13S model was produced in relatively small numbers and not that much is known about it.

 

 

For the F-15, the information is much more clear, and to give you an idea of the difference between that and the game:

 

In game, if you designate an AOJ strobe you will go 'STT' on it.

In reality, if you are in TWS, it will track the AOJ strobe in STT, like any other target.

If you are in SNIFF, it will track the strobe ... passively.

[Alfa]

 

...Despite this, consider that the range of R-27R according to MiG-29/Su-27 combat manuals is around 30-35km at 10000m, but R-77 will fly this distance at lower altitudes IIRC.

 

Mind you - is this range-quote describing the actual missile performance(aerodynamics/thrust) or just the practical operational limit? What I mean is that IIRC the maximum "datalink" range from a MiG-29 to an inflight R-27R is some 25 km - if you add missile seeker range(with overlap), you would arrive at something like the 35 km.

 

Electronically, R-77 is allegedly more like AIM-120A (I personally prefer to think AIM-120B).

 

Yes IIRC the AIM-120A seeker was not re-programmable, while the AIM-120B was?

 

We know that the older MiG-29/Su-27 radar processor could not handle enough data in a reasonable amount of time so it is not able to run SNP, which requires a lot of memory and processing (compared to other modes), while dealing with ECM.

Probably the newer radar deals with it better.

 

Well "newer radar" :) - its more like the same radar with modifications. Anyway, IIRC the N019M got the new processor from the N010 Zhuk - partly to fix the problems you mentioned and partly to deal with the increased processing requirements for the "SNP-2" mode.

[Weta43]

Presumably most have seen this site...

N019 is the USSR standard model.

 

N019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks "SP" mode.

 

N019EB is an export variant for general export. More downgraded. Less capable TS100.02.06 digital processor. Also lacks "SP" mode.

 

N019M is an updated version, developed as a response to the compromise of the N-019 radar by a US spy. Tested from 1986, it entered limited production in 1991. Slightly lighter than the N-019 at 350kg. N019 has increased ECM resistance, new software, and a more advanced built-in monitoring system. A new Ts101M computer relieves the processor overload problems of the N019, more than doubling capacity to 400,000 operations per second whilst weighing less, just 19kg, and with doubled MTBF of 1000h compared to the 500h of the Ts100. N019M allows two targets to be engaged by active radar homing missiles simultaneously. Range increased slightly to 80km. Originally intended to be fitted to the existing MiG-29 fleet as an upgrade, about 22 aircraft with N019M are thought to have entered service with the VVS.

 

N019ME Topaz Export version of Topaz, slightly downgraded. All Indian MiG-29s have been upgraded to this standard.

 

N019MP is a further modified radar proposed by Phazotron for the MiG-29SMT program. It used a Baguet series processor. The maximum range remained the about the same, but the radar could detect 20 targets simultaneously, track four, and engage two. The radar had also basic air-to-ground functions, like ground mapping mode, acquisition and engagement of sea targets with radar homing missiles, and ground targets with unguided weaponry under any weather conditions, day and night. The NO19MP could generate maps of 15x15, 24x24, 50x50 or 77x77km with a resolution of 15m. Radar imagery could be transmitted via datalink to GCI centres or A-50 AWACS aircraft. Targets visible on the radar map could be designated by the pilot(using a joystick) or ground controller, and used to cue TV-guided missile seekers, whose higher resolution imagery can then be displayed or transmitted to the GCI or A-50 controller as well. Performance against slow flying helicopters was improved as well as resistance to jamming. Uses Doppler beam sharpening techniques. Now superceded by N019M1.

 

N019M1 This latest radar upgrade proposal from Phazotron retains the antenna and transmitter block assemblies but replaces pretty much all the rest of the radar. It introduces new fully programmable digital processing, giving 30-50% greater range in air-to-air search and track. Improved track-while-scan mode, with the ability to continue volume search for new targets while tracking 10. 4 targets can engaged at once with R-77 missiles. 4 different close combat modes are available. Has raid assessment mode, and target class recognition. Air to surface modes include Real beam, DBS, SAR (5x5m), and moving target detection. Can handoff target data to the Kh-31A/Kh-35A anti-shipping missiles. Allows target handoff to TV guided weapons. Collision alarm system. It is being touted as a low cost upgrade for existing MiG-29 operators.

 

Phazotron-Ukraine are offering a UM522 low noise receiver to replace the NO19-09 UHF receiver. This low cost drop-in replacement part increases range 10-20%.

[GGTharos]

Mind you - is this range-quote describing the actual missile performance(aerodynamics/thrust) or just the practical operational limit? What I mean is that IIRC the maximum "datalink" range from a MiG-29 to an inflight R-27R is some 25 km - if you add missile seeker range(with overlap), you would arrive at something like the 35 km.

 

Practical limit. I can re-do the math at some point, but I'm fairly certain that the R-77 has a thrust advantage over the R-27 ... basically a simple case of missile weight to propellant weight ratio. But again, IIRC.

 

 

Yes IIRC the AIM-120A seeker was not re-programmable, while the AIM-120B was?

 

Yes, that is right.

 

Well "newer radar" :) - its more like the same radar with modifications. Anyway, IIRC the N019M got the new processor from the N010 Zhuk - partly to fix the problems you mentioned and partly to deal with the increased processing requirements for the "SNP-2" mode.

 

Most likely. From there on there are questions of the missile-aircraft interface, some of which are very clear for the 120, but there's next to no information for the 77 (specifically what does it do with the M-Link?)

[FLANKERATOR]

My impression with the R-77 in game is that it hardly retains speed compared to the 120. There doesn't seem to be a wide difference in terms of speed and initial acceleration but deceleration-wise, the R-77 slows down much faster, which of course takes a big toll on the range.

 

I've done some quick comparison work with data compiled from Tacview and it did confirm the obvious impression which I have been having when watching those two missiles flying in Tacview.

 

Do you guys think that the Adder is supposed to loose that much speed, that fast?

[GGTharos]

Neither missile should be losing speed quite as fast as they are right now IMHO, but yes, the 77 is a draggier missile and it will hit the brakes sooner.

[FSKRipper]

I don't believe what you say, the R-77 is terrible and have any sense this active head seeker interpretation of the R-77. If we can't do a hit against a head on fighter at 18 km with this missile then this is a non sense simulation of this missile. The Aim-120 is too light to have the current kinematic performance. I think is a clear physic concept missed, this is obvious.

 

You don't have to believe it if you want but as said the developers won't change performance by the wishes of the community, only by facts.

 

You can find a missile mod in the mod subforum but don't expect wonders. If you follow the thread you will find answers to most of your doubts.

[GGTharos]

I don't care what you believe. Do the math and then tell me I'm wrong, rather than talking about what makes you feel good.

What's obvious here is that you like to make things up without backing them up with facts.

Don't pretend to know anything about physics concepts when you obviously haven't even attempted to apply them.

 

I don't believe what you say, the R-77 is terrible and have any sense this active head seeker interpretation of the R-77. If we can't do a hit against a head on fighter at 18 km with this missile then this is a non sense simulation of this missile. The Aim-120 is too light to have the current kinematic performance. I think is a clear physic concept missed, this is obvious.