Chaff and R27(E)R

[GGTharos]

Care to explain? Like I said it's the best way to make sure the enemy radar can pick you up again.

 

You can't use doppler filtering well or at all (which is what IronHand's post alludes to :) )

Any CMs that you release can and probably do move the target centroid aft, resulting in an increase in miss distance.

Any jink you make is likely out-of-plane (if you try to 'tighten your turn into the missile' like many sites suggest, realize they're talking about some rather old, not very maneuverable missiles - a modern missile has no problem with IN PLANE g changes, or at least it shouldn't), which increases seeker settling issues; done right, it causes problems for the fuze also. In basic terms, it increases the miss distance.

 

That, however, is a last-ditch missile defense and it's called that for a reason. Instead most RL missile evasion seems to be countermeasures combined with relatively low/medium g (but very specific) maneuvers to help confuse the seeker.

 

 

Any source for this?

Me. The probability of going after a decoy increases in a look-down situation, as well as getting the possibility of notching.

 

So by this logic it would be ok that if the enemy chaffs, my missile will start to go 90° up into the sky, because the result is the same. I miss.

Rather than 'it's ok', it's more along the lines of 'it's not urgent' IMHO.
Edited November 16, 2015 by GGTharos
Correction for in-plane maneuvers

[GGTharos]

Ray tracing isn't necessary other than for checking LOS. You'll almost always have a better/faster algorithm running off of tables to calculate RCS etc, compared to ray tracing.

 

Naturally, you could make even that more complex. One of the big 'radar things' is the radar cell - I haven't seen any sim model that, nor am I terribly surprised. It is not trivial to code, and it is probably not trivial to make the AI deal with it either (though not impossible in either case).

 

Who is this Spike14 in relation to the sim? I haven't come across anything official to indicate ray tracing was in fact used in real time for the Radar model. Considering 1999 hardware, I'd be amazed if that was the case. Even more so in how no other sim since has done such it seems. I could imagine maybe a model built from ray traced data. Wags was apparently involved with the Janes F-18 development in some capacity.

[blkspade]

Ray tracing isn't necessary other than for checking LOS. You'll almost always have a better/faster algorithm running off of tables to calculate RCS etc, compared to ray tracing.

 

Naturally, you could make even that more complex. One of the big 'radar things' is the radar cell - I haven't seen any sim model that, nor am I terribly surprised. It is not trivial to code, and it is probably not trivial to make the AI deal with it either (though not impossible in either case).

 

I proposed ray tracing as a potentially more accurate way to come a conclusion, but realize implementation probably wouldn't be efficient. Which makes it less likely to be something used in a 1999 SIM. Seemed interesting that it is/was a thing tested for actual military application. A real-time construct would probably be way more useful for debugging.

[Capn kamikaze]

Wags was apparently involved with the Janes F-18 development in some capacity.

 

You could say that....

 

I just posted it to show you that it's not something I just imagined, google it.

[Beamscanner]

Side lobe suppression applies to the transmitting end: the goal is to reduce undirected emissions so as to avoid detection by hostile E-War equipment not being directly illuminated.

 

Inaccurate, just like the rest of your post(which was already hit on by GG).

 

Side lobe suppression is a process for both transmit and receive. Look into monopulse processing, adaptive nulling, spatial adaptive processing, Sidelobe cancelers, digital beamforming (and many more) for insight on how RF energy can be suppressed outside of a main beam (on receive).

 

Yes, even aircraft ingame(f-15/su-27/mig-29) use side lobe suppression techniques on receive to help filter out returns from ground clutter.

 

Cheap missiles(as you say), don't carry all of the compliments of a modern AI radar system. And thus are more susceptible to intense energy outside of their main beam(on receive).

Edited November 19, 2015 by Beamscanner

[Teknetinium]

Its clear that missiles need to track better, or Su-27 will be forced to fly only Aim-7 vs R-27 or aim-120C vs R-77. Why not make missiles track as in FC2? SATAC 2013 was a good example that ER-27 were useless then, it is almost 2016 and there is no response from ED rather then just downgrading missiles every patch. I really hope as well that SU-27 and MIG-29 pilots get some love we deserve.

 

Dedicated Air 2 Air squads are on their knees :) If any ED missile developers are interested, I can send the tracks from SATAC 2013, you to analyse how air 2 air tactics looked FC2 compare to late FC3. The change is to dramatic if you ask me.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Teknetinium

[Chimango]

SATAC 2013 was a good example that ER-27 were useless then, it is almost 2016 and there is no response from ED rather then just downgrading missiles every patch.

 

:music_whistling:

[Ragnarok]

Dedicated Air 2 Air squads are on their knees :)

 

Nah, if you like stall fight

comedy xD Eagle stall fighter.rar

[Teknetinium]

Nah, if you like stall fight

LOL, That' s dramatic, and no go for MP environment, you speed was not slower then 240km/h. IR missiles don't have any flare-filter as well they go for first flare you pop.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Teknetinium

[Ragnarok]

I think it's time to take a sailboat or cessna. Perfect solution. Stall speed 54 mph; 87km/h ,power off, flaps down.

 

chaff chaff, fox 3, ragequit :D

[Boberro]

Why not make missiles track as in FC2?

 

What is your ground to say it was better (read: more realistic) in the ancient times than it is now?

[Nedum]

The ER, ET and 73 missiles could hit enemy planes? :music_whistling:

[*Rage*]

Nah, if you like stall fight

 

That ACMI is just unbelievable. It never ceases to amaze me how aweful (E)Rs have become.

 

Have ED been forced into nerfing ER missiles into oblivion as payback for snowden? :)

Edited November 20, 2015 by ///Rage

[Ragnarok]

I must report to Putin and the Russian army may not use R-27, before it's too late! Omg they don't know that missiles are not working :shocking: :D

Let them return to R-40 or R-3!

Edited November 20, 2015 by Ragnarok

[Teknetinium]

I must report to Putin and the Russian army may not use R-27, before it's too late! Omg they don't know that missiles are not working :shocking: :D

Let them return to R-40 or R-3!

 

Ridiculous!!! Sams in Vietnam had better tracking, Dont ED missile developers think that what is shown i the acmi track will not be exploited in events and championships :) Can ED missile developers show me tactics I should use to counter what is shown in Ragnaroks acmi-track? Or at least confirm that R/ER-27 are broken. Su-27 squads are on our knees for three years already, we can not adapt any further when there is no respect for a missile lunch, plz help us!!!

Edited November 20, 2015 by Teknetinium

[karambiatos]

Ridiculous!!! Sams in Vietnam had better tracking, Dont ED missile developers think that what is shown i the acmi track will not be exploited in events and championships :) Can ED missile developers show me tactics I should use to counter what is shown in Ragnaroks acmi-track? Or at least confirm that R/ER-27 are broken. Su-27 squads are on our knees, we can not adapt any further when there is no respect for a missile lunch, plz help us!!!

 

It's realistic though the brilliantly documented Ethiopian war says so.

[Teknetinium]

It's realistic though the brilliantly documented Ethiopian war says so.

 

"If you're flying US (not UK) aircraft and fire an aim9 you must assume the pK to be 5%. the data suggests the Aim9 has been downgraded between the Falklands conflict and Desert Storm. it's the only data we have to go on, assuming better performance would be guessing games.

 

Ill say it again:

 

pK on its own means nothing.

 

Please try to understand."

Rage.

[karambiatos]

I was being sarcastic.

[Teknetinium]

By the way I need to correct my self, ED has stated that missiles are in the works.

[OxideMako]

Nah, if you like stall fight

 

I'm not an expert, not by a long stretch. However if 15 R-27ERs fired from a head on aspect or very close to it, failing to hit from <20km is realistic, I think ED picked the wrong plane to model.....

 

I understand it was a look-down situation, but 15 missiles. That actually explains a hell of a lot.

 

Can someone from ED actually state something about this? It seems like we would need to know if this is intended behavior or not. (IE will this get better/worse if the missile AFM is still WIP?)

[rami80]

Seems like its still the same after the last update. I also played Ragnarok's track and all the missiles missed again.

[holimoli]

what about heaters, any changes ??

[rami80]

what about heaters, any changes ??

 

First impressions only: It feels like when the flare is out of the seeker's FOV it doesn't lose the lock. But I need to test it more.

[Ragnarok]

It's all the same, no changes. SARH, ARH, IR. I await further...:music_whistling:

[BadHabit]

Today got killed twice by mig ai . head on he fired r-60m..

 

Sent from my HUAWEI G510-0100 using Tapatalk