Lofting the missle ??

[mvsgas]

Another thing to keep in mind is all f-16 are different. So maybe F-16 from Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, and Norway Air Forces had different HUD symbology than USAF circa 1998 and their system gave them "lofting"cues. Still, I have not seen anything to point to this, I'm simply guessing now.

Edited March 7, 2016 by mvsgas

[simo1000rr]

Thank you very much for clarifying some info but with that being aside do you think the AMRAAM version that we have in the game is somehow updated that it doesn't need loft or can we loft it before release of the missile? , and if that so to what angle should one loft before release? .

Is it possible to use tacview to see the different or its not possible ?

[mvsgas]

I have not seen a difference or benefit from lofting AIM in FC3, but I do not do as much A2A combat as many other guys here. I'm surprise non have mention their experience. Maybe if we give them time to see the thread they may come in and let us know.

[Sryan]

Lofting would be done in between Raero and Rpi.

 

 

 

I saw no symbols on the HUD for the F15, the diagrams are based on symbology of an F-16. however I tried to manually do it and it worked just fine, the missile even pulled a little extra angle after launch :) unfortunatly killing something at the edge of rpi is impossible in practice in dcs.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Sryan

[GGTharos]

To roll up an answer for you:

 

The AIM-7 loft required the pilot to fly a specific way at least some of the times (eg loft activation automatic if you pitch more than 30deg)

The AIM-120 lofts automatically and you don't have to do anything. Last I read in the -34 it will loft if flight time > 10s, but that's programmable.

 

Regarding the game itself, the loft command - the math behind it - is not well implemented. It actually causes bigger speed loss than the increase it's supposed to provide. Real loft trajectories/programming work much better.

 

I have not seen a difference or benefit from lofting AIM in FC3, but I do not do as much A2A combat as many other guys here. I'm surprise non have mention their experience. Maybe if we give them time to see the thread they may come in and let us know.

[Svend_Dellepude]

The AIM-7 loft required the pilot to fly a specific way at least some of the times (eg loft activation automatic if you pitch more than 30deg)

The AIM-120 lofts automatically and you don't have to do anything. Last I read in the -34 it will loft if flight time > 10s, but that's programmable.

 

IRL I asume and not in DCS.

[mvsgas]

Lofting would be done in between Raero and Rpi.

 

 

 

I saw no symbols on the HUD for the F15, the diagrams are based on symbology of an F-16. however I tried to manually do it and it worked just fine, the missile even pulled a little extra angle after launch :) unfortunatly killing something at the edge of rpi is impossible in practice in dcs.

 

Ok, did the range increase? If it did, is it any different than launching the missile from a higher altitude? Additionally, any chance you could be more specific on the F-16, what country, what year, etc.

[mvsgas]

To roll up an answer for you:

 

The AIM-7 loft required the pilot to fly a specific way at least some of the times (eg loft activation automatic if you pitch more than 30deg)

The AIM-120 lofts automatically and you don't have to do anything. Last I read in the -34 it will loft if flight time > 10s, but that's programmable.

 

Is this on the F-15?

[GGTharos]

Yes, this is on the F-15. I have seen HUD videos of lofting cues for F-18 and F-16 as well, but those were quite old and I have no idea how to find them any more.

[mvsgas]

Yes, this is on the F-15. I have seen HUD videos of lofting cues for F-18 and F-16 as well, but those were quite old and I have no idea how to find them any more.

Like I said before;

They don't "loft" missiles in RL, not anymore AFAIK. They used to"loft" missiles on older system but with new missiles it would be counterproductive.

I will keep looking see if I find anything

[GGTharos]

What's counter-productive about lofting? Lofting solves a lot of problems. At some altitudes lofting might not be required (Take a 50000' shot by F-22 M1.8), but shooting 20000' to 20000' there is a definite advantage in lofting the shot.

 

Again, most of it is automated, you don't have to do anything for the 120 to loft - it does so all by itself.

Edited March 7, 2016 by GGTharos

[Cik]

Ok, did the range increase? If it did, is it any different than launching the missile from a higher altitude?

the answer at least in DCS is no, but then again the AMRAAM in DCS has a much shorter range than it actually should which means lofting doesn't give as much benefit as it should.

 

i don't mean to insult your experience, but the physics seem to make lofting a thing, even if there wasn't a cue on the HUD. if you are at 15000 feet, the drag on the missile is a certain value, if you point your nose up in the air and fire the missile and the missile takes a loft trajectory, it will spend a high percentage of it's flightpath in the higher atmosphere, with correspondingly lower drag, so it goes farther on the same amount of propellant.

 

does this give it a farther range than you would get from launching it at angels 30 to start with? of course not, because it has to get to higher altitude from lower altitude, then coast, then go back down, but it's superior to a nonloft trajectory which takes it through denser air all the way.

 

it seems to me that the longer the missile flies, the more benefit you gain, which is probably why it doesn't work in DCS; the missile ranges are very compressed so any benefit you'd gain from the missile travelling high for awhile are cancelled out by the fact that it has to make abrupt steering commands to point the missile back down towards the target.

[TAW_Blaze]

Videos like this one

and sim communities are the only places I have found mention of "lofting" missiles. Many bomb lofting mention, but no AIM so far.

 

While on the subject of missiles. On videos found online about Air Combat, whether F-14 engagement to the TV series"Dogfights", etc. most RL pilots seem to prefer to go lower than enemy aircraft ( I assume to hide in the ground clutter) while most people in the sim communities want to go up, to give there missiles better range. I wonder why is that?

 

You're confusing WVR and BVR here. Most documentary to be found is about WVR fights and BFM brawls where being lower usually means you're harder to spot, like you said, but it also means you can minimize G load by using pitchbacks or other nose high maneuvers if appropriate. You also can't take away the fact that even in aircraft with close to nonexistant canopy vision obstruction it's still much harder to spot things below your level than above.

 

On the other hand if you're higher than the bad guy you'll be pretty much forced to pull nose low maneuvers where radial G is not much of a friend in terms of keeping your consciousness. This makes you quite predictable and that's no good especially when it's tougher for you to keep track of the other guy than vica versa. If your merge plan is to do a hard sliceback or split S into the bandit and he sees it coming it's almost guaranteed he'll do something where you lose him. If you're doing a split S he could also pull up into you and come back down and you'll be in a tough energetic situation because a) you started slower due to nose low merge plan b) because you probably wasted a lot of energy executing your nose low plan.

 

Some of that also applies in the sim but to a lesser extent because G forces don't affect us anywhere as much as in real.

 

In BVR you want to have energetic superiority in pretty much every case with the exceptions being an ambush or baiting for friends. There might be other restricting factors that force you to fly low but that's about it.

[bolek]

Again, most of it is automated, you don't have to do anything for the 120 to loft - it does so all by itself.

 

OK, but that means that the if the aircraft is flying straight and level then the missile has to turn upwards right after launch, therefore loosing some energy. It stands to reason that there would still be some (theoretical) advantage to pitching the aircraft up before launch. Whether it matters in practice, I don't know (obviously :)).

[GGTharos]

Yes, there is. How much of an advantage, I don't know :)

[Seaeagle]

Videos like this one

and sim communities are the only places I have found mention of "lofting" missiles. Many bomb lofting mention, but no AIM so far.

 

Someone(think it was IvanK) once posted the attached procedure for lofting an AIM-7 from an F-18. As I understand it, late variants of the AIM-7 as well as the AIM-120 did not require any manual procedures(including pitching up the nose of the aircraft), but would automatically enter a lofted trajectory if the right set of circumstances were met.

 

While on the subject of missiles. On videos found online about Air Combat, whether F-14 engagement to the TV series"Dogfights", etc. most RL pilots seem to prefer to go lower than enemy aircraft ( I assume to hide in the ground clutter) while most people in the sim communities want to go up, to give there missiles better range. I wonder why is that?

 

Could be because radars generally are more challenged in look-down situations.

[GGTharos]

Because the bandit radars were not capable of look-down in the cases that we know of.

[mvsgas]

What's counter-productive about lofting?

When I wrote that I am basing my opinion on the fact that I can't find no information the aircraft manuals so I assume to do this you would have to guess the best speed and angle for the lofting.

If we are talking about FC3, same thing, no cues to show best trajectory so it could be counter productive.

Lofting solves a lot of problems.

 

Since I do not do a lot of A2A, what problems does it solve?

 

 

Lastly, any chance you can post the First page of the -34 you have, it should be the page right after the supplements, looking like this

[mvsgas]

the answer at least in DCS is no....

 

You're confusing WVR and BVR here. ...

 

Someone(think it was IvanK) once posted the attached...

:thumbup:, Thank guys

[Oceandar]

In Jane's F/A-18 lofting AIM-7 was modelled, it used to increase range IIRC.

 

Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato

[GGTharos]

When I wrote that I am basing my opinion on the fact that I can't find no information the aircraft manuals so I assume to do this you would have to guess the best speed and angle for the lofting.

If we are talking about FC3, same thing, no cues to show best trajectory so it could be counter productive.

 

FC3 does not model lofting well. It's an algorithm thing.

 

Since I do not do a lot of A2A, what problems does it solve?

 

It increases range, it can solve some radar multi-path issues, as well as defeat robust dives to evade the missile. But it all takes a LOT more guidance programming than we have in-game :)

 

Lastly, any chance you can post the First page of the -34 you have, it should be the page right after the supplements, looking like this

 

Not handy right now, but it's a '95 -34 for the eagle.

[mvsgas]

K

[Sryan]

Ok, did the range increase? If it did, is it any different than launching the missile from a higher altitude? Additionally, any chance you could be more specific on the F-16, what country, what year, etc.

 

It's for the Mid Life Update. I'll have to admit it's from the BMS manual since the real dash 34 manual is classified.

 

I did a little bit of testing. A non-maneuvering Candid at 500-700km/h. 32800 feet (10km) high, deep inside the WEZ of an sa-10 grumble. Came in at 10km myself, mach 1,9. pitched up about 30-40 degrees. I launched about 43nm from the target, around 13km altitude. The DLZ indicated just before Raero. Missile accelerated untill about 5000km/h, climbed up to 15km. coasted a good distance, then dived in, went active and hit the candid with about 1100-1200km/h. So not much energy to spare as they usually go ballistic around 800km/h. When I'm home I'll try to do a level launch at the same speed, range and altitude as the actual release.

[mvsgas]

It's for the Mid Life Update. I'll have to admit it's from the BMS manual since the real dash 34 manual is classified.

 

I did a little bit of testing. A non-maneuvering Candid at 500-700km/h. 32800 feet (10km) high, deep inside the WEZ of an sa-10 grumble. Came in at 10km myself, mach 1,9. pitched up about 30-40 degrees. I launched about 43nm from the target, around 13km altitude. The DLZ indicated just before Raero. Missile accelerated untill about 5000km/h, climbed up to 15km. coasted a good distance, then dived in, went active and hit the candid with about 1100-1200km/h. So not much energy to spare as they usually go ballistic around 800km/h. When I'm home I'll try to do a level launch at the same speed, range and altitude as the actual release.

Thanks

[GGTharos]

Rather than not believing you it's different interpretation. Lofting increases range.

 

At shorter ranges than that mentioned, lofting effectively increases Pk (missile arrives with more energy).