AIM-9P5 changed?

[Reflected]

Since the latest updates my AIM-9 P-5s are just about half as effective as before. They miss even a target flying straight up, not flaring. They got so dumb, they're nearly useless compared to what they were before. Anyone else noticed this?

[Reflected]

So is it just me? There really was a drastic change, and now all my missiles go stupid. I get a kill for every 4-5 missiles fired - and I am within range and aspect.

[*Rage*]

Post a Tacview

[razo+r]

For me, it's rare but even missiles like the RB-74 fly very close to the target, like really close, doesn't matter if he maneuvers or not, he didn't flare and the missile just flew right past him without detonating...

[shaunwallis21]

same thing here watched my missiles with f6 view pass by a mig 21 like it was just there to say hello.

[rogonaut]

yup same here sometimes its really weird

[Dino Might]

Recently, I have been noticing a difficulty getting tone against MiG21s even rear aspect in afterburner less than 2km away. I suspect net code issues, or something changed in past couple of weeks. I double checked P5s and not Ps loaded. This has been going on on the ACG cold war server.

[Boris]

I've just recently trained on the F-5, having flown the MiG-21 for a while.

 

The performance of the Sidewinders is just terrible, I'm shocked to realize. They're quite bad compared to the R60.

[lemoen]

In total 452 Sidewinders were fired during the Vietnam War, resulting in a kill probability of 0.18.

 

-Friedman, Norman, The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems Naval Institute Press, Anapolis, MD, 1989, ISBN 1-55750-262-5, p. 439.

 

 

You'd expect, on average, a hit every 4 or 5 missiles (Note, this doesn't guarantee a hit if you fire 5), is this different from what you see?

[razo+r]

In total 452 Sidewinders were fired during the Vietnam War, resulting in a kill probability of 0.18.

 

-Friedman, Norman, The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems Naval Institute Press, Anapolis, MD, 1989, ISBN 1-55750-262-5, p. 439.

 

 

You'd expect, on average, a hit every 4 or 5 missiles (Note, this doesn't guarantee a hit if you fire 5), is this different from what you see?

 

Which aim 9 were used in this statistic?

[Boris]

Ok, if that's how it's supposed to be, that's how it's supposed to be.

 

Thanks.

 

I did notice it being worse than that though.

 

I did test it about 5 times yesterday using the air to air quick mission, but I didn't get any hits at all on the enemy F-5.

So no hits out of 10 missiles fired.

 

Admittedly the first attempts were very high angle but I tried getting a better shots in subsequent attempts.

I also took care to uncage the missile to ensure a good lock.

 

I too noticed that the ability to get a good IR lock was inconsistent, sometimes not getting a tone even though my seeker is pointing directly at the engines from the rear.

 

Having used the MiG-21 with R-60m I am used to much better results. Yes, I know it's a more advanced missile, but the difference is night and day.

 

As long as the deflection angle isn't too high and the enemy fails to launch flares, it's almost always a sure hit. Even if the enemy launches flares the missile often manages to connect.

[lemoen]

Which aim 9 were used in this statistic?

 

Ms and Js and I think. Whatever they had in Vietnam. The P is from the the same time period so I wouldn't expect it to be much better.

[Boris]

Ok, so I got a completely different view on the AIM-9P5 in multiplayer yesterday.

 

I took down four MiG-21s with four missiles fired.

[tflash]

Ms and Js and I think. Whatever they had in Vietnam. The P is from the the same time period so I wouldn't expect it to be much better.

 

You might check e.g. this: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Sidewinder-94.html

 

AIM-9P-5 and AIM-9L/M perform WAY better than the stats you mention, which relate mostly to AIM-9B and other early versions.

[lemoen]

I saw that, yes, the Vietnam Sidewinders were the first generation and they sucked. However, I'm not sure even the Ps will get much over 50% if that. Expecting a kill per missile is a symptom of gaming ;-)

[IASGATG]

Not understanding what pK means is what causes people to take data out of context. For example, a missile becoming a hung store counts towards pK.

[GGTharos]

J's, maybe, but their Pk had increased since the D/Es, not to mention Bs. Futher, a lot of misses are attributed to poor understanding of the WEZ in RL. Training took care of that.

 

The P5 is a fairly modern incarnation; the control motors have plenty of power, the seeker has wider gimbals, a stronger motor for the gimbal with a higher tracking rate and improved ECCM. Missiles have replaced guns. Maybe expecting a kill per missile isn't entirely realistic, but when your target isn't doing much to evade, this gets fishy.

 

Ms and Js and I think. Whatever they had in Vietnam. The P is from the the same time period so I wouldn't expect it to be much better.

Edited April 7, 2017 by GGTharos

[Boris]

I also had the problem of not being able to get tone yesterday. I was in prime firing position behind a MiG that hadn't yet noticed me, but I couldn't launch.

 

I checked and re-checked my settings. Weapons were live and wingtip rails selected. I had already successfully launched a missile a few minutes previously.

[lemoen]

Not understanding what pK means is what causes people to take data out of context. For example, a missile becoming a hung store counts towards pK.

 

We don't have a lot of data, which is the problem. The claims from manufacturers for their systems are probably slightly 'optimistic' and missile combat has been pretty much a non-event for decades now. There's been a bit of shooting here and there but not much and certainly not enough to know what the pK is for a given missile system in a given dogfight scenario.

[GGTharos]

There is plenty of data and plenty of missile shots. Training rules tell you what a very good Pk launch envelope is. You don't need manufacturer claims, you just need the test reports which are available for some weapons if you look hard enough. Or at least, you can find out when they were sent back to the drawing board because of disappointing results.

 

The rest we can guess very reasonably.

 

We don't have a lot of data, which is the problem. The claims from manufacturers for their systems are probably slightly 'optimistic' and missile combat has been pretty much a non-event for decades now. There's been a bit of shooting here and there but not much and certainly not enough to know what the pK is for a given missile system in a given dogfight scenario.

[lemoen]

Link? I'd like to see.

 

I won't take too seriously the training shots, those are 'firing solutions' which means the missile seeker was locked onto target. That's only a small part of the equation of actually hitting the target. Like you point out, pK involves a bit more then saying 'bang you're dead'

[GGTharos]

Training shots should be taken quite seriously as they set a bound on the missile's maneuverability, which itself is a huge part of the equation. Pk is 0 if you cannot reach your target.

 

You can troll dtic.mil for information ... I suggest looking for AA-2 employment study and the aim-9J study, I believe you can find both there.

 

While these concern older missiles, you can dig stuff up on more modern missiles also, but it isn't always so easy and the links aren't always available.

 

Link? I'd like to see.

 

I won't take too seriously the training shots, those are 'firing solutions' which means the missile seeker was locked onto target. That's only a small part of the equation of actually hitting the target. Like you point out, pK involves a bit more then saying 'bang you're dead'

[lemoen]

Training shots should be taken quite seriously as they set a bound on the missile's maneuverability, which itself is a huge part of the equation. Pk is 0 if you cannot reach your target.

 

 

 

You can troll dtic.mil for information ... I suggest looking for AA-2 employment study and the aim-9J study, I believe you can find both there.

 

 

 

While these concern older missiles, you can dig stuff up on more modern missiles also, but it isn't always so easy and the links aren't always available.

 

 

Ok I understand now. I misunderstood what you meant by training shots. Yes. Those allow one to start making some model of a missile's engagement zones and pK.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robert31178]

Lol....maybe they made them to match the accuracy of the guns.....

[tflash]

I must say I get good results with the P5 (in single player that is). I never try to shoot it head-on but try to get into the bandits six and find the good angle. That's the whole fun of it. I guess it's way more difficult in multiplayer.