Vanilla R-60 has all aspect capability?

[SgtPappy]

I was on the Cold War Server the other day and the mission was restricted to certain weapons - no R-60M, R-3R or AIM-9P5. I was fighting against a MiG-21bis and noticed that he fired a missile while I was about 90 degrees relative to his flight path (I was in burner the whole time).

 

From what I gather, there should have been no tone to begin with, and even if there was, it should have gone stupid sometime while I was turning. Is this an error or does the standard R-60 have a limited all-aspect capability? Or perhaps the missiles can track head on even while I am in afterburner?

 

I was sure of the missiles we had that day, I would not get hit, yet this happened:

 

Album here:

https://imgur.com/a/jzFDDQf

Edited January 19, 2019 by SgtPappy

[Mortisrose]

Yeah I checked the missile in single player and the r60 and r60m appear to perform the same, and r60 had a tone head on to target.

[SgtPappy]

Hopped back on the cold war servers and am still seeing this issue. Is the R-60 (not R-60M) all-aspect by design? I have videos and tracks as I have those recording systems working now.

[Schmidtfire]

The R-60 should have limited all-aspect capability. You can get a lock head-on but at a much shorter range than R-60M. Even the M variant should really be limited all-aspect. At release in 2014 Leatherneck had their own R-60M and it could only hit targets from the sides and rear, but not head-on. However this was changed as ED R-60M is all-aspect in DCS.

[SgtPappy]

The R-60 should have limited all-aspect capability. You can get a lock head-on but at a much shorter range than R-60M. Even the M variant should really be limited all-aspect. At release in 2014 Leatherneck had their own R-60M and it could only hit targets from the sides and rear, but not head-on. However this was changed as ED R-60M is all-aspect in DCS.

 

Understood. Do any articles or firing envelopes show that the vanilla R-60 has all-aspect capability?

 

I have been told that there isn't really a discrete change from rear-aspect to all-aspect as missiles just see heat, but that implies an AIM-9P might have a similar capability unless there's some kind of quantitative analysis that shows otherwise.

[Hiromachi]

I have this from Polish manual

 

 

 

 

 

 

And this is for R-60MK for comparison:

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a missile specialist, so maybe you can read more from that than I can. One thing that I know however, is that R-60s are supposed to produce less smoke and flash during launch so in result their launch should be harder to spot. I somewhere have a picture showing comparison of R-3S and R-60.

[nighthawk2174]

hmm if it can still see your burner plume there is a chance that it could track that. In fact that's a big problem a lot of early IR missiles had is they couldn't see the jet and didn't have a "lead program" built in to compensate so they would sometimes pass through the burner plume just out of proxy fuze range. Don't know for certain if the older uncooled R60 could even track you from the inital launch angle but I wouldn't say its impossible just highly highly highly unlikely, the drawings from above show quite well how limited the seeker is. However the second you broke into it I highly doubt it would have been able to keep track of you, especially if you pulled out of burner.

[Schmidtfire]

You also need to remember that missile lock in DCS depends on the module. Example: R-60M all-aspect on Su-25, MIG-29, MIG-21bis but on L-39 it is rear-aspect only to get a lock. AIM-9M all-aspect on Hornet but rear-aspect on Hawk (discontinued). In the case of L-39 it is because R-60M shares lock-on code with R-3S, making it rear-aspect.

 

Hiromachi, those are great documents. I have a live launch video of R-60MK somewhere. Looked very smokey, but maybe less than R-3S. But the smoke could also have been enhanced by contrails from the launch.

[Hiromachi]

That's from one of the technical magazines focusing on Polish post war aviation:

Poland tried to rewire (and manage to do so) MiG-21MFs to provide capability for R-60 missiles (originally only MiG-21bis delivered to Poland at the end of 70s had such capability). The project was called "Jasień" I believe. Prior to rewiring all units, there were some tests carried on how this functions and if it creates any risks.

This also gave an opportunity to launch various types of missiles from the same airframe, as indicated above during trials there were multiple launches of R-3S and R-60s. Now I dont have entire report but merely an article from the magazine, but it clearly points out to a difference in produced smoke and flash. R-3S was very smoky.

[Dehuman]

In the case of L-39 it is because R-60M shares lock-on code with R-3S, making it rear-aspect.

 

Correct but this is for generating the lock tone only. You can fire an R-60M from an L-39 without a tone head on and it will track and hit just as it would from MiG-29A, MiG-21Bis or Su-25.

 

I tried modding the L-39 with R-73 and same thing. No lock tone but will track head on targets no problem.

 

Shortfall is of course that you have to guess.

[Hiromachi]

So what's the conclusion regarding the missiles ?

[AeriaGloria]

I discovered I’m rubbish at reading missile charts for seeker performance:)

[SgtPappy]

I have this from Polish manual

 

I'm not a missile specialist, so maybe you can read more from that than I can. One thing that I know however, is that R-60s are supposed to produce less smoke and flash during launch so in result their launch should be harder to spot. I somewhere have a picture showing comparison of R-3S and R-60.

 

Wow these are awesome, Hiromachi! Thank you. I will have to get some of my Polish friends to decipher this info.

 

EDIT: My friend and I analyzed the plots, and the captions are just saying something along the lines of "range when firing rocket weapon". Hiromachi's first and second plots imply that the R-60 is rear-aspect only unless there are other plots that show a front aspect shot. These plots appear to be for ratios of Vc (launch aircraft speed) over Vm (missile's target speed; i.e. the enemy plane). The other R-60 plot appears to show only the rear-aspect shot missile envelope while the target is maneuvering where 180 degrees again is the tail aspect and the target is maneuvering to the right if viewed from top down (i.e. a clockwise turn on the plot, notation shown as omega_c).

 

However the second you broke into it I highly doubt it would have been able to keep track of you, especially if you pulled out of burner.

 

I have more and more video evidence of the R-60 keeping perfect track on the very very good Cold War 1945-1991 server. No matter what I do (even cutting burner but will have to confirm if it cut in time while I was flying), if the MiG pilot launches close enough right at Rmin, I get hit. I will see if I can do more testing to see if facing the missile directly helps.

 

You also need to remember that missile lock in DCS depends on the module.

 

That seems concerning - but I don't know enough about how the modules are built to comment.

 

So do we agree that the R-60 should NOT track well head-on? :) I think I'm convinced enough to start a petition!

Edited February 4, 2020 by SgtPappy
EDIT: Analyzed missile plots

[Кош]

As far as I've heard, no head-on basically, but a chance of head-on if target is full afterburning and is big and powerful, something in the lines of F-111 of F-14. But its just cool stories not verified by docs.

[SgtPappy]

Yea, it isn't hard to believe, but it seems obvious that the one in-game is far outperforming that. I think we will need more quantitative information.

 

Hiromachi, any chance you can share some of that sweet sweet R-60 manual information? Does any one have more of that kind of data? I had no luck last night trying to find any.

[Hiromachi]

That's all I have really. There is also a description of combat employment of the missiles which basically boils down to this:

 

 

Maximum load of the maneuvering target for seeker to be able to track – 8 G

Maximum load allowed during the launch – 7 G

Maximum load allowed during the launch with a sideslip not exceeding 1.5 diameter of the ball on the turn and bank indicator – 5 G

Maximum launching range of the missile when speed of the MiG-21 aircraft and target is even – 1.5 - 2 km (near the ground)

Minimum launching range – 0.2 – 0.3 km

Acquisition range of the seeker of a target similar to MiG-21 aircraft with silhouette 0/4 :

at the altitudes of 4.000 m to 6.000 m – 4.5 km

at the altitudes of 8.000 m to 10.000 m – 46 km

Time of operation of the missile engine – 3 – 5 s

Time of tracking flight – 17 – 23 s

Time of auto destruction – 26 - 29 s

 

Combat capabilities of the MiG-21bis aircraft in regard to ability to destroy targets in direct maneuvering combat due to employment of R-60 missile are greatly increased. It is due to high tactical and technical properties of the missiles, allowing to achieve following combat possibilities:

practically there are no restrictions regarding acceleration and speed of the attacking fighter (MiG-21bis), happening when launching missiles of other type; it is possible to destroy target maneuvering with acceleration up to 7 – 8 G; requirements regarding accuracy of aiming are reduced.

Zone of possible launch of R-60 missile to a target maneuvering with acceleration of 7 – 8 G practically does not change, meaning that it is possible to enter it without additional maneuvers. R-60 missiles can be launched one by one or in pairs. In order to increase probability of kill, it is recommended to launch them in pairs.

 

 

 

I think the above graphs really give all the necessary information, not sure what else you need ?

[SgtPappy]

That's all I have really. There is also a description of combat employment of the missiles which basically boils down to this:

 

 

Maximum load of the maneuvering target for seeker to be able to track – 8 G

Maximum load allowed during the launch – 7 G

Maximum load allowed during the launch with a sideslip not exceeding 1.5 diameter of the ball on the turn and bank indicator – 5 G

Maximum launching range of the missile when speed of the MiG-21 aircraft and target is even – 1.5 - 2 km (near the ground)

Minimum launching range – 0.2 – 0.3 km

Acquisition range of the seeker of a target similar to MiG-21 aircraft with silhouette 0/4 :

at the altitudes of 4.000 m to 6.000 m – 4.5 km

at the altitudes of 8.000 m to 10.000 m – 46 km

Time of operation of the missile engine – 3 – 5 s

Time of tracking flight – 17 – 23 s

Time of auto destruction – 26 - 29 s

 

Combat capabilities of the MiG-21bis aircraft in regard to ability to destroy targets in direct maneuvering combat due to employment of R-60 missile are greatly increased. It is due to high tactical and technical properties of the missiles, allowing to achieve following combat possibilities:

practically there are no restrictions regarding acceleration and speed of the attacking fighter (MiG-21bis), happening when launching missiles of other type; it is possible to destroy target maneuvering with acceleration up to 7 – 8 G; requirements regarding accuracy of aiming are reduced.

Zone of possible launch of R-60 missile to a target maneuvering with acceleration of 7 – 8 G practically does not change, meaning that it is possible to enter it without additional maneuvers. R-60 missiles can be launched one by one or in pairs. In order to increase probability of kill, it is recommended to launch them in pairs.

 

 

 

I think the above graphs really give all the necessary information, not sure what else you need ?

 

Thanks, Hiromachi. I'm good with your data, I was just wondering if there was anything else for more context.

 

But does this mean the R-60 will be fixed on the MiG-21 or is this not up to you? I expect it's a ED thing.

[Frischi234]

In German, but almost the same:

 

 

[SgtPappy]

In German, but almost the same:

 

 

 

I think you forgot to post the images, Frischi

[Foka1]

its not ED thing ED doesn't have R-60 missile, only R-60M

[Foka1]

I have this from Polish manual

 

 

 

 

 

 

And this is for R-60MK for comparison:

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a missile specialist, so maybe you can read more from that than I can. One thing that I know however, is that R-60s are supposed to produce less smoke and flash during launch so in result their launch should be harder to spot. I somewhere have a picture showing comparison of R-3S and R-60.

 

None of these graphs tell us anything about front aspect capability. First two are for missile performance for rear aspect non maneuvering target. And third is adjustments for maneuvering target.

[Foka1]

Hopped back on the cold war servers and am still seeing this issue. Is the R-60 (not R-60M) all-aspect by design? I have videos and tracks as I have those recording systems working now.

 

In your case you was 90 degrees to the launch platform, which is 3/4 IIRC. And presumably limited all aspect would be possible to see you in some cases. To have constructive discussion here, we need to determine what limited all aspect means, and how it applies to R-60.

[Foka1]

So this source says that only R-60M new seeker Комар-М allowed missiles to be used "at aspects of 2/4 or even 1/4":

 

http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-101.html

 

 

Aspects table for reference:

 

 

 

This implies that before that regular R-60 missile had less capabilities I guess..

[Zweistein000]

So this source says that only R-60M new seeker Комар-М allowed missiles to be used "at aspects of 2/4 or even 1/4":

 

http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-101.html

 

 

Aspects table for reference:

 

 

 

 

 

This implies that before that regular R-60 missile had less capabilities I guess..

 

That inplies that R-60M was not capable of achieving a head on lock. This is useful data. I would as however why is 4/4 90° angle. Does that imply that rear aspect missiles are 5/4 6/4 7/4 and 8/4? Or doI just hace the morning dumb?

[Foka1]

That inplies that R-60M was not capable of achieving a head on lock. This is useful data. I would as however why is 4/4 90° angle. Does that imply that rear aspect missiles are 5/4 6/4 7/4 and 8/4? Or doI just hace the morning dumb?

 

You judge too fast. I didn't research it to that deep yet. But I've thrown it here as food for thoughts..