Fox 2! AIM-9M perf on F-14B compared to Hornet & Harrier

[*Aquila*]

There's a lot to be said about the AIM-7M, but I often had and heard some bad feelings about the AIM-9M on the F-14B. So I decided to do some testing with three planes using this missile: the Tomcat, ED's Hornet and Razbam's Harrier.

 

The conditions were: on Caucasus, own plane flying northward. F/A-18C target (AI excellent, set to evade fire, weapons hold) flying westward. Time of the day: 08:00 local. 21 june, temp 20°C

Solid lock acquired via boresight (Hornet) or SEAM (Tomcat, Harrier), so no radar fire control involved. Fox-2 launch at 2.5 nm. In those conditions, the splash happens just after the missile has reached its maximum speed and the rocket engine stopped.

 

For each plane, I recorded 30 successive shots, registered in chronological order. Each shot has its Tacview file (see attachment below). And I did some statistics.

 

First, the Tomcat.

 

 

The Hornet.

 

 

The Harrier.

 

 

Hope it helps. How relevant is the sample is always a subject of debate. When you realize 30 shots for each plane, get the same success ratio with two planes and 6,67% less with a third one, is the difference (2 more missiles eating flares out of 30) noticeable?

 

I also noticed that with each plane, I had 1 time 4 flare eaters in a row. 3 flare eaters in a row happened 1 time with the Harrier, 1 time with the Hornet and 3 times with the Tomcat. When you get such a 3 or 4 failures chain, it really feels like the missile is useless. But stats say otherwise. 43 to 50% PK against a target maneuvering and launching flares is far from rubbish.

DCS-AIM-9M.zip

Edited October 16, 2019 by *Aquila*

[S. Low]

Seems like a decent test to me, and matches my anecdotal feelings on the 9M with the Tomcat: Useful, but not perfect.

 

Unlike the 7M, which has seemed terrible.

[Rabbisaur]

Aim9 compare look normal to me. But I’ve got one thing. If you compare aim9 seeker gimbal limit on F14 against a notching target, try to follow the lead cue when ACM cover is closed. It will surprise you. I don’t know if the aim9 seeker gimbal limit is wrong or the lead cue is off. I guess it is the later. I usually have better lead if I ignore the lead cue and use my own judgement. Good hunting~

[Airhunter]

You do realize that heater CCM in DCS has a randomness factor programmed into it, right?

[*Aquila*]

You do realize that heater CCM in DCS has a randomness factor programmed into it, right?

It looks a lot like that.

[captain_dalan]

You do realize that heater CCM in DCS has a randomness factor programmed into it, right?

 

That is why you need larger samples, at least 70 or above, so you can apply normal distribution methods to your statistical analysis :thumbup:

[Airhunter]

That is why you need larger samples, at least 70 or above, so you can apply normal distribution methods to your statistical analysis :thumbup:

 

Would probably end up being a bell curve...

 

As long as you can reliably get kills with the missile in DCS I couldn't care less about stats.

[IronMike]

Thank you for this report. We will take a close look, very well put together!

[gyrovague]

Thanks for all this effort! We use the standard DCS AIM-9M, nothing custom, so I think the differences you're seeing are just due to small sample size. As Airhunter said, the DCS missile countermeasure susceptibility is just chance based, the different sidewinder variants use slightly different values for this for instance.

[gyrovague]

Aim9 compare look normal to me. But I’ve got one thing. If you compare aim9 seeker gimbal limit on F14 against a notching target, try to follow the lead cue when ACM cover is closed. It will surprise you. I don’t know if the aim9 seeker gimbal limit is wrong or the lead cue is off. I guess it is the later. I usually have better lead if I ignore the lead cue and use my own judgement. Good hunting~

 

I can take a look. The lead cue is based on average missile speed and intercept geometry using the target's velocity vector (from STT info). Perhaps the DCS indicated average missile speed for sidewinder is too far off, or there's some other bug.

[Fri13]

What I see is very effective AIM-9... Oddly effective....

[*Aquila*]

Oddly effective...

Not really. Here, you have a standardized engagement in which both protagonists start on a straight line. When things turn to a knife fight in a phone box, PK is somewhere around 20%, but conditions are too varient for a comparison to be relevant.

[S. Low]

Does heatblur have a comment on the aim-7m?

[TLTeo]

Yea the AIM-7 definitely needs more looking at than the AIM-9

[*Aquila*]

I'm at the 7M right now.

[Banzaiib]

IMO, title is click bait given your data... variations in the AI behavior could easily account for the 2 missiles being different. It's very close.

[*Aquila*]

Click bait? WTH? The title says what you find in the post: a comparison. And the post says the same as you. It even says why the test was done. I swear nobody pays me for each person who reads my posts...

[captain_dalan]

Would probably end up being a bell curve...

 

As long as you can reliably get kills with the missile in DCS I couldn't care less about stats.

 

3 bell curves actually. And by comparing them, you can establish if any deviations in the median/medium values are statistically significant or not. The relatively small size of the original sample gives me a hunch that it isn't.....but it's only a hunch. Someone needs to take more shots. Way more shots.