AGM-88 Vs. LD-10

[RentedAndDented]

So I was just mucking around with the two against a SA-6 and a SA-15, and the LD-10 seems to be FAR more effective than the AGM-88. First, it almost always destroys the target. Second, it doesn't get engaged by the SA-15.

Third, part of that might be because the HARM bleeds speed like a parachute by comparison. It really makes a mockery of the H and it's really just ARM IMO.

 

Also, there is a profile difference. The HARM seems to fly straight at the target where the LD-10 seems to fly level to a point then dive.

 

I had read that this was due to the AGM-88 not knowing the range to target. However, that geometry is basically just right angled triangle and I could see a way for the LD-10 to do this without having explicit range information. Why would the AGM-88 not do the same thing?

 

All it would need to do is fly level on autopilot knowing it's altitude. It knows two angles of the triangle, 90 and 90-depression angle, and therefore the third. The rest of the triangle can be calculated including range, assuming level terrain.

[falcon_120]

There are certain aspects of some JF17 weapons that seems quite optimistic regarding performance. For example it seems that ED has somehow simulated the randomness of a HARM kill if the SAM turn his radar off, in which case the missile is flying to the last known position based on its internal INS, and thus is subject to some errors, on the other hand the LD10 behaves like SU25T ARM missiles, this is, in a more "arcade" way, in that they always hit perfectly and always destroys the target, also they are not engaged by SAMs. I suspect the ED approach is more reasonable but it's just a guess on my side.

[MobiSev]

...on the other hand the LD10 behaves like SU25T ARM missiles, this is, in a more "arcade" way, in that they always hit perfectly and always destroys the target, also they are not engaged by SAMs. I suspect the ED approach is more reasonable but it's just a guess on my side.

 

Are you saying that the LD-10 will go after a SAM even if it turns off the radar and moves a little bit? Bc I can assure you that this does not happen with the LD-10 in game. They will do the same thing HARMs will do in this regard....it's just that their damage needs to be reduced, something that Deka has already fixed in the upcoming patch.

[Harlikwin]

Yeah, having used the LD10 it absolutely doesnt always hit and suspect its shorter ranged than the HARM.

[Exorcet]

The HARM lost loft capability a while back when it was added as a player used weapon. This was a huge cut in capability, but we will get it back eventually.

 

 

The other issue is that the HARM is a speedbrake as you mentioned, though on the other hand it seems to have amazing glide capability for a missile. Once it's subsonic it basically stops slowing and has a ridiculous amount of lift. I'm hoping it will get a rework after the AAM's.

[falcon_120]

Are you saying that the LD-10 will go after a SAM even if it turns off the radar and moves a little bit? .

 

I didnt say anything about moving. Based on my 10/15 practice shots against SA10 and SA15 and the succes in MP where i play i find it like much much better when compared to the AGM88. It always seems to impact perfectly, but i could be wrong though. I havent use it enough to make an informed opinion, sorry about that did not mean to look like one. Also I did not know about the fix of the explosion damage, that could play a big role.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Edited December 16, 2019 by falcon_120

[RentedAndDented]

Yeah, having used the LD10 it absolutely doesnt always hit and suspect its shorter ranged than the HARM.

 

 

It doesn't appear to be in game, it is still doing 1000+ kts when it hits where the 88 has slowed to 570 ish. The problem is that if the SA-15 is attacking the missile, it's so slow that it has heaps of time. Twice as fast would be much harder.

[Harlikwin]

It doesn't appear to be in game, it is still doing 1000+ kts when it hits where the 88 has slowed to 570 ish. The problem is that if the SA-15 is attacking the missile, it's so slow that it has heaps of time. Twice as fast would be much harder.

 

Sooo… You're telling me you don't like physics? The LD10 is basically the SD10 with a different warhead. Its smaller than a HARM, Its got a lower RCS than a HARM, and its gonna be faster than HARM, its not as draggy, and its motor and flight profile is basically designed to engage supersonic aircraft, rather than a static target? Overall I wouldn't be surprised if the HARM actually had a much longer range when lofted at a target, because you know, kinematics and physics and those big fat daffy fins it has (see drag). But at the same time, the LD10 launched from a shorter range is going to be way faster getting there. Not to mention the literal decades between missile designs. So I would hope it would have a better seeker and engagement logic.

 

My experience in Using the LD10 has been at about 25-500ft, popping up to engage targets at about 5-10nm and using whatever cover I can. It does work, but it definitely can miss and it has a very strong preference for hitting EWR's or any other radars rather than actual SAM tracking radars which sucks. Which has lead to my death on many an occasion. But do tell me about your vast experience with it. (And yes I know switch it from passive to self protect, but that's hard to do when diving at the ground in full AB, dumping chaff and maneuvering, cuz you know, I got my hands "full")

Edited December 17, 2019 by Harlikwin

[Exorcet]

Sooo… You're telling me you don't like physics? The LD10 is basically the SD10 with a different warhead. Its smaller than a HARM, Its got a lower RCS than a HARM, and its gonna be faster than HARM, its not as draggy, and its motor and flight profile is basically designed to engage supersonic aircraft, rather than a static target?

 

 

The HARM actually has a bit of a tapered body which is closer to the minimum drag profile for a supersonic shape than the typical cylindrical AAM. The fins are pretty large for a missile though.

 

 

I don't see why the LD-10 being based on an AAM makes it inherently faster. If anything it could be a disadvantage as it might be shaped for higher Mach that you would expect to see at altitude, but I'm speculating. You also can't say much on speed/range without considering the motor.

 

 

I haven't tried the LD-10 yet, but the HARM's very low speed impacts are quite odd.

[RentedAndDented]

Sooo… You're telling me you don't like physics? ......

 

 

Hey I can do unsubstantiated physics too. Longer and wider body (giggity) = bigger rocket motor and the missile never peaks anywhere near the speed of the LD-10.

[Terrorban]

Since I used to play the F/A-18 specifically for Air to Ground roles, I must say the HARM missiles slows down considerably when it is basically flying downward at a target.

 

 

Would burning all the rocket fuel make the missiles light enough for the fins to generate so much drag that it slows down as fast as it does in DCS?

 

 

Does the wind speed even affect the missile flight profile?

 

 

I have also noticed that all the DCS missiles act quite random sometimes in massive multiplayer servers so it is probably not the best place for getting performance info.

[RentedAndDented]

I think there is a disconnect between some of the external companies and ED about missile drag (it's widely stated to be the case at the moment) but I am not sure what is what, I am just not that knowledgeable.

 

Maybe it really is just an outmoded weapon nowadays (hence the AARGM and AARGM-ER). The LD-10 is newer so perhaps that is the difference.

 

But, the SA-15 engaging one and not the other, I am not so sure.

 

Since I used to play the F/A-18 specifically for Air to Ground roles, I must say the HARM missiles slows down considerably when it is basically flying downward at a target.

Would burning all the rocket fuel make the missiles light enough for the fins to generate so much drag that it slows down as fast as it does in DCS?

 

Does the wind speed even affect the missile flight profile?

 

I have also noticed that all the DCS missiles act quite random sometimes in massive multiplayer servers so it is probably not the best place for getting performance info.

[Terrorban]

I think the SA-15 should attempt to intercept both missile equally. The hit success rate however, should depend on the missile flight speed and approach method obviously.

[Habu_69]

Slightly off topic, but I have great difficulty (in online servers) locking a target in HARM TOO. I select emitter with RAID switch, but CAGE does not make the weapon RDY to release. Any suggestions?

 

 

Never mind. SOI issue, I think!

Edited December 19, 2019 by Habu_69

[Harlikwin]

I think the SA-15 should attempt to intercept both missile equally. The hit success rate however, should depend on the missile flight speed and approach method obviously.

 

The LD10 being smaller should be harder to see, and being faster should be more difficult to engage and there should be less time to engage it.

[Harlikwin]

Hey I can do unsubstantiated physics too. Longer and wider body (giggity) = bigger rocket motor and the missile never peaks anywhere near the speed of the LD-10.

 

 

Oh wait! This is the basis for DCS... :megalol:

[Harlikwin]

The HARM actually has a bit of a tapered body which is closer to the minimum drag profile for a supersonic shape than the typical cylindrical AAM. The fins are pretty large for a missile though.

 

 

I don't see why the LD-10 being based on an AAM makes it inherently faster. If anything it could be a disadvantage as it might be shaped for higher Mach that you would expect to see at altitude, but I'm speculating. You also can't say much on speed/range without considering the motor.

 

 

I haven't tried the LD-10 yet, but the HARM's very low speed impacts are quite odd.

 

I mean, I'm not saying one way or the other, the HARM wouldn't be the only missile that might be borked, or the LD-10 might be. But having used both, the LD-10 isn't some uber missile relative to the HARM. And being based on an AAM its probably got really high initial speeds and I have used it primarily close in (10nm or less at lower altitudes). Same flight regime I've found the HARM to be usefull too.

 

And yes, motor (nozzle), ISP etc. All matters. Given the harm is bigger I'd expect it to be longer range since its got more fuel, but its largely irrelevant if you have no idea what altitude the nozzle is actually optimized for (I'm gonna guess high alt for both missiles).