new missile API

[Raubritter]

The problem with your "50% fail rate" argument is that the sample size is way, way too small to draw any meaningful conclusion (regardless of how you define failure vs success).

Even in this sample of 3 launch I do not see failures.

Phoenixes are not OP. If they run away from them most likely there will be no hit. Distance.

[TLTeo]

That's exactlay my point about defining failure vs success. If success is exclusively shooting down what you shot at (which is wrong, but still), then they did fail.

 

 

And even then, again, 5 events are not enough to produce any statistic about anything at all.

Edited June 11, 2020 by TLTeo

[Fri13]

Are we really going to start the whole "the Phoenix wasn't designed to engage fighters" discussion all over again ? :D

 

No need, as the "Phoenix is perfect missile with perfect capability to hit anything that is up in the sky" discussion always comes back.

[eatthis]

i see the merrygoround has started again.

tldr

us launch sample size is pathetic to draw conclusions from

manufacturers lie and mislead congress CONSTANTLY

iranian stats are sketchy but not unreasonable

[Bruce_D]

Hi guys,

 

I did a lot of tests before the 06/10/2020 update.

 

Here are some of the results (.acmi file). After the update the missile started to fail again.

 

Planes:

2x Su-27 (high)

2x Su-30 (high)

2x Su-33 (high)

2x Mig-31 (excellent)

2x Mig-29A (excellent)

2x Mig-29S (excellent)

2x F-4E (high – Super Phantom)

 

I always fly with ECM on against AI.

 

Before the patch, 80% of the time I had 2 kills (the F-4E is a super fighter that manage to evade missiles) and 95% of the time just 1 kill (again the Super Phantom).

 

I have done more than 100 shoots at ranges between 48 nm and 44 nm.

 

After the 06/10/2020 update, in four different attempts I only manage to hit 2 targets (25%).

 

What I saw since before the patch: When the Phoenix reaches a speed of 1399 knots and his distance is higher than 6 nm from the target, he tries to go for the CM.

 

After the update, when the missile reaches 6,21 nm from the target he misses, no matter the speed.

 

Other thing, the F-14 altitude matters more than the speed. I always climb 15,000 feet (30° of AoA) before firing to not give time to AI to climb and follow me. The missile has to be at least 15,000 feet above the target.

 

With the new patch I will try to give more altitude to the missile.

 

You don’t need to climb a lot for the Mig-31, you need more speed. The Mig-31 does not have chaff or ECM so the missile will only need speed and you can fire a little bit far and star your defensive maneuver against the R-33.

 

If someone has any more comments about this, feel free to comment.

 

Tks.

Before.rar

After.rar

[fat creason]

I would generally ignore this patch, even we were not able to test anything in it. The patch cadence recently has made any testing very difficult.

Edited June 11, 2020 by fat creason

[Bruce_D]

Hi,

 

After today’s hotfix, climbing 20,000 ft (60°) above the target starting firing at 30° I had a 70% kill ratio against AI High. Distance about 52 nm.

HF.rar

[Harlikwin]

WIKI.. RLY?? Do you want me to write in this article that the phoenix shot down asteroids and star destroyers? :D

I asked documents :)

OK. What they write on the wiki - - "On January 5, 1999, a pair of US F-14s fired two Phoenixes at Iraqi MiG-25s southeast of Baghdad. Both AIM-54s' rocket motors failed and neither missile hit its target." Source shown - "Defense.gov Transcript: DoD News Briefing January 5, 1999".

https://archive.defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=852

what is written there?

"Two MIG 25s engaged two F-14s flying off the carrier Vinson, and they responded by firing missiles at the Iraqi planes. The Iraqi planes, when they saw that they were engaged and being fired upon, turned sharply and beat a hasty retreat out of the no-fly zone, and the U.S. planes returned safely to their bases."

UPSS. Was an Iraqi pilot writing a wiki article? :)

Second source in WIKI, Osprey.

"On 7 september 1977, following significant Opposition to recent patrols, CVW-2, embarked in USS Constellation (CV-64), launched Operation Gun Smoke. Some 35 of 39 AAA and SAM sites targeted for destruction in the ‘Box’ were eliminated in a series of precision strikes that saw the largest expenditure of ordnance in single day since Desert Storm.

The F-14Ds of VF-2 played a leading role in this campaign, and aside from dropping LGBs and lasing for AGM-65s fired from F/A-18s, the unit also got to fire a single AIM-54C at long range distant an Iraqi MiG23. Again, no hit as registered."

Where does it say about failures?

In both cases, after the launch, the targets turned around and left the zone at high speed. Exact launch distance not known (~long). Missiles eventually fall to the ground, yes :)

 

admit - you do not have documents on the effectiveness of SPS-141 ecm.

And read carefully rule 1.16

 

Bad sources. Bad arguments. Сorrect to say - you really want to make the phoenix worthless.

 

P.S more Osprey

 

"Opposite.

The F-14’s primary air defence weapons share a wing glove pylon on this VF-2 jet in March 2003.

Almost four years earlier, on 9 September 1999, the combination of the AIM-54C and a ‘Bounty Hunters’ F-14D almost gave the US Navy its first kill with the legendary Phoenix missile. VFA-151 Hornet pilot Lt Cdr Ron Candiloro (who subsequently participated in OIF with the unit in 2003) was a witness to the engagement, “This event provided me with the most exciting moment of my whole career, as we committed to engage two Iraqi MiG-23s that were heat south into the No-Fly Zone from Al Taqaddum air base, west of Baghdad. I was on the wing of the VF-2 F-14D that took the Phoenix shot at the Iraqi jets. The missile eventually went into the ground, and was Dash Two to fire a Sparrow round, but the MiGs turned around and headed back north once they detected that a Phoenix had come off the rail. The Tomcat crew were talking on a different frequency to me, and did not hear the pilot make the call that he was firing off a Phoenix. The only cue got was when I looked over and saw the “Buffalo” (missile) go flying off after the target!

 

The F-14D crew had committed to firing the AIM-54C after receiving secure radio and datalink information passed via Link-16 JTIDS (Joint Tactical Information Distribution System).

With his jet lacking JTIDS, Lt Cdr Candiloro had no idea why his Tomcat section leader had turned north and accelerated. He was also unaware that the F-14 crew had received clearance to fire until the Phoenix came off the rail. The missile would almost certainly have guided to a ill if the Iraqi fighters had not turned tail and sped back north. The AIM-54C was regularly carried by F-14s throughout OSW, and also featured on Tomeats tasked with DCA in the first few days of OIF However, it soon disappeared when it was realised that the Iraqi Air Force posed no threat to the outcome of the campaign. Indeed, for much of the war F-14 crews relied on one or two AIM-9Ms for their self-protect (PH2 Dan McLain)"

 

B1: UM... That part you have underlined that said the two missile motors failed. :doh:

B2: Hmm, I don't ever recall that being part of my argument. But please go ahead and shake your fist at the sky and yell at clouds some more.

 

And your "spoiler" just confirms what the first article said, that phoenix didn't hit anything cuz the Iraqis ran.

 

It's also pretty clear English isn't your first language and whatever argument you think you are having with me is pretty ranty and incoherent.

 

As for the 141, I have tech documents in 2 different languages on it along with various declassed DIA assessments of Iraqi use of those jammers during the iran Iraq war (along with the French ones). But I'm not gonna go posting em here, cuz they are dated from the late 80's and 90s.

Edited June 11, 2020 by Harlikwin

[Harlikwin]

That's exactlay my point about defining failure vs success. If success is exclusively shooting down what you shot at (which is wrong, but still), then they did fail.

 

 

And even then, again, 5 events are not enough to produce any statistic about anything at all.

 

Yeah that's why I find the Iranians claims more interesting, of course those are incomplete as well and basically wouldn't mention, oh the missile fell off the rail and didn't light. And even if they did everyone would claim those don't count because of course the Iranians are incompetent and couldn't maintain them.

[Raubritter]

B1: UM... That part you have underlined that said the two missile motors failed. :doh:

....

 

underlined is what is not in the source for this article. Noted because such articles - this is not an argument in the dispute.

 

As for the 141, I have tech documents in 2 different languages on it along with various declassed DIA assessments of Iraqi use of those jammers during the iran Iraq war (along with the French ones). But I'm not gonna go posting em here, cuz they are dated from the late 80's and 90s.

Of course, that is precisely why you stated previously that Iraq had no RWR and ECM

 

SPS-141

 

The stations were developed in the 1960s for front-line aviation to counter radar illumination and target tracking of the MIM-23 Hawk and MIM-14 NHercules missiles, as well as to aircraft-guided missiles with SARH

 

 

It's also pretty clear English isn't your first language and whatever argument you think you are having with me is pretty ranty and incoherent.

Am I that difficult to understand? ohh :(

Edited June 11, 2020 by Hummel

[Harlikwin]

 

Of course, that is precisely why you stated previously that Iraq had no RWR and ECM

 

They didn't at the beginning of the war, which is why they lost so many aircraft to the IRAF and HAWK's, they started getting that stuff a few years INTO the war. But at that point they had policies in place to avoid the IRAF and defenses. Plus systems like the SPO10 are largely crap in any sort of environment outside of 1 radar is tracking/locking/firing at you, which is almost never going to be the case.

 

With the ECM they got, which included the 141 and French gear they tore up the I-hawk sites fairly well, and iranan pilots reportedly had problems locking up fighters equipped with those ECM systems. And the 141 is repeat jammer that can work against airborne SARH/ARH missiles.

 

Also Iran claims like ~40 or so Aim54 kills, out of 275 or so AIM54's delivered. How many of those "missed" or failed are the relevant questions. I dimly recall reading DIA estimates that iran had less than 100 left after the war, so if that's right the number is something like 40/175 doesn't really speak too well of it. But it does seem in the ballpark given the rather poor showing of US naval aviators (the best of the best after all) had with it in real world conditions. But clearly the USN thought the missile was fine to lob at fighters.

Edited June 11, 2020 by Harlikwin

[Raubritter]

... and iranan pilots reportedly had problems locking up fighters equipped with those ECM systems..

really would like to read about it. where can i do this? or is it secret too?

Also Iran claims like ~40 or so Aim54 kills, out of 275 or so AIM54's delivered

about it too. pls.

 

But it does seem in the ballpark given the rather poor showing of US naval aviators (the best of the best after all) had with it in real world conditions. But clearly the USN thought the missile was fine to lob at fighters.

ufff.

 

The Iran-Iraq War. Pierre Razoux

[Harlikwin]

really would like to read about it. where can i do this? or is it secret too?

 

about it too. pls.

 

 

ufff.

 

The Iran-Iraq War. Pierre Razoux

 

 

Its briefly mentioned in the DIA analysis of the Iran Iraq war. I found it so can you. Not posting it here cuz of 1.16.

 

I pulled it off a wiki page with more detail than your book and counted the specific aim54 kills. (most with actual dates of use, which are predominantly prior to 1983 when the Iraqis started introducing ECM pods/systems) and then a few late in the war, presumably with iran-contra supplied spare parts.

 

So your source is about the same as mine in the TOTAL kills I found but you are assuming the tomcats used aim54's for each kill, they did not. But even if it was 100% phoenix kills its 95/~175 expended, which still isn't great. But a good number of F14 kills were documented with sidewinders and sparrows. (again no info on total number of missiles fired per kill either).

 

You might find the following amusing to read as it talks about the US military suspending contracts specifically on the phoenix missile (among others) due to past quality control problems. As well as some lively commentary as to the validity of the military's acceptance testing.

 

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=xcvdLXyuemQC&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA46

[Bruce_D]

Hi,

 

Now I’ve tried a little bit closer. The kill ratio was 89%.

 

The angle that the AIM-54 reaches the target is the most important factor to hit AI.

 

Every AI plane were on high.

High.rar

Edited June 11, 2020 by Bruce_D

[Raubritter]

Its briefly mentioned in the DIA analysis of the Iran Iraq war. I found it so can you. Not posting it here cuz of 1.16.

of course :)

I pulled it off a wiki page

wiki again

So your source is about the same as mine in the TOTAL kills I found but you are assuming the tomcats used aim54's for each kill, they did not

I did not say that everything is aim-54 kill. can read a book :)

You might find the following amusing to read as it talks about the US military suspending contracts specifically on the phoenix missile (among others) due to past quality control problems. As well as some lively commentary as to the validity of the military's acceptance testing.

https://play.google.com/books/reader...en&pg=GBS.PA46

there is an appendix - an article from the Washington post, which was considered at the hearing.

The answers are not there. And the talk in it is not only about aim-54 exclusively

But "the military always lies," yes :)

 

I think, I had enough of your arguments twisting

[Harlikwin]

of course :)

 

I think, I had enough of your arguments twisting

 

Clearly, you sir have taken me to your level and beaten me with experience.

 

No more chess with pigeons for me.

[Bruce_D]

Hi,

 

Now I have put only angle to fire (30°).

 

Great results! Even kills firing in 60 nm.

 

The angle that you fire is important to give a loft to the missile.

New.rar

[Bruce_D]

Hi guys,

 

New tests with the last patch.

 

If you fire one missile all of the group’s planes try to notch.

 

Al the American’s old fighters are Super Jets (F-5 & F-4)!

 

Difference of the max altitude between the AIM-54 and the targets is the key.

Last.rar

[Harlikwin]

Yeah we know. Most people are concerned with people doing cheaty things in MP with magic ins.