Flare-spam not always effective vs. R-73

[BlackPixxel]

R-73 is using a crossed array tracker, which according to Wikipedia ( :) ) should be very good at rejecting flares. Additionally it has a small FOV, which makes it less likely for flares to be seen by the seeker or minimizes the time for which the flares will be seen by the seeker.

 

Don't claim that the R-73 has no CCM just because you want it to be shit in DCS.

[Fri13]

There is an interview with a Luftwaffe pilot that flew east german MiG-29 and test fired the R-73. If you want a minimal amount of knowledge, that would probably be a place to start. He explains how both the 9M and R-73 were designed to reject different kinds of flares. The R-73 was good at rejecting flares thrown upwards (like on soviet fighters) but not as good at rejecting western flares that were ejected sideways. The AIM-9M on the other hand was good at rejecting the western ones, but not so good at rejecting the russian ones. If these missiles were not programmed in some way, there would not be such differences.

 

I recall it was not the direction, but it was the composition of the flares that made difference.

 

The soviets had more of a "dirty flares" that burned each differently, while west was more about specific flare loads that you then selected based the profile etc.

 

One of the first things that any intelligence will gather is the position of the flare dispensers and so on find the direction where they fly.

But to get access for the flares so you can find their composition is much more difficult.

[Fri13]

Additionally it has a small FOV, which makes it less likely for flares to be seen by the seeker or minimizes the time for which the flares will be seen by the seeker.

 

AIM-9 should have around 2-2.5 degree IFOV (instantaneous FOV), so it ain't bad itself either at all. Example at 5000 m (5km) launch range it means 218 m seeker field of view diameter to see a flare.

At 2500 m it is half of that, 109 m in diameter, and at 500 meters it is 21.8 meters.

[nighthawk2174]

R-73 is using a crossed array tracker

 

Do you have any docs proving this?

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

Yes, first one is taken from 'Tuneable Lasers for Countermeasures a Literary survey' published by the Swedish Defense Research Agency (FOI)

The second table is taken from 'Infrared Target-Flare Discrimination using ZISC Hardware Neural Network' from the Royal Military College of Canada

 

This table taken from page 324 of Intro to Modern EW systems 2nd Edition also list it as such

Edited June 11, 2020 by TaxDollarsAtWork

[GGTharos]

Do you have any docs proving this?

 

It's basically a nutating seeker.

[FalcoGer]

What do you mean ED wants to get more close range engagements? It doesn't matter what they want. What they should want is to produce something as close to reality as possible, not make amraam ranges be 15 nmi just to get people to use their 20nmi heaters.

[henshao]

reading a story about the F-15 vs MiG-25 over Iraq '91 revealed some interesting tidbits about how heat seekers reject countermeasures:

 

the sidewinders they used (forget which model, lima or mike) had good CCM/flare rejection but were programmed to reject a flare based on its thermal-ramp up. because the Foxbats were using comparatively low performance flares that bloomed slowly, the sidewinder ccm was fooled into going after the flares. it was programmed to reject flares which immediately bloom much hotter than an aircraft engine, and thus the seeker was rejecting the hotter, real engine and pursuing the flare (relatively) slowly bloomed. pre-flare-ing was a thing as well, the Iraqis had been fighting the Iranians for some time and were no rookies in air combat

[D4n]

What do you mean ED wants to get more close range engagements?

That was a statement from one of the high ED persons some time ago.

 

What they should want is to produce something as close to reality as possible

That too, but the last thing most of us want in DCS is unrealistic Hornets vs Hornets or F-16s vs F-16s... And it's already sad enough that MiG-29S is barely flown on servers like GrowlingSidewinder, due to (afaik) R-77 still being so much worse than 120C... (And R-27ER still bugged afaik?)

 

not make amraam ranges be 15 nmi just to get people to use their 20nmi heaters.

Who says that they would make this??

[Coxy_99]

This thread still a thing lo;

[D4n]

"lo" ?

[dundun92]

reading a story about the F-15 vs MiG-25 over Iraq '91 revealed some interesting tidbits about how heat seekers reject countermeasures:

 

the sidewinders they used (forget which model, lima or mike) had good CCM/flare rejection but were programmed to reject a flare based on its thermal-ramp up. because the Foxbats were using comparatively low performance flares that bloomed slowly, the sidewinder ccm was fooled into going after the flares. it was programmed to reject flares which immediately bloom much hotter than an aircraft engine, and thus the seeker was rejecting the hotter, real engine and pursuing the flare (relatively) slowly bloomed. pre-flare-ing was a thing as well, the Iraqis had been fighting the Iranians for some time and were no rookies in air combat

 

sadly, even basic IRCCM like this is completely absent from the game.

[Notso]

I hope ED does not take this thread serious.

 

You got killed by a heatseeking missile, and instantly made this thread so that the next time you can have it easier.

 

Imagine if everyone did that after they get killed by Aim-120, Aim-54 etc... ("OMG chaff spam did not work, ED please fixx!!!")

 

Instead you could focus on how to properly defeat a heater in DCS, which would include not showing the rear of your aircraft to the seeker for example.

 

This^^ There is nothing 100% about flares defeating even older missiles. Flares are not a perfect panacea for defeating IR missiles. Lots of other factors come into play that affect IR missile seeker capability including lookup/lookdown, aspect, throttle setting, background environment, flare program interval, type, etc, etc etc.

[Blinky.ben]

See trackfile. (Su-27 launching on Harrier) https://ufile.io/s47l8jvd

 

This is just another everything not America just simply can not be any good. Well this might blow your mind but Russia are amongst the best missile developers in the world. In fact in areas are superior to everyone else.

[nighthawk2174]

With the archer based on what has been shown the version we have should be very resistant to just a few flares dropped with a moderately large interval (especially at very short or long ranges) but if enough flares are dropped rapidly over even a small period of time it should still be able to pull the seeker off the target with good reliability.

[BlackPixxel]

Which it does in DCS. R-73 are pretty easy to defeat with a few flares, unless you don't know how to turn off afterburner.

[D4n]

Which it does in DCS. R-73 are pretty easy to defeat with a few flares

In current OpenBeta? Because in previous patches in Harrier I've had it several times that insane flare spam didn't defeat it

[dundun92]

In current OpenBeta? Because in previous patches in Harrier I've had it several times that insane flare spam didn't defeat it

 

We literally just had some fights with the KIAP under a week ago, and some a few weeks ago and we defeated plenty of R-73s with flares. Its very easy. IMO a bit too easy. But regardless, complaining on the forums isnt changing anything.

[D4n]

complaining on the forums isnt changing anything.

Well I provided a trackfile when I reported this many months ago. So yes, needs testing with current OB again.

[dundun92]

Well I provided a trackfile when I reported this many months ago. So yes, needs testing with current OB again.

 

exactly what needs retesting is the question? The fact that you personally cant defeat R-73s? Happen to have a source of ED stating that flare spamming as you performed it in the track is guaranteed to defeat the R-73? I don't think so.

[Ironhand]

In current OpenBeta? Because in previous patches in Harrier I've had it several times that insane flare spam didn't defeat it

Perhaps it’s the Harrier flares that are bugged...

 

[nighthawk2174]

Well flare spamming should defeat the archer we have with very good reliability. Again could be a jet to jet issue, do some tests and post the results.

[Oceandar]

 

We literally just had some fights with the KIAP under a week ago, and some a few weeks ago and we defeated plenty of R-73s with flares. Its very easy. IMO a bit too easy. But regardless, complaining on the forums isnt changing anything.

Agreed. May I ask ED to buff it little bit. Yesterday someone in GS server launched all of his 4x73 at me and hit nothing but bunch of flares.

 

[dundun92]

Well flare spamming should defeat the archer we have with very good reliability. Again could be a jet to jet issue, do some tests and post the results.

 

The thing is that it already goes after a few flares, no spam is needed.

[D4n]

 

The thing is that it already goes after a few flares, no spam is needed.

Even with Harrier, from the side?