AIM-54 Changes / new API fixes are live in today's patch

[QuiGon]

 

If you really ask me, AWG-9 it's disappointing many times, i asked a lot of times how much this is accurate or not (i even PMed IronMike) but i didn't got any answer. Reading "thorugh the lines" of other answers in other topics here and there, they say the limitations are accurate, yet there are a few conditions that are somewhat hard to belive.

 

Honestly (look at my registration date), i witnessed ages when missiles behaviour has been much worse than now: yet i know it's frustrating, you do things right and then things completely out of your control (ghost contacts, PDSTT lost lock, weak missile guidance, questionable chaff resistance) screw you up. Personally i would prefer the WCS/missile combination to be more on the overperforming side to concentrate on the tactical aspects - not just for the Tomcat, i mean for every a/c.

 

The AWG-9 isn't the issue either. The radar is performing really well if you know how to use it. I have no problem finding targets and keep them locked

It's just that Phoenix doesn't connect with its target anymore as it used to, despite keeping the target TWS locked untill TTI 16. :dunno:

[UWBuRn]

The AWG-9 isn't the issue either. The radar is performing really well if you know how to use it. I have no problem finding targets and keep them locked

It's just that Phoenix doesn't connect with its target anymore as it used to, despite keeping the target TWS locked untill TTI 16. :dunno:

 

Can you point me out the most critical points to keep stable locks, in your experience? I admit i fly mostly in the front seat, leaving Jester playing with the radar, but when i tried it by myself i found out there's not much you can do when you have missiles in the air, it's mostly how you fly the aircraft in relation to target. Did i miss something big?

 

Then there's another question that i have over my mind, in relation to missile effectivness: the distance of the receiver antenna (the missile) does affect chaff effectivness? I mean both IRL and DCS, because i guess that at some distances and aspects the chaff cloud can confuse the missile seeker more easily than others, i'm courious to know if in DCS some of this is modelled or if it's just like throwing a dice.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

PD-STT apparently isn't giving any warnings .

And , phoenixes shot in TWS by a rio also won't give any warnings until impact if supported all the way, missile is behaving as a SARH.

 

[dundun92]

Me and a few squad mates did some tests both with jester and with a RIO on how they guide and the associated warnings.

 

JESTER:

PD-STT, Supported until impact: Guides like normal SARH, with launch warning and no active warning. As expected

PD-STT, Switched to TWS by telling Jester to break the lock then switching back to TWS: Missile stopped guiding and did not reacquire. Bandit had SARH missile warning throughout entire engagement. SARH warning after lost lock not expected

PD-STT, Switched to TWS by telling jester to switch to P-STT (to which he replied with an "I lost the lock", switching to TWS): Missile reacquired when TWS track was regained and guided as in SARH. Bandit had SARH missile warning throughout entire engagement. Not expected

P-STT, Supported until impact: Active off the rail. No datalink corrections (unsure if intended behavior). With active warning pitbull range. Pretty much as expected.

TWS, Supported until impact: No launch warning, with active warning at pitbull. As expected

TWS, switched to STT before active: Missile stops guiding, does not go active. As expected

 

HUMAN RIO:

TWS, Supported until impact: Missile guided. Unsure if in SARH or ARH guidance logic. No missile warning. Not expected

More potentially to come

[QuiGon]

Can you point me out the most critical points to keep stable locks, in your experience? I admit i fly mostly in the front seat, leaving Jester playing with the radar, but when i tried it by myself i found out there's not much you can do when you have missiles in the air, it's mostly how you fly the aircraft in relation to target. Did i miss something big?

 

With TWS-A there is indeed not much you can do to support it unlike with other modes. In some situations it can help to turn off the MLC filter, but that's about it.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

phoenix fired by a RIO in TWS does not give any RWR warning.

[eatthis]

phoenix fired by a RIO in TWS does not give any RWR warning.

 

why? does it work the same if the pilot fires it?

 

[QuiGon]

 

why? does it work the same if the pilot fires it?

 

It should work the same.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

It should give an RWR warning at some point , also when fired by a rio. But, it doesn't.

[SgtPappy]

Then there's another question that i have over my mind, in relation to missile effectivness: the distance of the receiver antenna (the missile) does affect chaff effectivness? I mean both IRL and DCS, because i guess that at some distances and aspects the chaff cloud can confuse the missile seeker more easily than others, i'm courious to know if in DCS some of this is modelled or if it's just like throwing a dice.

 

I'm sure GG can chime in, as I was told the way it works really is simply by "throwing dice", as you say. The target closure reduces to a very low speed and the defender pops chaff out will have some probability of having the missile go for the chaff like it was flares. Doing so over the ground will increase the probability of missile losing lock.

 

In real life, the target's signal to background noise (including clutter) ratio will determine the probability of retaining lock on the target. This S/N ratio increases as you get closer to the target and so chaff would be less effective. In addition, the resolution cell - the smallest area your radar can resolve - is larger when you're further away so any chaff in that cell with the target decreases the radar sensitivity and causes an angular pull-off effect, seducing the radar to follow the chaff RCS centroid slightly more and more until the target is not being illuminated, thus breaking lock. The target would need to continue to drop chaff for this to work. As the radar gets closer, that cell gets tighter giving the chaff less time to bloom within it. None of this is modeled explicitly AFAIK in DCS.

[UWBuRn]

In real life, the target's signal to background noise (including clutter) ratio will determine the probability of retaining lock on the target. This S/N ratio increases as you get closer to the target and so chaff would be less effective. In addition, the resolution cell - the smallest area your radar can resolve - is larger when you're further away so any chaff in that cell with the target decreases the radar sensitivity and causes an angular pull-off effect, seducing the radar to follow the chaff RCS centroid slightly more and more until the target is not being illuminated, thus breaking lock. The target would need to continue to drop chaff for this to work. As the radar gets closer, that cell gets tighter giving the chaff less time to bloom within it. None of this is modeled explicitly AFAIK in DCS.

 

Thanks for the explanition, it confirms more or less what i was thinking of. ;)

[miromurin]

What does missile API mean?

[draconus]

9 minutes ago, miromurin said:

What does missile API mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API

Basically it's a new programmable connection between the modules, missiles and DCS World that allows all of them to talk to each other and send data between. Something end user should not be cencerned about.

Edited January 25, 2021 by draconus

[miromurin]

thank you