Jump to content

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


IronMike

Recommended Posts

 

Are you sure? All other missiles seem to produce active warnings as expected. The Aim-54 reliably doesn't, specifically it seems when fired at ranges where the seeker is not going active off the rail.

 

Could this be another instance of a universal missile 'problem' that is only noticeable when applied to something unique about the Aim-54? I recall back in the day when the desync was terrible, it was technically true that all missiles desynced. But desync increased with time of flight, and since in those times Phoenixes were still lethal at triple the range anyone else was even considering shooting for, it wasn't a problem with other missiles.. It was a Phoenix problem.

 

Seems to me the "stealth phoenix" is a really bad outcome in the course of developing this thing, and I'm sure most people would like to think there's some urgency in solving it. Maybe there's some stop-gap or band-aid that can be used to mitigate the problem while you're waiting for ED.

 

 

It is possible that this affects only the aim-54, we just had reports from others, but might also have been unrelated. It could also be on our side, we're investigating and the urgency of the matter of course isn't lost on us (or ED).

  • Like 1

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just remember UWBuRn that the AI countermeasures are far more potent in general than human countermeasures. You can see this by launching an AIM-9M for example at 2 nm head on and they can spoof with almost no maneuvering and maybe a few flares. Try this on a human and it would never work.

 

Their missiles too may or may not be less resistant to countermeasures as well. I can notch even today's tougher AIM-54s from the AI flying right at the deck, firing in a look-up situation by forcing the missile to go up and then notching + chaff near the ground all the way to merge. However against my friend online, no chance of this at < 5nm.

 

Can be true or not - i'm not so sure - but seems not relevant, as for the test i was carrying out i just wanted to see if the missile when launched in PDSTT above 10 nm was purely SARH or not, and it was not, as shutting down the radar resulted in the missile scoring in ARH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done some test against a large target (Tu-22) non maneuvering, no ECM and no chaffs (turned off from mission editor) flying at 0.9M, 35k feet.

  1. One Mk60 shot at 70 nm in PDSTT just to check things out, kept the lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 34 seconds
  2. Same as above but with C, TTI when missile hit was 18 seconds
  3. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 5 nm from target, missile hit
  4. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 10 nm from target, missile hit
  5. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target, missile hit
  6. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 5 nm from target (TTI was about 30 seconds), missile missed target going below target
  7. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 10 nm from target (forgot to look at TTI, but was obviously far from 16), missile missed going far above target
  8. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target(TTI was about 45 seconds), missile missed target going far above target
  9. Shot of an AIM-45C at 75 nm in TWS, keep lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 20 seconds
  10. Shot of an AIM-45C at 35 nm in TWS, keep lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 12 seconds
  11. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in PDSTT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  12. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in TWS, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  13. Shot of an AIM-45C at 15 nm in PSTT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  14. Shot of an AIM-45C at 15 nm in PDSTT with BRSIT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  15. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in RWS with ACM cover up, missile didn't loft, missile hit

Tracks are here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...8B?usp=sharing

Didn't check if they desync, anyway replicating the test is rather easy.

 

So, general impressions are that in strictly controlled conditions it's working as expected except STT that still goes active insted of being purely SARH and the TTI being so off that is mostly useless; on long shots, when the missiles start coming down after lofting missiles keep performing (as they did before) a quite harsh maneuver that seems to waste energy.

 

Of course by having the target not maneuvering it's difficoult to understand when the missile went active, if it lose and reacquire the track... maybe ED can include in labels an indication of the missile being active, as missiles behavior gets more complicate might be interesting looking at it for training.

 

Hope it helps.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is possible that this affects only the aim-54, we just had reports from others, but might also have been unrelated. It could also be on our side, we're investigating and the urgency of the matter of course isn't lost on us (or ED).

 

Also I probably should add, this may also have something to do with specific RWRs because from some testing ( I can produce a track if needed) the F-15 RWR picks up AIM-54s just fine from TWS.

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So am i reading this correct ? The aim54 is now equipped with stealth technology ? How does this even happen?

Why does it only happen to phoenix ? Is this also why F14 can turn cold from 100nm and still take out AWACS ?

 

Nobody "equipped" the AIM-54 with anything. This is simply a case of the attempted upgrade to the new API causing issues (the AMRAAM already has its fair share of bugs and issues from it having the new API). As for why its an AIM-54 only issue we really dont know, and it really doesnt matter. All that matters is that it gets fixed ASAP.

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tested today, 4v4 scenario, 4 F-14B(with AIM-54C) and 4 JF-17(with BVR Missiles as well) 40nm range at start, highest AI level. The AIM-54 is not reliable, as you guys' tests, especially under TWS mode.

 

The only effective approach to make AIM-54 hit is that close-range STT/PD-STT mode with fire-and-forget tactic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, i think i found out what's happening with STT.

 

If you shoot in PDSTT the missile is effectively SARH. If you lose lock, the missile doesn't go active. Example: your fire STT, turn away the missile is lost.

 

BUT if you shoot in PDSTT, you lose lock and TWS kicks in picking up the track THEN the missile will start behaving as if it was launched in TWS.

 

Beside firing at a distant target and doing a 360° turn to lose STT and pick up in TWS there's an easier way to replicate this: start TWS, go STT, look at the missile in F6, hit PLM and see the missile steering away from interception course, wait for TWS to pickup and see the missile going pitbull (presumibly if within onboard radar range).

 

Overall, given the current lackuster performance of TWS-A (that's not clear how much is an intended behavior or not), scoring hits is quite challenging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, i think i found out what's happening with STT.

 

If you shoot in PDSTT the missile is effectively SARH. If you lose lock, the missile doesn't go active. Example: your fire STT, turn away the missile is lost.

 

BUT if you shoot in PDSTT, you lose lock and TWS kicks in picking up the track THEN the missile will start behaving as if it was launched in TWS.

 

Beside firing at a distant target and doing a 360° turn to lose STT and pick up in TWS there's an easier way to replicate this: start TWS, go STT, look at the missile in F6, hit PLM and see the missile steering away from interception course, wait for TWS to pickup and see the missile going pitbull (presumibly if within onboard radar range).

 

Overall, given the current lackuster performance of TWS-A (that's not clear how much is an intended behavior or not), scoring hits is quite challenging.

 

Yesterday, I found that simply firing in either TWS or STT of any kind (all with Jester) at 10 nm or less, co-alt with the bandit and you will still have time to turn away from an AMRAAM. Unless they do the same, they'll get hit by the AIM-54C. I have rarely been able to trash this missile with an orthogonal roll since the update so it's actually very good real close. But I suppose this is a little besides the point of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yesterday, I found that simply firing in either TWS or STT of any kind (all with Jester) at 10 nm or less, co-alt with the bandit and you will still have time to turn away from an AMRAAM. Unless they do the same, they'll get hit by the AIM-54C. I have rarely been able to trash this missile with an orthogonal roll since the update so it's actually very good real close. But I suppose this is a little besides the point of this thread.

 

10 nm or less is straight to active. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some Track files of tests we did. Nine Tracks per pilot total. Three tracks per test with three tests done.

 

Test 1: TWS

 

None Maneuvering

Maneuvering Light

Maneuvering Heavy

 

 

Test 2: PD-STT

 

None Maneuvering

Maneuvering Light

Maneuvering Heavy

 

 

Test 3: TWS to PD-STT

 

None Maneuvering

Maneuvering Light

Maneuvering Heavy

 

 

Some interesting results all round.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xN8pT5TyPmLUCXOCim04-GYq7kNh99-N?usp=sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hotfix just came out but I didn't see anything in the notes about fixing the AIM-54 no RWR warning bug (unless I missed it)...

 

@IronMike Do you guys know if whatever was borked with the missile API got fixed?

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@IronMike Do you guys know if whatever was borked with the missile API got fixed?

 

Go figure... ED even omitted listing the new missile API in the November 4th patch notes! I don't understand why some changes are listed in the notes and some don't, not the first time that happens for something definitely not negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is possible that this affects only the aim-54, we just had reports from others, but might also have been unrelated. It could also be on our side, we're investigating and the urgency of the matter of course isn't lost on us (or ED).

 

That's good to hear.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because there were no changes to that on the 4th.

 

I never made so in depth test before 11/4 patch, but what i found here https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/7126386-aim-54-changes-new-api-fixes-are-live-in-today-s-patch?p=7130824#post7130824 and here https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/7126386-aim-54-changes-new-api-fixes-are-live-in-today-s-patch?p=7133433#post7133433 seems coherent with the new behavior listed in the opening post of this topic. I should revert to stable to test again and compare the behavior.

 

Do you have some info about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No changes were made to the F14 whatsoever. The code for the new API was in the F14 for a while now, however the fixes ED made should have activated it, which as it looks like, it did not. So it is falling back on the old API, to circumscribe it a bit (thats not really how it works, but it illustrates what I mean). I hope that makes sense.

 

From page three in this thread

The behavior you see is indeed different from what we had at release but is still not how its supposed to be

i5-8600k @4.9Ghz, 2080ti , 32GB@2666Mhz, 512GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done some test against a large target (Tu-22) non maneuvering, no ECM and no chaffs (turned off from mission editor) flying at 0.9M, 35k feet.
  1. One Mk60 shot at 70 nm in PDSTT just to check things out, kept the lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 34 seconds
  2. Same as above but with C, TTI when missile hit was 18 seconds
  3. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 5 nm from target, missile hit
  4. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 10 nm from target, missile hit
  5. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target, missile hit
  6. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 5 nm from target (TTI was about 30 seconds), missile missed target going below target
  7. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 10 nm from target (forgot to look at TTI, but was obviously far from 16), missile missed going far above target
  8. Shot an AIM-54C at 70 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target(TTI was about 45 seconds), missile missed target going far above target
  9. Shot of an AIM-45C at 75 nm in TWS, keep lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 20 seconds
  10. Shot of an AIM-45C at 35 nm in TWS, keep lock till missile hit, TTI when missile hit was 12 seconds
  11. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in PDSTT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  12. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in TWS, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  13. Shot of an AIM-45C at 15 nm in PSTT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  14. Shot of an AIM-45C at 15 nm in PDSTT with BRSIT, broke lock just after launch, missile didn't loft, missile hit
  15. Shot of an AIM-45C at 8 nm in RWS with ACM cover up, missile didn't loft, missile hit

Tracks are here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...8B?usp=sharing

Didn't check if they desync, anyway replicating the test is rather easy.

 

So, general impressions are that in strictly controlled conditions it's working as expected except STT that still goes active insted of being purely SARH and the TTI being so off that is mostly useless; on long shots, when the missiles start coming down after lofting missiles keep performing (as they did before) a quite harsh maneuver that seems to waste energy.

 

Of course by having the target not maneuvering it's difficoult to understand when the missile went active, if it lose and reacquire the track... maybe ED can include in labels an indication of the missile being active, as missiles behavior gets more complicate might be interesting looking at it for training.

 

Hope it helps.

 

I just read this very interesting post on the AIM-54 - not sure about the person's credentials but he is certainly convincing! Link: https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the-US-Air-Forces-F-15-Eagle-fighter-carry-the-extremely-long-range-and-high-speed-AIM-54-Phoenix

 

He mentions that the missile would sometimes have to fly in such a way as to arc back towards its own loft trajectory. Furthermore, BIO mentions that TWS had some issues with false contacts and I believe Heatblur stated that it is by design (or that it simply won't change) that TWS is not suitable for maneuvering targets. I expect the more targets that are being tracked, the easier it is for the TWS mode to drop accurate tracking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He mentions that the missile would sometimes have to fly in such a way as to arc back towards its own loft trajectory. Furthermore, BIO mentions that TWS had some issues with false contacts and I believe Heatblur stated that it is by design (or that it simply won't change) that TWS is not suitable for maneuvering targets. I expect the more targets that are being tracked, the easier it is for the TWS mode to drop accurate tracking.

 

The technology used for the Eagle and the Tomcat, as well as the operational concepts were very different. There are also costs involved, and the Eagle was simply not designed to haul the phoenix. You could maybe haul three of those on the appropriate pylons, and the radar would operate just fine but the technology was probably a little too risky for a single crewed fighter.

 

This Quora thing you found seems pretty good.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...