AIM-54-isms DCS OpenBeta 2.5.6.57949

[BreaKKer]

I was told to report missile guidance things here. So, I will post my initial post here.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/bugs-and-problems-bf/7143787-aim-54-isms-dcs-openbeta-2-5-6-57949

 

Bug: AIM-54 tracking chaff at the most odd time along with reacquisition weirdness. Potentially may be from Pilot+RIO desync. TWS track not showing phoenix active queue(Blinking TTI)

 

Can I reproduce it 100%: yes

 

How to reproduce/ description:

 

Step1: Get in a 2-crewed F-14 on a DCS multiplayer server.

 

Step2: Fire any phoenix variant in TWS on any number of bandits.

 

Step 3: Let the phoenix go active. The harder the notching/maneuvering target, the better.

 

Result: Phoenix goes stupid within active range. Possibly incorrect notch value numbers in missile API.

Result 2: Phoenix does not reacquire, even though bandit turns hot back into phoenix seeker limits. Possibly the phoenix "tunnel visioning" on the single bundle of chaff while there is a huge MiG coming right in the radar seeker.

Result 3: TWS track not showing active queue passed 16 TTI. Possibly the phoenix going active before 16 TTI and not indicating that it did

 

DCS Version: OpenBeta 2.5.6.57949

 

Track:

From my Pilot. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...118-194823.trk

From me(RIO): https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...118-125101.trk

 

Tacview files:

From my Pilot: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...11.16.zip.acmi

From me(RIO): https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...11.16.zip.acmi

 

Video/ Screenshots: Both from my tacview. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/435484399778136114/778707651571220500/2020-11-18_13-41-01.mov

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/435484399778136114/778707656491139113/2020-11-18_13-43-06.mov

 

Mods: I do not use any mods.

 

Other users on the Tomcat Alley discord server are saying they are seeing somewhat similar results.

 

Similar bug to what was seen in the past few patches. I reported something similar in the past.

[Chimango]

Yes, and please ED fix the no warning on RWR by AIM-54s when launched in TWS (when it goes pitbull), it's a game braking bug for MP.

 

Also, please fix F-16/18 RWR showing a "M" instead of a "U" when they get a Phoenix warning.

[BlackPixxel]

Why should the RWR show the Phoenix as unknown, when it knows that it is a missile?

[dundun92]

Also, please fix F-16/18 RWR showing a "M" instead of a "U" when they get a Phoenix warning.

Thats how its supposed to be, it was bugged all this time.

 

 

[Chimango]

Maybe i expressed myself not clearly, cause i mean exactly that: F16/18 when they get AIM54s warning it shows as "U" on their RWR when it should show a "M" otherwise is non realistic, and a clear advantage for any competition. Please fix this.

[SgtPappy]

Maybe i expressed myself not clearly, cause i mean exactly that: F16/18 when they get AIM54s warning it shows as "U" on their RWR when it should show a "M" otherwise is non realistic, and a clear advantage for any competition. Please fix this.

 

I think perhaps you misunderstood. It is supposed to show up as a "U", not an "M". It will be confusing but if that's what it's supposed to be, then you have to assume its a Phoenix.

 

How do we know its not realistic? I assume if they did it on purpose then the "U" is realistic. But who really knows.

[QuiGon]

 

I think perhaps you misunderstood. It is supposed to show up as a "U", not an "M". It will be confusing but if that's what it's supposed to be, then you have to assume its a Phoenix.

 

How do we know its not realistic? I assume if they did it on purpose then the "U" is realistic. But who really knows.

 

What makes you think this is realistic? :huh:

 

I don't see any reason, why the AIM-54 would shot up as a U, while AIM-7s and AIM-120s and all other radar guided missiles show up as M?

[Svend_Dellepude]

It's probably just the database that isn't updated with the "new" AIM-54. Happens sometimes with new modules too..

[Chimango]

I think perhaps you misunderstood. It is supposed to show up as a "U", not an "M". It will be confusing but if that's what it's supposed to be, then you have to assume its a Phoenix.

 

I'm on the other end of the Phoenix, i'm the one who launches them (i didn't buy F-16 nor F-18 ) so i don't want my "victims" to have a special help when they get a pitbull warning from my AIM54s.

 

All other ARH missiles in the sim show as a "M" in RWRs when they go active, also in the F14s RWR you get an "M" when a phoenix is going for you.

 

So it's a bug indeed, and what the post above this one says makes a lot of sense, and needs to be fixed.

 

[BreaKKer]

 

I'm on the other end of the Phoenix, i'm the one who launches them (i didn't buy F-16 nor F-18 ) so i don't want my "victims" to have a special help when they get a pitbull warning from my AIM54s.

 

All other ARH missiles in the sim show as a "M" in RWRs when they go active, also in the F14s RWR you get an "M" when a phoenix is going for you.

 

So it's a bug indeed, and what the post above this one says makes a lot of sense, and needs to be fixed.

 

Anyone should know that F-14 nails and an unknown missile warning means Phoenix. Regardless of what it is, it should be defended.

[Zaphael]

The Phoenix A60, and C47 are both behaving weirdly from my single player / single target test TWS auto launch.

• Any cranking maneuver to support the Phoenixes causes the missiles to become "Chaff-seekers". I suspect the pitbull code causes the Phoenixes to become chaff-seekers as well. The missile can track the aircraft and suddenly make an abrupt turn towards chaff.
  
• However, if the Tomcat, maintains nose-hot within 10 to 20 Degree azimuth of the target (i.e. no cranking), the missile chases the target effectively. Usually results in a kill.
  

This is rather strange since Jester now cranks the radar automatically if the Tomcat cranks away. Why would the nose position of the Tomcat matter so much?

 

The summary is that the Phoenixes now behave like an odd-SARH missile, that pitbulls destroy evil bundles of chaff. I suspect this was not what the devs intended.

[dundun92]

 

I think perhaps you misunderstood. It is supposed to show up as a "U", not an "M". It will be confusing but if that's what it's supposed to be, then you have to assume its a Phoenix.

 

How do we know its not realistic? I assume if they did it on purpose then the "U" is realistic. But who really knows.

 

Its not done on purpose, U is for unknown on the RWR. This clear when you realize that the F-14 itself shows AIM-54s as a "M" not a "U". ED simply hasnt updated the RWR codes for their jets. The SD-10, for exmaple, has been ping-ponging around between showing as a "M" vs a "U" (RN it shows as a "U")

[dundun92]

It's probably just the database that isn't updated with the "new" AIM-54. Happens sometimes with new modules too..

 

Its been like this from release. Its an ED side thing that they haven't bothered to fix.

[Chimango]

The Phoenix A60, and C47 are both behaving weirdly from my single player / single target test TWS auto launch.

• Any cranking maneuver to support the Phoenixes causes the missiles to become "Chaff-seekers". I suspect the pitbull code causes the Phoenixes to become chaff-seekers as well. The missile can track the aircraft and suddenly make an abrupt turn towards chaff.
  
• However, if the Tomcat, maintains nose-hot within 10 to 20 Degree azimuth of the target (i.e. no cranking), the missile chases the target effectively. Usually results in a kill.
  

This is rather strange since Jester now cranks the radar automatically if the Tomcat cranks away. Why would the nose position of the Tomcat matter so much?

 

The summary is that the Phoenixes now behave like an odd-SARH missile, that pitbulls destroy evil bundles of chaff. I suspect this was not what the devs intended.

 

+1

 

I now have exaclty the same experience when flying with my RIO, when you crank your AIM-54 goes dumb

 

 

Anyone should know that F-14 nails and an unknown missile warning means Phoenix. Regardless of what it is, it should be defended.

 

Maybe we are talking about the same but as english is not my native language i'm not fully sure about your sentence. In a multi-aircraft environment i.e MP PvP servers, or tournaments like SATAL, you get a lot of nails on your RWR; many times from the same direction. Why should anyone get the advantage to know 100% for sure that a Phoenix is on it's way? Of course ppl who knows their stuff will defend preventively from any 120/SD10/AIM54...but knowing that a specific missile is going for you is an important advantage when there shouldn't be, you don't defend the same way -or at least take different margins- when a Phoenix it's on it's way.

 

 

 

Its not done on purpose, U is for unknown on the RWR. This clear when you realize that the F-14 itself shows AIM-54s as a "M" not a "U". ED simply hasnt updated the RWR codes for their jets. The SD-10, for exmaple, has been ping-ponging around between showing as a "M" vs a "U" (RN it shows as a "U")

 

Exactly

[captain_dalan]

 

+1

 

I now have exaclty the same experience when flying with my RIO, when you crank your AIM-54 goes dumb

 

 

 

 

Does the rate of crank (g-load) matter? I.E. will the missile still go dumb if you do a light 45 degrees crank as well a hard one? Or is the offset the key factor? In the past, i've lost even hard PD-STT locks doe to pulling non-trivial g's.

 

[Zaphael]

 

Does the rate of crank (g-load) matter? I.E. will the missile still go dumb if you do a light 45 degrees crank as well a hard one? Or is the offset the key factor? In the past, i've lost even hard PD-STT locks doe to pulling non-trivial g's.

 

Less than 2 G?

 

From what I observed, it does not appear to be a G effect. I hardly pull Gs for the test.

 

I Shoot the missile and gently bank away while reducing throttle to bring the target left or right.

 

The Phoenix appears to work if the nose position is pointed directly at the target. But after offsetting it away, it sort of goes stupid.

 

I want to test next to see whether it is something TWS Auto that's doing that breaks it.

[Zaphael]

Update

 

It appears the chaff is the problem. I tried cranking against an Su-27 that I loaded with zero chaff. The F-14 radar and the phoenix was able to track and kill.

 

So it seems that the problem is how the chaff works and its effectiveness.

 

Strangely, the F-14's TID is part of the problem. When the Su-27 used chaff, it generated a false track that the Phoenix homes after.

[BreaKKer]

Update

 

It appears the chaff is the problem. I tried cranking against an Su-27 that I loaded with zero chaff. The F-14 radar and the phoenix was able to track and kill.

 

So it seems that the problem is how the chaff works and its effectiveness.

 

Strangely, the F-14's TID is part of the problem. When the Su-27 used chaff, it generated a false track that the Phoenix homes after.

 

I don't believe that is how DCS works with chaff.

[Zaphael]

 

I don't believe that is how DCS works with chaff.

 

Neither do I. But there was a ghost target on the TID that the Phoenix went after.

 

The real target appeared shortly after, nose hot straight at me.

 

Did not encounter ghost targets when the target aircraft had zero chaff in the load out.

 

 

Second issue encountered was the SARH mode firing from STT. The Phoenix zipped by, missing by 100ft or so. Target did not maneuver, just dumping chaff.

 

Third issue, ACM cover lifted. Phoenix fired at target at 9Nmi with ADL on it. Also failed to guide.

 

I'm stumped honestly.

[IronJockel]

When firing in TAWS 9 out of 10 the Aim54 goes for chaff since the patch, from my experience so far.

 

[Chimango]

Today it's one full month since the AIM-54s got broken (Nov 4th patch); such a game braking issue for MP...30 days without any fix...

 

[captain_dalan]

12 hours ago, Chimango said:

Today it's one full month since the AIM-54s got broken (Nov 4th patch); such a game braking issue for MP...30 days without any fix...

 

All hail the monthly patch schedule!