[INCLUDE TRACK FILES] Aim-120 in range, but always missing

[tun3]

Hi everyone,

 

I've searched this forum and other places but could not find a good answer to what I'm experiencing.

 

I've been flying the F-16 for about three weeks until I felt comfortable with it's basic functionality and also completed the three Caucasus missions that come with it. Now I've been started playing the F/A-18C and am running into a problem with Aim-120 AMRAAMs:

 

I created a mission that has two unarmed transport planes flying in front of me and away from me. This way I can play around with the radar, locking and weapons. When I select the Aim-120 and wait to be in range (and the SHOOT cue - about 10nm I believe?), I fire and the missile tracks, I see the time left counter (I think it's called "TTR"?) but after a few nm, it seems to run out of fuel and miss the target. The HUD shows "LOST".

 

When I repeat this at 5 nm distance, it still happens. I have to get really really close (more like 2nm) for the missile to hit.

 

Is this just what it is? Is it missing because my target is flying away from me? My speed and my target's speed does not change, so I'd assume that the range is calculated correctly and I have a very high change to hit the target when I get the SHOOT cue.

 

Thank you very much for you time.

[wilbur81]

I've wondered about the 120C's performance from the Hornet platform vs. the Viper for some time now. I watch, in MP, Viper kills galore from 120c shots... and they're not being taken from extreme altitudes or airspeeds. it's as if the Viper's radar is somehow more supportive of the missile.

[Ziptie]

Hi everyone,

 

I've searched this forum and other places but could not find a good answer to what I'm experiencing.

 

I've been flying the F-16 for about three weeks until I felt comfortable with it's basic functionality and also completed the three Caucasus missions that come with it. Now I've been started playing the F/A-18C and am running into a problem with Aim-120 AMRAAMs:

 

I created a mission that has two unarmed transport planes flying in front of me and away from me. This way I can play around with the radar, locking and weapons. When I select the Aim-120 and wait to be in range (and the SHOOT cue - about 10nm I believe?), I fire and the missile tracks, I see the time left counter (I think it's called "TTR"?) but after a few nm, it seems to run out of fuel and miss the target. The HUD shows "LOST".

 

When I repeat this at 5 nm distance, it still happens. I have to get really really close (more like 2nm) for the missile to hit.

 

Is this just what it is? Is it missing because my target is flying away from me? My speed and my target's speed does not change, so I'd assume that the range is calculated correctly and I have a very high change to hit the target when I get the SHOOT cue.

 

Thank you very much for you time.

 

 

What altitude are you at?

 

What altitude is the bandit at?

 

What speed are you at?

 

Is the AIM-120C in AUTO or MAN mode?

 

Are you engaging with STT lock or TWS?

 

Are you using Stable version, or Open Beta version?

 

 

A cold aspect shot is typically one of the most common miss scenario's in DCS, not sure why - that being said, the range you are saying, 5nm, is exceptionally close. I regularly get kills with the AIM0120C from the Hornet, on HOT, flanking and cold engaements from 20+nm, so seems like an isolated issue to me. I've scored kills with TWS from in excess of 30nm (and not playing against DCS' normal baked AI).

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

[fmedges]

The 120 is a mess right now. I flew an 8 vs 8 all ai but myself. 14 120’s fired from about 10 miles head on. 14 out of 14 missed. Other scenarios. 4 digit closing speeds at 28,000 and shoot cues at 15 miles. Even when you are in range the interesting choices they make when tracking is a mind boggling as well. 

[noisy_lightning]

Funnily enough I noticed whilst flying on the Hoggit server last night that my 120s seemed short legged compared to how I remember them (been playing the A10 II a lot recently). So it may be a recent thing with the new 120 flight model etc?

 

For context, I was hot, nose on with 2x SU27, TWS, fired on the closest one at 14nm, notched about 20 degrees, switched target and fired on the second one no more than ten seconds later at about 11/12nm, notched a slight bit more till the missiles were both pitbull then turned cold. Both showed lost, and when checking on them in F7 they had both bled out of energy a mile or so short and had given up.

 

The Su27 both remained HOT the entire time, and we had a closing speed at launch ~1000-1200kts. There is no way based on the parameters above they should have fell short...

[Al-Azraq]

Same experience. I usually fly Blue Flag and the F-16 AIM120 are way more dangerous. Sure the F-16 flies at Match 1+ everywhere and will be more dangerous than the Hornet most of the times but still, my launches are good and I find weird I don't have more connections. I try to get to Match 1 before launching, good altitudes, always supporting the missile, but my oponents are always able to defend.

 

I observed some weird behaviour of the radar while in TWS AUTO as it seems to freeze after launching and start nothing. The search bar will stop and the launch is not being supported. After some seconds it will start working again but the launch is already dead.

[CBStu]

I agree 120Cs seem much less effective than a couple months ago. I fly the included missions in SP mode and the 120C used to be nearly 100% using the HUD to aim and releasing on the 'Shoot' cue. Yesterday I shot a couple and then bugged out because there were 4 Migs nearby. I got a 'LOST' cue in the HUD and couldn't get rid of it. 'Undesignated', clicked 'AA' to off. Clicked 'Master Arm' to off. Each time, as soon as I got the 'AA' and 'Master Arm' back on, and the 120C aim cue back on the HUD, there was 'LOST' again. Shot another 120C and still 'LOST' showing. At this point the 'LOST' was referring to 3 missiles ago. Jeez, I get it, it was LOST, but I no longer care.

[Al-Azraq]

57 minutes ago, CBStu said:

I agree 120Cs seem much less effective than a couple months ago. I fly the included missions in SP mode and the 120C used to be nearly 100% using the HUD to aim and releasing on the 'Shoot' cue. Yesterday I shot a couple and then bugged out because there were 4 Migs nearby. I got a 'LOST' cue in the HUD and couldn't get rid of it. 'Undesignated', clicked 'AA' to off. Clicked 'Master Arm' to off. Each time, as soon as I got the 'AA' and 'Master Arm' back on, and the 120C aim cue back on the HUD, there was 'LOST' again. Shot another 120C and still 'LOST' showing. At this point the 'LOST' was referring to 3 missiles ago. Jeez, I get it, it was LOST, but I no longer care.

 

Yeah same, I get the LOST Cue 100% of the time and also get ghost locked contacts. When I lock a contact in TWS and it drops, sometimes it stays locked and following an straight line. Sometimes they get to -77.000 ft.

[...]

They almost sent me to the stake for defending the theory that AMRAAM is less effective in the Hornet than in the other modules. But to be honest, I have learned to live with it and currently I am getting good results, yes, with high exposure and at short distances.

[fmedges]

I'm hoping that we don't have to live with it forever, but I'm not sure if that's the case.

[Gogojuice]

I totally agree that the 120's seem worse for the 18 and previous posted comments.

 

 With other modules and the 120 I get quiet different results (When firing in similar conditions)  

On the bright side, glad to see others share the same opinion and we are having a civil conversation about it.

[Sn8ke]

I have been noticing the majority of AIM-120C shots are failing to hit their targets. Firing from standard F/A-18C BVR timeline 28-25 mile timeline in TWS, notching and supporting to pitbull. When reviewing Tacview, I have noticed AI are going defensive the moment the missile comes of the rails, spewing endless chaff and flares and performing expert defensive tactics. Part of the problem here is the AI should not be going defensive immediately, in fact they should not even get a missile warning when the missile is fired and supported in TWS until the missile is in self guidance (pitbull), which could be up to 20 seconds after the missile leaves the rails. At this time I would say the Hornet’s AIM-120C has a 10% success rate. IRL the missile is not going hit targets 100% of the time, however when the missile is defeated 90% of the time, that is not the missile I want to take into combat. I think much of the failure of the missile thus far can be attributed to the missile being detected immediately and the aircraft getting an unfair advantage with defensive tactics. 

[fmedges]

It’s a known thing with the AI and unfortunately the way it is. The AI isn’t limited to what it should know, or shouldn’t see like missiles coming from underneath them. Are you seeing better results using the same tactics against human players? I think that the AI’s tactics using countermeasures are just one piece of the puzzle.

 

The behavior that I’m seeing would suggest multiple issues and not just one related to countermeasures. I’ve fired missiles from 10 miles away at targets coming in hot being tracked in tws and the missile just flys right by them almost like it didn’t track. I’ve also seen missiles fly up to 80,000 for some reason like they are going to space. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by fmedges

[dundun92]

The Hornet and Viper use the exact same AIM-120s, so that isnt a problem here. I also havent experienced any of the issues here (note that I purely do PvP, so there could be some AI weridness going on such as detecting missiles off the rail). I think the first thing is that you simply cannot trust any of the DCS DLZ indicators. They, simply put, are very innacurate, and if you are using them to judge shot range unfortunately you will find a lot of "valid" shots missing because they in actuality were way out of WEZ. Its best to read up on DLZ definitions and test the missile yourself and find how they actually perform in game, until ED fixes them.

Second, there is also a somewhat unrealistic expectation of shots fired outside of the Kinematic NEZ to hit defending bandits. As an example, at 40kft the NEZ for the AMRAAM is 14nm, and this drops to just under 4nm on the deck. Almost all of the avaliable RL BVR documentation (for instance, NATOPS P-825) makes it clear that if you want to make sure the bandit cannot defeat the missile kinematically you need to shoot inside the NEZ. Anything outside the NEZ and your giving the bandit a chance to kinematically defend it. You really shouldnt expect shots outside of the NEZ to hit a defending bandit.

 

However, there definitely are some bugs with AMRAAMs, but these universally apply to all AMRAAM carriers. For example, with lofted trajectories, if you drop the lock before the peak of the loft it flies into space for some reason and doesnt guide towards the last known position. Also, if the bandits have ECM they may be abusing the ECM blinking bug.

Edited December 3, 2020 by dundun92

[falcon_120]

I have not seen any noticeable difference between amraams in different aircrafts. Same behavior from my PoV.

A different thing altogether is the beast the amraam turns into when shot at M1.5 and more, something only F16 and F15 drivers will be able to take advantage of.

 

[Al-Azraq]

6 hours ago, dundun92 said:

The Hornet and Viper use the exact same AIM-120s, so that isnt a problem here. I also havent experienced any of the issues here (note that I purely do PvP, so there could be some AI weridness going on such as detecting missiles off the rail). I think the first thing is that you simply cannot trust any of the DCS DLZ indicators. They, simply put, are very innacurate, and if you are using them to judge shot range unfortunately you will find a lot of "valid" shots missing because they in actuality were way out of WEZ. Its best to read up on DLZ definitions and test the missile yourself and find how they actually perform in game, until ED fixes them.

Second, there is also a somewhat unrealistic expectation of shots fired outside of the Kinematic NEZ to hit defending bandits. As an example, at 40kft the NEZ for the AMRAAM is 14nm, and this drops to just under 4nm on the deck. Almost all of the avaliable RL BVR documentation (for instance, NATOPS P-825) makes it clear that if you want to make sure the bandit cannot defeat the missile kinematically you need to shoot inside the NEZ. Anything outside the NEZ and your giving the bandit a chance to kinematically defend it. You really shouldnt expect shots outside of the NEZ to hit a defending bandit.

 

However, there definitely are some bugs with AMRAAMs, but these universally apply to all AMRAAM carriers. For example, with lofted trajectories, if you drop the lock before the peak of the loft it flies into space for some reason and doesnt guide towards the last known position. Also, if the bandits have ECM they may be abusing the ECM blinking bug.

My issues are in a PvP server (Blue Flag). I don't think there's a problem with the AIM 120 because as you said, they are the same missiles for all planes but I do think that the F-18 might have an issue supporting the missiles. I'm always getting the LOST cue on the HUD unless I launch from very close and also in TWS, when I launch and notch, the scan bar in the radar gets kinda stuck to the radar contact gets lost and missile is wasted.

 

Also ED nerfed the AIM 120 after improving them due to the Russian community complaining and I guess it will stay like that until the improvements to the Russian missiles come, but that's a separate issue.

[falcon_120]

My issues are in a PvP server (Blue Flag). I don't think there's a problem with the AIM 120 because as you said, they are the same missiles for all planes but I do think that the F-18 might have an issue supporting the missiles. I'm always getting the LOST cue on the HUD unless I launch from very close and also in TWS, when I launch and notch, the scan bar in the radar gets kinda stuck to the radar contact gets lost and missile is wasted.
 
Also ED nerfed the AIM 120 after improving them due to the Russian community complaining and I guess it will stay like that until the improvements to the Russian missiles come, but that's a separate issue.

I don't think the amraam was nerfed in any way kinematically since the major overhaul. Its still a weapon capable of 40/50 nm kills.

One thing to consider in blue flag is that only 120b are allowed there. This missile is considerably less capable than his newer brother the aim120c both in range and in CM rejection cappabilities. When doing the mental math of the NEZ you should consider reducing by at least 20/25% your numbers, that is a good ballpark figure.

Meaning that for example down low the 120C is in its NEZ at 6/7nm, however the B is only when at 4nm. So many good players will defeat it kinematically in that server if they understand and respect these numbers.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[fmedges]

I think some of the issues are between the hornets radar and the 120. 

[dundun92]

10 hours ago, Al-Azraq said:

My issues are in a PvP server (Blue Flag). I don't think there's a problem with the AIM 120 because as you said, they are the same missiles for all planes but I do think that the F-18 might have an issue supporting the missiles. I'm always getting the LOST cue on the HUD unless I launch from very close and also in TWS, when I launch and notch, the scan bar in the radar gets kinda stuck to the radar contact gets lost and missile is wasted.

 

Also ED nerfed the AIM 120 after improving them due to the Russian community complaining and I guess it will stay like that until the improvements to the Russian missiles come, but that's a separate issue.

As I said, you really should ignore all DLZ cues, LOST cue included. Ive had LOST shot for 40nm shots at 40kft (well within the WEZ), and it not show up for 90nm shots from 20k with a displayed TTA of 120sec (which is longer than the battery life...)

As far as the bug with the radar scan beam freezing, moving the TDC around and/or switching between AUTO and MAN quickly usually fixes it.

And I wouldnt quite say they nerfed the AMRAAM. Kinematically it never changed from when it got the new FM, the complaints were about chaff resistance. It had increased chaff resistance one patch which supposedly was unintended, and a few months later they put the resistance back to the original values.

[CBStu]

Several of your replies are technically way over my head. I fly the provided missions in Caucuses and PG maps. I don't know enough about the radar to even chose different modes. How ever it is set up in the mission, that is what I use. Some times, as range to the enemy closes to 25 or less, I will shoot a few 120Cs by slewing across the radar screen to get a lock and then fire. I usually have no idea if I hit anything though because, as the planes get into visual range, it gets busy quickly so I switch to using the HUD as my sensor. Where it is an air start I am shooting the provided weapons. I have given up flying missions where I have only 7s. For 2 years they have never hit much of anything for me. Where it is a ship start, I often rearm and chose 120Cs and 9Xs. They have been working very well.  But in the last several weeks the 120Cs are not much better than 7s. I haven't changed anything, the provided missions haven't changed, but the effectiveness of 120Cs has dropped way off.

[dundun92]

Without tacviews/tracks or some way of specifically documenting what the missile is doing differently, threads like this typically dont go anywhere, as theres no way to tell whats wrong, as often there isnt. From my experience, the 120s have gotten better in almost every way since the FM/New API update, due to the increased lift, less drag, loft, etc. Plus, again if you are using the shoot cue to time your shots you will get inconsistient results as the shoot cues have changed, and arent particularly accurate either.

[fmedges]

1 hour ago, dundun92 said:

Without tacviews/tracks or some way of specifically documenting what the missile is doing differently, threads like this typically dont go anywhere, as theres no way to tell whats wrong, as often there isnt. From my experience, the 120s have gotten better in almost every way since the FM/New API update, due to the increased lift, less drag, loft, etc. Plus, again if you are using the shoot cue to time your shots you will get inconsistient results as the shoot cues have changed, and arent particularly accurate either.

 

I would say that your experiences are in the minority here also I mix pve and pvp so that is different as well. I have plenty of tacviews, but all too big to post here.

Edited December 3, 2020 by fmedges

[dundun92]

2 hours ago, fmedges said:

 

I would say that your experiences are in the minority here also I mix pve and pvp so that is different as well. I have plenty of tacviews, but all too big to post here.

...since when has this been about majority and minority lol. And again, without showing something as simple a a YT vid of a few your "plenty of tacviews" it means nothing as far as ED is concerned.

[oldcrusty]

10 hours ago, dundun92 said:

As I said, you really should ignore all DLZ cues, LOST cue included. Ive had LOST shot for 40nm shots at 40kft (well within the WEZ), and it not show up for 90nm shots from 20k with a displayed TTA of 120sec (which is longer than the battery life...)

As far as the bug with the radar scan beam freezing, moving the TDC around and/or switching between AUTO and MAN quickly usually fixes it.

And I wouldnt quite say they nerfed the AMRAAM. Kinematically it never changed from when it got the new FM, the complaints were about chaff resistance. It had increased chaff resistance one patch which supposedly was unintended, and a few months later they put the resistance back to the original values.

 

No major issues sending 120's against AI in SP. At high altitudes most of my shots from Rmax connect with no issue, again... that's against AI. They usually start defensive maneuvering when missiles go active. I don't really know the AI logic but I think they should expect the shot and start cranking a bit earlier. Heck, under perfect conditions at high altitudes they might even 'see' the missile trail during the burn and the 'smokeless' smoke.

Once or twice I tried launching from R_aero (at over 40k feet ~ 52nm) but they run out of steam... still made the bandit turn away for a minute.

At lower altitudes and shorter ranges, I've had mixed results

 

 

Edited December 4, 2020 by Gripes323

[oldcrusty]

BTW, I noticed something weird with the ACQ point. After designating a track on a single target in RWS (LTWS on) the cross stayed put at the point where the track was created but the L&S crept up happily toward me. I have to test this some more.