Target size questions

[eatthis]

Apart from distance to target when it goes active what else changes with the target size setting? 

Will shooting at a fighter in large target size increase the missiles chance to miss/go stupid?

[draconus]

Nothing else changes but the result of that is when you set large target size, the missile will go active sooner and may have a hard time finding a fighter on it's own.

Quote

The TGTS (targets) switch selects expected target size which is used by the WCS to calculate missile launch zones and set parameters for target tracking in the radar. It also sets the range at which the missile ATC is sent, SMALL being 6NM, NORM 10NM and LARGE 13NM. The selected position of this switch might negatively affect target tracking and engagement if set incorrectly.

http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/general.html#detail-data-display-ddd-and-panel

Edited December 22, 2020 by draconus

[eatthis]

9 hours ago, draconus said:

Nothing else changes but the result of that is when you set large target size, the missile will go active sooner and may have a hard time finding a fighter on it's own.

http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/general.html#detail-data-display-ddd-and-panel

 

doesnt explain much

[draconus]

On which part you need explanation?

[Xeno426]

7 minutes ago, draconus said:

On which part you need explanation?

The part where is goes "The selected position of this switch might negatively affect target tracking and engagement if set incorrectly. "

How might it negatively affect tracking and engagement? What kind of targets are we talking about? An F-16 vs an F-14? If the target is in a 5g turn, which would be better? If the missiles is further away from the target when it goes active, does it have a larger cone to find it? If you know the target is going to try and maneuver hard before the missile hits, would "small" be a better setting?

[draconus]

The longer the distance the bigger the cone, right (well, the cone is the same but is wider at the longer range). But the lower target RCS can be too small and impossible for the 54's radar to pick it up from that distance. That's how it affects both tracking and engagement. For the best tracking you want the small target selection ofc but then it is almost SARH, isn't it? You have to weigh in the time you possibly have to engage or extend depending on enemy's actions or possible actions (like expecting a heater or TWS AMRAAM shot incoming).

Edited December 22, 2020 by draconus

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

I'm pretty sure that this: "The selected position of this switch might negatively affect target tracking and engagement if set incorrectly" is NOT modeled , at all. 
Probably only changes when the targets gets the RWR warning. 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[AH_Solid_Snake]

It’s definitely modelled wrt when the missile will go active and no longer need supported.

 

I’ve used it successfully on fighters with the large setting which goes active about 4-5 seconds sooner on average, about 20 seconds or thereabouts. Normal usually starts flashing at 15-16. Never tried small, at that point its STT all the way.

[near_blind]

3 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

I'm pretty sure that this: "The selected position of this switch might negatively affect target tracking and engagement if set incorrectly" is NOT modeled , at all. 
Probably only changes when the targets gets the RWR warning. 

 

Unless you're flying formation with an IL-76, I'm not sure that will negatively effect the missile in the way you're hoping it will.

[IronMike]

On 3/17/2021 at 10:34 PM, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

I'm pretty sure that this: "The selected position of this switch might negatively affect target tracking and engagement if set incorrectly" is NOT modeled , at all. 
Probably only changes when the targets gets the RWR warning. 

 

 

 

100% this is modeled.

[QuiGon]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

100% this is modeled.

 

Huh, interesting. Now I'm curious what it does exactly in this regard?

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

In theory, because of the greater distance when the missile goes active earlier it should have a harder time finding it's target. 
The phoenix however is so aggressively tracking, (it will just keep finding you again and again,  no matter how many times you ditch it) that in reality it makes no difference. 

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

Edited March 19, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[near_blind]

50 minutes ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

I would love to get ahold of the AIM-54 that exists in your imagination. It sounds like a real hoot.

[Golo]

1 hour ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

If that missiles radar can send radar energy lets say 10nm, detect reflected energy of target and track it, it also means that that emitted radar energy can travel and be detected by RWR probably several times that distance. So whats so strange about that? Its only logical.

[dundun92]

1 hour ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

In theory, because of the greater distance when the missile goes active earlier it should have a harder time finding it's target. 
The phoenix however is so aggressively tracking, (it will just keep finding you again and again,  no matter how many times you ditch it) that in reality it makes no difference. 

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

 

... not even close to how the AIM-54 operates in game. Its literally the easiest missile to evade rn. Just stop whining about it, and honestly just spend the time wasted on the forums getting good at BVR.

[Gunslinger22]

2 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

In theory, because of the greater distance when the missile goes active earlier it should have a harder time finding it's target. 
The phoenix however is so aggressively tracking, (it will just keep finding you again and again,  no matter how many times you ditch it) that in reality it makes no difference. 

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

 

I wish we could get you as the Phoenix seeker, it would never give up and would be impossible to ditch. You’re certainly willing to die on your hill, aren’t you. 

[Skysurfer]

4 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

In theory, because of the greater distance when the missile goes active earlier it should have a harder time finding it's target. 
The phoenix however is so aggressively tracking, (it will just keep finding you again and again,  no matter how many times you ditch it) that in reality it makes no difference. 

It is like it has a 360 degree sphere search pattern with unlimited range once it goes active . I'm even getting phoenix RWR warnings when i'm refueling on the runway. 

 

 

Just git gud brah.

[captain_dalan]

Give that man a medal guys, the heat death of the universe won't stop his persistence

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

Hey man don't shoot the messenger. 
Only the phoenix seems to still try to get me when i'm refueling, i've never ever gotten an RWR warning from any other missile while i was refueling on the runway. 
Only the phoenix keeps re-acquiring me like a crazy stalker. Sometimes even 10 seconds after it seemed ditched. Everytime i'm like "what  ?! Are you serious !?! LOL" . It's funny to witness. 
And only an active phoenix shoots past me, and tries to get me when it's on my 10'o clock IN FRONT of me  

 

Not trying to pick a fight but in my humble experience the seeker seems a bit weird to say the least. 

[dundun92]

13 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

Only the phoenix keeps re-acquiring me like a crazy stalker. Sometimes even 10 seconds after it seemed ditched. Everytime i'm like "what  ?! Are you serious !?! LOL" . It's funny to witness. 

Its almost as if... the AMRAAM does the same thing

Edited March 20, 2021 by dundun92

[Steff Bourne]

vor 10 Minuten schrieb dundun92:

Its almost as if... the AMRAAM does the same thing

 

Plus I don’t know it exactly, but often it feels, that the Aim120 can see you through the Hills

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

10 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Its almost as if... the AMRAAM does the same thing

 

Don't think it does and even if it did, it IS an 'Advanced' missile  

[Gunslinger22]

On 3/20/2021 at 7:14 PM, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

Hey man don't shoot the messenger. 
Only the phoenix seems to still try to get me when i'm refueling, i've never ever gotten an RWR warning from any other missile while i was refueling on the runway. 
Only the phoenix keeps re-acquiring me like a crazy stalker. Sometimes even 10 seconds after it seemed ditched. Everytime i'm like "what  ?! Are you serious !?! LOL" . It's funny to witness. 
And only an active phoenix shoots past me, and tries to get me when it's on my 10'o clock IN FRONT of me  

 

Not trying to pick a fight but in my humble experience the seeker seems a bit weird to say the least. 

Boy would I love to see some trackfiles of this. Strange that you never provide any evidence for you claims. 

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

1 hour ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Boy would I love to see some trackfiles of this. Strange that you never provide any evidence for you claims. 

Seemed like a bit of sarcasm and embellishment if you ask me. I doubt he has had the exact experience, just relaying his frustrations. 
I am curious however.  Who are you to ask for evidence?  And If by chance he sent you some, please illuminate us on what you would do with it? Jump under the “ole lid” and give DCS a tweak?  Should we start sending all of our track files to “Gunslinger “????

Whats with all the bullies lately?  

 

 

 

[AH_Solid_Snake]

Go easy on each other guys. I think Gunslinger is just a little frustrated, as probably a lot of people are getting with the majority of CS Go’s posts degenerating into unsubstantiated claims of HB cheats and game breaking “intentional bugs” all of which when pressed for evidence evaporate or “cannot be arsed” providing.

 

As with all allegations there must be a degree of proof.