resolved Aim-120, Aim-7MH, SD-10 produce 0% hit chance against non-manuevering hot target with blinking ECM+chaff

[NineLine]

On 4/10/2021 at 3:42 AM, Teknetinium said:

Will 15 sec warm up jammer be removed for Flankers/F-15? Plz stop divide Fc3 from what ever you think you are flying. What is more realistic could be debatable from both perspectives, let us keep the community together and do what ever we can so it gets as realistic as possible with no double standards.  

 

 

We are looking at the data we have and will try and make all aircraft reflect how the real world works to the best of our ability.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

On 2/22/2021 at 1:09 PM, HWasp said:

Don't know, seems like kind of a big deal to me... 

This type of shit should be hotfixed asap in my opinion. (disable ecm, add timer, whatever)

@Teknetinium  , you don't want this to happen to all the jets do you ? 
It's already bad enough the F14 and Mirage have this ECM blinking thing. Why do you want the FC airplanes to be able to blink to ?
Am i misinterpreting your comment ?

Edited April 12, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[Frostie]

It is the missile that is bugged not the ecm.

I didn't hear any complaints when Active missiles had overmodeled midcourse guidance, but undemodeled missiles suddenly becomes everyone elses problem.

Concentrate on what needs fixing rather than trying to break more DCS to fix your trip.

 

Having purposely broken ecm for FC3 while new modules get unhindered ecm is a big problem as well.

 

To add, F14 has always blinked its jammers.

[dundun92]

13 minutes ago, Frostie said:

I didn't hear any complaints when Active missiles had overmodeled midcourse guidance, but undemodeled missiles suddenly becomes everyone elses problem.

Your point is valid, but "nobody" complained because in practice the Magic INS wasnt that big of a game breaker (at least for AMRAAMs, AIM-54 was a whole other can of worms), if one at all. 20nm was like the furthest youd shoot the old AMRAAMs, and thats from like 35K M 1.2+. Realistically shot ranges were under 10-15nm 99% of the time where the missile went active like under 5 sec off the rail, so the presence of Magic INS was nowhere near the level of breaking gameplay as this ECM bug is. Whereas now, you have loft enabling longer shot ranges, the effects of not having any sort of INS are much more problematic than when they had magic INS.

 

That being said, this is really just quite simply a case where we need to just sit back and let ED do their work. Making a new "AMRAAM Broken" thread every week, or bumping old ones is not going to make ED move any faster. They will fix bugs as they see fit. What looks like an "easy fix" on the surface often is acually a lot more complicated, especially accounting for spaghetti code.

[D4n]

8 hours ago, Frostie said:

To add, F14 has always blinked its jammers.

You mean Ai F-14 always rapidly switched its jammer on and off? Or is the logic broken that way even for player-F-14s who simply enable jammer once and leave it on?

 

8 hours ago, dundun92 said:

especially accounting for spaghetti code.

If I remember correctly, in a recent ED YouTube-interview it was mentioned that the term "spaghetti-code" didn't even come from the ED programming-team (but from very high ED staff instead), so we have to stop using that term...

[dundun92]

8 hours ago, D4n said:

so we have to stop using that term

are you like a mod or something?

[dundun92]

8 hours ago, D4n said:

Or is the logic broken that way even for player-F-14s who simply enable jammer once and leave it on?

yes

[Frostie]

On 4/13/2021 at 8:10 AM, D4n said:

You mean Ai F-14 always rapidly switched its jammer on and off? Or is the logic broken that way even for player-F-14s who simply enable jammer once and leave it on?

 

The AI doesn't rapidly switch its jammer on and off.

What it does is a feature in the AI code and something that can be set in the ME for any AI aircraft carrying a jammer by the 'activate when locked' option, when locked it activates jammer, when the jammer is locked it deactivates jammer. Ironically almost like a Self Protect Jammer would actually behave.

 

[Furiz]

Thought they fixed this, but SU25 kept its stealth bomber capabilities, firing 3 aim120 at the guy and no hit... incredible

[Arikaj]

bumping

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

So uhm, is this supposed to be fixed now? 
Because i still see amraams whizzing by almost stationairy targets @35k while missile is still almost going mach3 

[dundun92]

47 minutes ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

So uhm, is this supposed to be fixed now? 
Because i still see amraams whizzing by almost stationairy targets @35k while missile is still almost going mach3 

Quoting from another post of mine

Quote

Its the aiming error mechanic. Turns out, besides the low altitude aiming error, theres an overall error for new API missiles, the aim_sigma value, the standard deviation. Assuming a normal distribution curve, I calculated that the probability of a miss outside proxy fuze range was 3.5%. Low, but not zero. That may be what you are experiencing.

 

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

ok that is acceptable i guess. Which missiles are not affected by this RNG ?

[Breakshot]

ok that is acceptable i guess. Which missiles are not affected by this RNG ?

R-27ER as it has a 97.5% chance of missing to start with.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

Your point is valid, but "nobody" complained because in practice the Magic INS wasnt that big of a game breaker (at least for AMRAAMs, AIM-54 was a whole other can of worms), if one at all. 20nm was like the furthest youd shoot the old AMRAAMs, and thats from like 35K M 1.2+. Realistically shot ranges were under 10-15nm 99% of the time where the missile went active like under 5 sec off the rail, so the presence of Magic INS was nowhere near the level of breaking gameplay as this ECM bug is. Whereas now, you have loft enabling longer shot ranges, the effects of not having any sort of INS are much more problematic than when they had magic INS.
 
That being said, this is really just quite simply a case where we need to just sit back and let ED do their work. Making a new "AMRAAM Broken" thread every week, or bumping old ones is not going to make ED move any faster. They will fix bugs as they see fit. What looks like an "easy fix" on the surface often is acually a lot more complicated, especially accounting for spaghetti code.

Not a game breaker? Are you kidding me?

You mean like F18 pilots lofting 120s from 40nm then instantly turning away with 32sec mag ins. While the 120s guided perfectly.... I can even show you acmis of you doing just that.

Its funny how its never an issue for BLUE on BLUE to fly gamy mechanics because end of the day is just about the missile. So when kills are easy, who's complaining right?

ED needs to sort their missile stuff out. At least I'm glad they are on the right track.

Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

[dundun92]

12 hours ago, Breakshot said:

R-27ER as it has a 97.5% chance of missing to start with.

No. Never seen an ER miss a straight flying, non maneuvering non chaffing target within the WEZ.

12 hours ago, Breakshot said:

Not a game breaker? Are you kidding me?

You mean like F18 pilots lofting 120s from 40nm then instantly turning away with 32sec mag ins. While the 120s guided perfectly.... I can even show you acmis of you doing just that.

If you'd bothered to spend 2 seconds reading what I said in detail I said it *was* not a game breaker previously for the listed reasons, but once it got loft and the drag changes, it did become an issue.

 

EDIT: and just to set the record straight, the most memory Ive ever used is 8s, and thats only to fix the issue of TWS constantly loosing track in interleaved, and the various TWS-A issues. I do not intentionally go around exploiting this or other bugs (especially obviously wrong ones like this), as any pilot ive flown with extensively knows. Im not out here to get "easy kills".

Edited May 25, 2021 by dundun92

[July]

11 hours ago, Breakshot said:

You mean like F18 pilots lofting 120s from 40nm then instantly turning away with 32sec mag ins. While the 120s guided perfectly.... I can even show you acmis of you doing just that.
 

In the current implementation of the way the Hornet builds tracks, it can extrapolate radar tracks even without scans, up to 32 seconds. This is based on the last scanned heading, speed, and altitude of the target. If the target maneuvers while not having been swept by the Hornet radar, the track becomes inaccurate. It's not "magic", even though it seems like it is.

 

Is this the correct implementation of track building? I have no idea.

Edited May 25, 2021 by July

[dundun92]

1 hour ago, July said:

If the target maneuvers while not having been swept by the Hornet radar, the track becomes inaccurate

Incorrect. Although visually the TD box moves off the target, the missile is being fed perfect target info.

[dundun92]

On 5/24/2021 at 6:19 AM, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

ok that is acceptable i guess. Which missiles are not affected by this RNG ?

All the old API missiles. ANything but the AIM-120 and AIM-7 as of RN.

[July]

2 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Incorrect. Although visually the TD box moves off the target, the missile is being fed perfect target info.

I wasn't aware of the tracks working this way because in the past, I've observed sudden changes to missile trajectory (instantaneous Gs) as the seekers turn on within range after breaking "lock" in TWS ~16 seconds to active with the datum set to 32 seconds. I just thought that was attributed to inaccurate tracks being built by target aircraft maneuvers before they get missile warnings. I guess I stand corrected, provided it works the way you say it does. Maybe I've been seeing server desync.

[Breakshot]

On 5/25/2021 at 10:43 PM, dundun92 said:

No. Never seen an ER miss a straight flying, non maneuvering non chaffing target within the WEZ.

If you'd bothered to spend 2 seconds reading what I said in detail I said it *was* not a game breaker previously for the listed reasons, but once it got loft and the drag changes, it did become an issue.

 

EDIT: and just to set the record straight, the most memory Ive ever used is 8s, and thats only to fix the issue of TWS constantly loosing track in interleaved, and the various TWS-A issues. I do not intentionally go around exploiting this or other bugs (especially obviously wrong ones like this), as any pilot ive flown with extensively knows. Im not out here to get "easy kills".

 

It was an issue from day 1. Why wouldn't it be? When you fly REDFOR you notice that right away as margins for error in fight are close to 0, so every little exploit is easy to spot. It was the same for the pheonix. It took years for ED/HB to do something about it...

 

Second part was just to stir you up a bit, relax, it really doesnt matter what memory setting you use. If its possible in DCS then I really don't see a problem. There are many bugs and "exploits" but they cant be policed, rather we should raise them to ED to be fixed for the sake of realism. In fact its up to Hornet pilots to point them out, not the "other" guys.

 

As to ER missing, yes it can due to EO bug without any maneuvering or CM, but thats another story. 

 

So the question now is have they fixed the 32 sec exploit on Hornet? Im guessing not yet right?

Edited May 27, 2021 by Breakshot

[dundun92]

8 hours ago, Breakshot said:

 

So the question now is have they fixed the 32 sec exploit on Hornet? Im guessing not yet right?

 

Nope, still not fixed. Its been reported several times, for almost a year now.

[Max1mus]

ECM needs to be fixed, please. F-18, F-16, JF-17 and F-14 are completely unaffected by jamming at any distance, while Su-27, F-15C and MiG-29 can not have a lock for more than a second against F-18 and F-14 until about 22 miles, at which point you will have been destroyed by enemy missiles.

[Harker]

ECM needs to be fixed, please. F-18, F-16, JF-17 and F-14 are completely unaffected by jamming at any distance, while Su-27, F-15C and MiG-29 can not have a lock for more than a second against F-18 and F-14 until about 22 miles, at which point you will have been destroyed by enemy missiles.

The F-18 cannot achieve a lock either past 22 NM, on jamming targets. They are kept in the system as AOTs (Angle Only Tracks), without range info.

For the F-16 and F-14 I agree, their radars are unaffected by jamming and for the JF-17, I don't know.

[Max1mus]

59 minutes ago, Harker said:

The F-18 cannot achieve a lock either past 22 NM, on jamming targets. They are kept in the system as AOTs (Angle Only Tracks), without range info.

Test again. The F-18 maintains a perfect track, and when it launches an AIM-120, it will loft and track normally, as if it knew the range. On top of this, you cannot break the F-18s radar lock by turning ECM on and off.

In short, its useless, especially if the target is detected by AWACS. Infact, youre helping the F-18 by jamming more than youre hurting it.

[Harker]

Test again. The F-18 maintains a perfect track, and when it launches an AIM-120, it will loft and track normally, as if it knew the range. On top of this, you cannot break the F-18s radar lock by turning ECM on and off.

In short, its useless, especially if the target is detected by AWACS. Infact, youre helping the F-18 by jamming more than youre hurting it.

When you say "a perfect track", is it range resolved? Because if not, then it's an AOT and that's correct behavior.

And why would you be able to break the track by turning the ECM on and off? What should happen in his case is that the track would switch between a fully resolved track and an AOT (resolved in azimuth, elevation and range vs resolved only in azimuth and elevation). You are helping the F-18 if you turn off your ECM, because you're giving away your range. Why would turn off your ECM in the first place?

If the AMRAAM behaves like it knows the range, then it's a bug with the missile or the radar-missile interface. The pilot in the F-18 does not have information about the range, with their own radar.

Finally, of course having an AWACS will help the F-18, why wouldn't it? The entire point of a datalink system and the MSI system in the Hornet is to help with SA and situations like this.