AIM-54 Status

[Aigle2]

Hi @IronMike,

My community noticed in our campaign that since a few month/weeks, AIM-54 performance (especially in TWS) dropped. 
I noticed on the forums that you were planning at some point to have a mid-flight guidance rework. However, with ED wanting to take charge of missiles, how or will this affect their development ? 

It would be nice if you could give some details about whether or not their current behaviour is normal or (indeed) quite buggy, whether or not you are working on it, or intending to, and what are Heatblur's goals on it.

The Tomcat is one of the greatest module in DCS, and we really are looking forward to be able to fire our AIM-54s again and make the AMRAAM lovers scream a bit !

Best regards from France, 

Aigle2

Edited February 11, 2021 by Aigle2

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

rofl
 

September last year :
Tweaked AIM-54 PN coefficients for smoother transitions and a slightly better effect at long range (to try and counter the disadvantages of the current terminal guidance compromise).

 

 

[Skysurfer]

The Phoenix is currently not on the latest ED missile API. So there is that. 

[QuiGon]

10 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

The Phoenix is currently not on the latest ED missile API. So there is that. 

 

Where was that said?

 

--------------------------------

 

15 hours ago, Aigle2 said:

Hi @IronMike,

My community noticed in our campaign that since a few month/weeks, AIM-54 performance (especially in TWS) dropped. 
I noticed on the forums that you were planning at some point to have a mid-flight guidance rework. However, with ED wanting to take charge of missiles, how or will this affect their development ? 

It would be nice if you could give some details about whether or not their current behaviour is normal or (indeed) quite buggy, whether or not you are working on it, or intending to, and what are Heatblur's goals on it.

The Tomcat is one of the greatest module in DCS, and we really are looking forward to be able to fire our AIM-54s again and make the AMRAAM lovers scream a bit !

Best regards from France, 

Aigle2

 

 

The Phoenix guidance has seen some extensive changes in November, bringing their guidance logic down to more realistic standards:

 

On 11/4/2020 at 12:57 PM, IronMike said:

Dear all,

 

for a while now we had our side of the code needed for the new API to work in the release version of the F-14, however we did not inform you until now as these changes were not working at all or not as intended, and practically showed no difference - hence it was no change that warranted a changelog entry so far.

 

Now Eagle Dynamics helped fix some of the remaining issues on their side, which means that the new API might be working as of today's patch, but it is not well tested yet. Equally it is not in the patch notes, as we did not commit anything really, however the changelog entry is planned for Nov 18th.

 

In light of these API changes now being active, we would like to ask for your feedback. It would help us greatly finalize the item before the next patch, if possible, as our main testing focus at the moment lies on the A.

 

To recap the changes and how it should work:

 

1. TWS with range >10NM: LTE (launch to eject) 3s, loft, SARH/DL, missile goes active at 16 seconds TTI (time-to-impact)

 

2. PDSTT with range >10NM: LTE 3s, loft, SARH/DL, missile does not go active (SARH/DL all the way to target)

 

3. TWS or PDSTT with range <10NM, or PH ACT selected: LTE 3s, no loft, active directly after launch

 

4. PSTT or BRSIT or (ACM cover up with no track or PSTT or PDSTT): LTE 1s (unless STT and angle >15deg then 3s), no loft, active immediately

 

5. This also means the in-flight missiles with TWS will no longer go active if tracking is lost, the F-14 is destroyed, the radar is disabled etc. before 16s TTI. However, the WCS can keep a track file stored for up to 2 minutes (for targets under missile attack) and send an active signal to the Phoenix pointing it into the target’s likely position, if the track has not updated for a certain time

 

6. If working as intended, you will not see the terminal phase maneuver the missile does at 7nm to the target (or 15km). Instead you should observe it going active when 16 seconds away from impact. This is best tested with a 2nd player in MP, by taking the time between the RWR warning and being hit.

 

Please note: the 16 seconds TTI will not always be exact, as DCS doesn't have a simulated missile flyout, etc. Loft, relative velocities and whether the target maneuvers or not can impact the timer being right or wrong as well. So it should be taken with a grain of salt and as a general guide line, rather than a solid value to always be 100% correct. This means: it will go active at 16 seconds TTI as indicated on the TID, just that it may not be quite 16s in reality at that stage. How big this margin might be, we cannot really say, due to the numerous factors it depends on. Please keep that in mind. The TTI is a WCS calculated TTI and not a real TTI.

 

ATM we are suspecting that SARH guidance might not work as intended in PDSTT yet: it reportedly keeps tracking when lock is lost, and we need to investigate this further.

 

 

 

Any kind of feedback you have is greatly appreciated. We will use this thread for it. We hope that we are now very close to finalizing the phoenixes. Thank you!

 

 

The 16 sec TTI has been changed in a following update:

Quote

- AIM-54 now uses distance (determined by TGT Size switch: large=13NM, medium=10NM, small=6NM) for going active, instead of 16s TTI.

 

Edited February 12, 2021 by QuiGon

[The_Tau]

Idk if that realistic or not but aim54 seem very aggressive at turning, bleeding a lot of energy

[Skysurfer]

28 minutes ago, The_Tau said:

Idk if that realistic or not but aim54 seem very aggressive at turning, bleeding a lot of energy

 

Yes, now compare this to the AMRAAM and how relatively smoothly it lofts and de-lofts now - one is on an older API, the other on a newer one. I guess it'll get there eventually.

[QuiGon]

19 hours ago, The_Tau said:

Idk if that realistic or not but aim54 seem very aggressive at turning, bleeding a lot of energy

 

18 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

Yes, now compare this to the AMRAAM and how relatively smoothly it lofts and de-lofts now - one is on an older API, the other on a newer one. I guess it'll get there eventually.

 

Oh, you were referring to the turning behaviour of the missile, not the seeker logic. That is indeed still an issue