Phoenix missile broken on latest beta patch?

[near_blind]

11 hours ago, draconus said:

Where you got that info from? Afaik the missile is lost to the WCS when already active. Only Sparrow can look for flood illumination as a last resort.

 

In game yes. IRL the missile behaves like r4y30n describes. 

[draconus]

56 minutes ago, near_blind said:

In game yes. IRL the missile behaves like r4y30n describes. 

Why not call it a bug then?

[near_blind]

Bug implies that the missile isn't behaving as intended. To my knowledge there's been no indication that the ARH->SARH fall back has been implemented in the API, the feature can't be failing if it doesn't exist. 

[Callsign JoNay]

2 hours ago, dundun92 said:

your looking at the wrong file, that is the file for the old ED AIM-54 (and even that one is commented out so it does nothing). The HB AIM-54 is located in C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\CoreMods\aircraft\F14\Entry\Weapons.lua

 

That's true. But it is an indication that someone out there who is involved in the sim at one point coded an AIM-54 (not necessarily HB's 54) to have a CM resistance of 1.0. I guess I'm wondering if it's possible that somewhere in the spaghetti there exists a fragment of that old 1.0 CM resistance setting that is still affecting things even for HB's AIM-54. Because as I demonstrated above, this current version of the 54 is highly susceptible to chaff.

[Triggerjo23]

On 3/2/2021 at 8:55 AM, draconus said:

Where you got that info from? Afaik the missile is lost to the WCS when already active. Only Sparrow can look for flood illumination as a last resort.

This is refering to when firing in P-STT, PH-ACT or ACM cover up. The missile is active off the rails but will refer to an STT locked target if it can not find a target on its own.
 

On 3/2/2021 at 9:55 PM, near_blind said:

Bug implies that the missile isn't behaving as intended. To my knowledge there's been no indication that the ARH->SARH fall back has been implemented in the API, the feature can't be failing if it doesn't exist. 

This feature has been implimented, you can find it in the manual under the Phoenix section.

[near_blind]

35 minutes ago, Triggerjo23 said:

This feature has been implimented, you can find it in the manual under the Phoenix section.

 

Huh, so it does. Well the I guess the current behavior would presumptively be a bug, because I certainly have never seen an AIM-54 reacquire a target after losing it. 

[draconus]

4 hours ago, Triggerjo23 said:

This feature has been implimented, you can find it in the manual under the Phoenix section.

I see where you come from but it is not clear whether the missile could revert back to SARH after losing the track in ARH. The manual rather means that the missile falls back to SARH only if ARH is unable to find the target on its own at the launch.

[The_Tau]

It would make sense,  if active finds target then missile is fully independent, and if target is lost in active then missile goes stupid

[Naquaii]

IRL the missile would fall back to SARH as long as it's available if it losses active tracking. In DCS the ability to fallback to SARH is not possible to model for us as it is currently afaik.

IRL you were supposed to illuminate the target until a supposed hit regardless, to turn around and stop supporting the missile wasn't even a scenario in the documents. At least not for the -A.

Edited April 3, 2021 by Naquaii

[Triggerjo23]

On 4/3/2021 at 9:47 AM, draconus said:

I see where you come from but it is not clear whether the missile could revert back to SARH after losing the track in ARH. The manual rather means that the missile falls back to SARH only if ARH is unable to find the target on its own at the launch.

Never saw people saying the missile had a lock in ARH just that the missile was active. In the manual it states the missile will revert to SARH if a lock is not gained on a target.
 

On 4/3/2021 at 8:53 PM, The_Tau said:

It would make sense,  if active finds target then missile is fully independent, and if target is lost in active then missile goes stupid

Yep, this is what the missile does just now. The AIM120 in DCS will reacquire but not the Phoenix.

 

On 4/3/2021 at 9:31 PM, Naquaii said:

IRL the missile would fall back to SARH as long as it's available if it losses active tracking. In DCS the ability to fallback to SARH is not possible to model for us as it is currently afaik.

IRL you were supposed to illuminate the target until a supposed hit regardless, to turn around and stop supporting the missile wasn't even a scenario in the documents. At least not for the -A.

 

Are there any updates on fixing tracking issues in TWS for the Tomcat. It seems to be a big issue in multiplayer since the late January patch.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

6 hours ago, Triggerjo23 said:

Never saw people saying the missile had a lock in ARH just that the missile was active. In the manual it states the missile will revert to SARH if a lock is not gained on a target.
 

Yep, this is what the missile does just now. The AIM120 in DCS will reacquire but not the Phoenix.

 

Are there any updates on fixing tracking issues in TWS for the Tomcat. It seems to be a big issue in multiplayer since the late January patch.

@Triggerjo23
What do you mean the aim120 will re-aqcuire ?
If track is lost before the aim120 goes active the missile is just wasted.
It doesn't even go active so i'm not sure what you mean ? 

And about "fixing TWS" issues ? Not sure if this is what you mean but from the thread below it seems that the awg-9 radar does not use ´velocity gating´  and is missing some gimball , and in all fairness it does look a bit ´dated´. I'm not hating (!) but i'm just curious what you expect from the TWS. 
 

 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[Naquaii]

8 hours ago, Triggerjo23 said:

Never saw people saying the missile had a lock in ARH just that the missile was active. In the manual it states the missile will revert to SARH if a lock is not gained on a target.
 

Yep, this is what the missile does just now. The AIM120 in DCS will reacquire but not the Phoenix.

 

Are there any updates on fixing tracking issues in TWS for the Tomcat. It seems to be a big issue in multiplayer since the late January patch.

 

That part of the manual refers to how the missile would behave IRL, might add a passage to clarify that.

 

As for TWS tracking issues there has been a lot of reports of this but we've yet to seen clear evidence of an actual bug. The ones I've seen is the TWS behaving as intended, having issues tracking small maneuvering targets is not something the TWS in the AWG-9 was that good at. But as always, if we are presented with evidence of an actual bug which we can reproduce we will ofc try to fix it.

 

The only active bug that I know of atm is that a combination of high azimuth and roll can have the WCS think an STT track is lost when it's not.

[Triggerjo23]

22 hours ago, Naquaii said:

 

That part of the manual refers to how the missile would behave IRL, might add a passage to clarify that.

 

Yes will definetely need clarity on that becuase it certainly gives the impression that is in game. Other things which are not implimented yet such as Data-Trans have (not yet implimented) on them.

 

22 hours ago, Naquaii said:

As for TWS tracking issues there has been a lot of reports of this but we've yet to seen clear evidence of an actual bug. The ones I've seen is the TWS behaving as intended, having issues tracking small maneuvering targets is not something the TWS in the AWG-9 was that good at. But as always, if we are presented with evidence of an actual bug which we can reproduce we will ofc try to fix it.

 

The only active bug that I know of atm is that a combination of high azimuth and roll can have the WCS think an STT track is lost when it's not.

 

If this is a bug soley on the Tomcat then it is very dificult to pin down. All I know is that I can fire on a player 1v1 and have the missile track all the way to pitbul everytime so long as the opponent does not try to notch the radar. On other ocasions though and especaily when there are a good few people on a server it does not track at all. I am not so convinced it is a Tomcat related bug though and maybe something to do with netcode or ping in DCS perhaps. From what I have seen, the majority of people who have not experienced this fly PVE rather than PVP. The ones who do fly PVP resort to STT launches.

As a small example; If you fly the F18 much at all in A2A then you will probably be aware of a bug where the F18 will not see a target right in front of it at co-alt and nose pure. The get around the bug you have to swap from A2A into A2G then back again and magicaly the bandit appears. There are also instances where TWS tracks will drop as a missile comes off the rail or halfway through flight. The 120 can survive this of course as once you reacquire lock the missile will continue to the tartget. The Phoenix of course does not do this, but when the tracks can be lost so easily at times even though both yourself and the bandit are nose pure on each other and not manouvering then you stand to lose more than half of your missiles like this if not more. STT at longer ranges is not much of an option becuase of the 2 minute long engagement warning a bandit will get to tell them a missile is inbound. I will try and dick through tracks and tacviews for the best examples of it.

Sorry for the large response but I have another question. I was wandering if this is also a bug or not. The Phoenix and the AIM-7 can track from TCS without giving either a lock or engagement warning to the bandit. Certainly a great feature if it is intended however I don't know if it is or not. I have seen in some F14 manuals it says a target can be tracked silently via TCS but they never state this is with a missile or not. In the HB manual it says the Radar slave to TCS is equivilant to an STT lock and as far as I am aware the TCS takes over from the CW antenna which is what gives an engagement warning. I have limited understanding on this but just thought I would ask. Thanks for your previous reply.

Edit. If the no engagement warning is a bug and you want to know how to reproduce it then simply STT a target the slave TCS to get a TCS track, then slave the radar to TCS. Once you have done this you hit Pulse or Pulse Doplar search to unlock the bandit. Now launching a missile will not produce a warning of any kind yet the Phoenix will track all the way to target.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Triggerjo23

[Triggerjo23]

On 4/5/2021 at 9:44 AM, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

What do you mean the aim120 will re-aqcuire ?
If track is lost before the aim120 goes active the missile is just wasted.
It doesn't even go active so i'm not sure what you mean ?

The 120 does reaxquire on the F18. If you lose track during a missiles flight it will begin tracking again if you pick up the track again on the same target. This is in part due to the memory mode on the 18's radar however if I set the memory to 4 seconds and lose a track then it can still reacquire the track and continue to guide the missile even when acquisition occurs after 4 seconds. No the 120 not going pitbull is a diferent matter completely but it can go pitbul. Bug or not it does do it. I have seen 120s be notched by myself when fired from around 20nm and no longer supported then they will acquire a friendly behind me who thinks it is a high energy missile.

 

On 4/5/2021 at 9:44 AM, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

And about "fixing TWS" issues ? Not sure if this is what you mean but from the thread below it seems that the awg-9 radar does not use ´velocity gating´  and is missing some gimball , and in all fairness it does look a bit ´dated´. I'm not hating (!) but i'm just curious what you expect from the TWS.

I have tacviews with me in quite heavy manoeuveres whilst maintaining TWS track on the bandit, now if I fly 1v1 then this is repeatable over 20 or more fights. Yet I also have experiences were the WCS will lose track 80 or more % of targets when niether myself or the target are manoeuvering. I have no idea if it is a Tomcat related issue or a DCS issue as the same things can happen with the F18's TWS. There are quite a few issues with desync right now with the Phoenix. The SD-10 has issues also however it needs greater ping or server load to see it and the 120c also however needing even more stress to see.

My point with the issues with the Tomcats TWS is that I had never experienced any issues like this until right after the late January patch. Now I know the urge will be for people to say well you are acting as if it still has magic INS but that is not the case at all. Magic INS was removed before that patch and happened at the same time as the big WCS updates late last year. There was only one update added on the patch notes for the WCS in the late January patch and that was the (dissociation of the missile from the DCS object).

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

Yes but wasn't this '32 seconds thing' regarding the hornet a bug or something ? 
Because on some discords you are not even allowed to discuss this 'feature' as they clearly see it as an abusable bug. 

Also i think you may be expecting too much of the first implementation of TWS.
I mean even in the F16 tracks get lost all the time for no apparent reason, this is even MUCH worse in a busy multiplayer environment and i would not be surprised if this happens in real life as well. 
If your target starts to do drastic evasive manouvres it seems normal that you might lose the track especially considering the limitations of the F14 radar mentioned in the thread i quoted in regards to TWS. 

In the F16 i even regularly use STT just because TWS bugs are more flimsy in general.
Especially in a steep dive tracks get lost really easily even though the target is well within gimbal limits. 

When you're both flying towards eachother and it's clear you're fighting eachother you might as well STT anyway. 
 

[Lurker]

On 4/5/2021 at 1:12 PM, Naquaii said:

The only active bug that I know of atm is that a combination of high azimuth and roll can have the WCS think an STT track is lost when it's not.

 

Any update on this particular issue? I know it's being looked at but is it fixed internally, have you been able to reproduce etc? Thanks in advance. 

[GGTharos]

On 2/28/2021 at 8:48 PM, wadman said:

Yeah - WTF is up with that??? How can ED not fix this?  They think it's OK for a sim that stresses realism to behave like this??? I can launch a smokeless AIM-54 from WAY beyond visual range and as soon as the missile is fired, the AI starts dropping chaff???  That is messed up and ED should be ashamed of themselves for not fixing this massive, very obvious flaw!!!

 

Do you believe that your opponents would not be executing anti-missile tactics knowing that there are F-14s in the area?

Why is everyone expecting their missile launch to be a surprise?

 

Yep, the AI doesn't actually know how to employ any tactics which is unrealistic, so you have two unrealistic things:

 

- The AI can't do tactics

- The AI magically knows when you shoot

 

Together they work out to something a little more reasonable than each taken separately.

[draconus]

I'm fine with AI employing this tactic and CMs but I'm not buying that they should magically know when we shoot. Let them react every time, not only when we shoot.

[GGTharos]

They don't know how to employ tactics and it's unlikely they'll learn any time soon, so this is the (probably unintended) compromise.  There are probably better compromises and if you have one the propose it to ED and hopefully they'll make it happen.

[AH_Solid_Snake]

If the AI was changed to dump countermeasures every time a player STT's them without a launch they would just run out faster. Its far from optimal but I agree it's the best compromise we have right now.

[Coxy_99]

On 4/5/2021 at 12:12 PM, Naquaii said:

 

That part of the manual refers to how the missile would behave IRL, might add a passage to clarify that.

 

As for TWS tracking issues there has been a lot of reports of this but we've yet to seen clear evidence of an actual bug. The ones I've seen is the TWS behaving as intended, having issues tracking small maneuvering targets is not something the TWS in the AWG-9 was that good at. But as always, if we are presented with evidence of an actual bug which we can reproduce we will ofc try to fix it.

 

The only active bug that I know of atm is that a combination of high azimuth and roll can have the WCS think an STT track is lost when it's not.

 

Ill give you the reason why they dont track.

 

1. There closure rate is poor at mach 0.8

2. Getting below your target after you launch will keep an awsome track.

3. If the bandit beams the f-14 radar the track will also be lost (70s Tech) Not 2010. 

4. Problem is these people have relied on active straight off the rail, With no timer.

 

These issues are down to the people flying it completely wrong, And i must say have no issues with any aim-54 variant.

 

HOWEVER there is one issue, When the pilot pulls hard in an populated server, Any human rio will come across dysnc and warp which WILL destroy 1. Your track and 2. The human RIO picking the target back up.

 

Thats all on the "My missile dont hit anything".

 

I have had hours of fun with a human rio. 

 

One last thing to clarify F-14 radar was look up only radar, I believe F-15 was the first look down radar i believe i maybe wrong.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Coxy_99

[near_blind]

40 minutes ago, Coxy_99 said:

One last thing to clarify F-14 radar was look up only radar, I believe F-15 was the first look down radar i believe i maybe wrong.

 

The AWG-9 is a look down shoot down radar. You can verify by observing that RWS, TWS and PD-STT are able to see targets below the horizon. The first combat operational look down doppler set was on the F-4J.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

yes it can look down somewhat but don't all radars look better up ?

[Naquaii]

6 hours ago, Triggerjo23 said:

If this is a bug soley on the Tomcat then it is very dificult to pin down. All I know is that I can fire on a player 1v1 and have the missile track all the way to pitbul everytime so long as the opponent does not try to notch the radar. On other ocasions though and especaily when there are a good few people on a server it does not track at all. I am not so convinced it is a Tomcat related bug though and maybe something to do with netcode or ping in DCS perhaps. From what I have seen, the majority of people who have not experienced this fly PVE rather than PVP. The ones who do fly PVP resort to STT launches.

Sorry for the large response but I have another question. I was wandering if this is also a bug or not. The Phoenix and the AIM-7 can track from TCS without giving either a lock or engagement warning to the bandit. Certainly a great feature if it is intended however I don't know if it is or not. I have seen in some F14 manuals it says a target can be tracked silently via TCS but they never state this is with a missile or not. In the HB manual it says the Radar slave to TCS is equivilant to an STT lock and as far as I am aware the TCS takes over from the CW antenna which is what gives an engagement warning. I have limited understanding on this but just thought I would ask. Thanks for your previous reply.

Edit. If the no engagement warning is a bug and you want to know how to reproduce it then simply STT a target the slave TCS to get a TCS track, then slave the radar to TCS. Once you have done this you hit Pulse or Pulse Doplar search to unlock the bandit. Now launching a missile will not produce a warning of any kind yet the Phoenix will track all the way to target.

 

 

There is likely a netcode and latency issue here when people are playing on servers with high ping and latency but a large part also seems to be that some people misunderstand or overestimate the TWS in the AWG-9. Compared to later radars with or without TWS the blind areas are much larger in the AWG-9 and the tracker not nearly as good as in a hornet or viper and adding to this the documents specifically says that maneuvering (like cranking) when in TWS is not a good idea as it's likely to throw the tracks.  We have yet to be able to reproduce a bug in this regard and it's not from a lack of trying.

 

In regards to the TCS launches it is true that it can guide the missiles to an extent. The AIM-54 will launch active along the TCS line of sight so the missile itself should be indicated on the RWR. As for the AIM-7 the illuminator on the AWG-9 will activate when you launch so in this case the target will get an F-14 missile launch indication. We tested this when we implemented it and it did work back then for sure. There might be new bug here but we'd need help to reproduce it.

 

3 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

Any update on this particular issue? I know it's being looked at but is it fixed internally, have you been able to reproduce etc? Thanks in advance. 

 

We have reproduced it and it's being looked at. No date for a fix yet though.

 

In conclusion the AWG-9 is very much not a "look up radar", pulse doppler was the very function that allowed for look down-shoot down. It's just not that great at it against heavily maneuvering targets, especially in TWS.

 

In regards to AI targets I'd personally like to see the AIs magical ability to detect launches disappear, having them always do it is just breaking stuff. But at least it's possible to set a lower skill on the AI which mitigates this somewhat.

[dundun92]

7 hours ago, Triggerjo23 said:

If you lose track during a missiles flight it will begin tracking again if you pick up the track again on the same target.

No you cant as of quite a few patches ago, do you have a track/tacview/video of this happening?