Jump to content

Do Phoenixs go pitbull in STT or only in TWS?


CBenson89

Recommended Posts

They are only supposed to go active in TWS mode.  In PD-STT they are Fox 1 all the way to target.  If you drop lock in either mode (or Jester switches on you), you'll trash the missile.  Prior to the Missile API update, it would act like an AIM-120 and go active if lock was lost, but on Open Beta at least, it will go dumb if you drop lock for any reason.

 

In real life, if launched in PD-STT, they are Fox 1 (SARH like an AIM-7) all the way to target.  In P-STT they get initial steering information from the AWG-9, and then launch mad dog (hot off the rail).  In TWS, they are a Fox 3 and go active only when the AWG-9 says to go active.  Loss of the track or turning away will cause the missile to go dumb.

  • Like 2

My YT Channel (DCS World, War Thunder and World of Warships)

 

Too Many Modules to List

--Unapologetically In Love With the F-14-- Anytime Baby! --

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus These settings as well for active shots. 
 

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  

 

Little Tip. When you choose Brsit with lock or without lock, the missile is active of the rail but Scans a distance under 15nm (don’t know the distance exactly). You can shoot a target about 20nm but the missile is not flying directly to it. Under 15nm it will find the target and then it will follow it! 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read some documents. The AIM-54C is supposed to go active with the loss of PDSTT lock. As far as TWS track loss, I think it’s the same deal where I’d goes active with track loss. That was one of the major selling points of the AIM-54C and it’s subvariants.

BreaKKer

CAG and Commanding Officer of:

Carrier Air Wing Five //  VF-154 Black Knights

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read some documents. The AIM-54C is supposed to go active with the loss of PDSTT lock. As far as TWS track loss, I think it’s the same deal where I’d goes active with track loss. That was one of the major selling points of the AIM-54C and it’s subvariants.
If you have official documentation that describes this process, you should consider messaging one of the Heatblur developers.
  • Like 1

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Harker said:
1 hour ago, BreaKKer said:
Read some documents. The AIM-54C is supposed to go active with the loss of PDSTT lock. As far as TWS track loss, I think it’s the same deal where I’d goes active with track loss. That was one of the major selling points of the AIM-54C and it’s subvariants.

If you have official documentation that describes this process, you should consider messaging one of the Heatblur developers.

They are aware of it. 

BreaKKer

CAG and Commanding Officer of:

Carrier Air Wing Five //  VF-154 Black Knights

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2021 at 11:03 AM, BreaKKer said:

Read some documents. The AIM-54C is supposed to go active with the loss of PDSTT lock. As far as TWS track loss, I think it’s the same deal where I’d goes active with track loss. That was one of the major selling points of the AIM-54C and it’s subvariants.

Do you have this document (or at leas the name of it) I'd love to read it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

Do you have this document (or at leas the name of it) I'd love to read it.


This...

I wonder if it's the same document which I read eons ago which said the F-14 could fire an AIM-54 on datalinked targets painted by other aircraft...  fun to re-read those articles today with more knowledge!

My YT Channel (DCS World, War Thunder and World of Warships)

 

Too Many Modules to List

--Unapologetically In Love With the F-14-- Anytime Baby! --

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh man, two tom clancy refs in one week... Too good...

 

And yeah if you have those docs to share, lots of people want them, me included.

 

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2021 at 5:03 PM, BreaKKer said:

Read some documents. The AIM-54C is supposed to go active with the loss of PDSTT lock. As far as TWS track loss, I think it’s the same deal where I’d goes active with track loss. That was one of the major selling points of the AIM-54C and it’s subvariants.

This is BS for one reason and that is if you shoot PDSTT and loose lock (can happen just second after launch), missile would go active and track whatever it would be in its FOV. It might be your intendet target or it could be some other target you did not want to engage, it can even be friendly aircraft that got in the missile way. That is unacceptable, If you loose lock the missile should be dud, its logicaly safer option. Same in TWS, if it does not receive activation command at exact pre-calculated point/time it should just go dud. In my opinion same should apply to AMRAAM too. Cant have missiles that go willy-nilly after anything they see.        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Golo said:

This is BS for one reason and that is if you shoot PDSTT and loose lock (can happen just second after launch), missile would go active and track whatever it would be in its FOV

 

Not quite. For the AMRAAM,  the missile has an understanding of where it is in relation to the target courtesy of the IMU. When launched the radar passes a predicted intercept position to the missile for it to fly to before going active. This position is constantly updated by the launching platform and passed to the radar throughout time of flight. If the radar loses the target, then the missile flies to the last known position and then turns on. The DCS AMRAAM doesn't quite work like this yet, as they haven't modelled the IMU yet. 

 

The debate is whether the AIM-54C, which has a similar architecture to the AIM-120, receives these updates and is aware of its own position internally, or whether it needs to receive explicit steering and activation commands from the radar like the A model. If the C *does* behave like the AMRAAM, there's nothing to say that it doesn't receive a positional update as part of the SARH guidance, and that it can't fly to that position and flip on with loss of guidance.

 

4 hours ago, Golo said:

That is unacceptable, If you loose lock the missile should be dud, its logicaly safer option. Same in TWS, if it does not receive activation command at exact pre-calculated point/time it should just go dud. In my opinion same should apply to AMRAAM too. Cant have missiles that go willy-nilly after anything they see.        

 

Generally considerations such as these are to be satisfied as part of the crew's decision whether or not to shoot. Once the weapon is off the rail, the engineers are trying to maximize the chance of a kill rather than have the missile make IFF decisions. 


Edited by near_blind
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, near_blind said:

 

Not quite. For the AMRAAM,  the missile has an understanding of where it is in relation to the target courtesy. When launched the radar passes a predicted intercept position to the missile for it to fly to before going active. This position is constantly updated by the launching platform and passed to the radar throughout time of flight. If the radar loses the target, then the missile flies to the last known position and then turns out. The DCS AMRAAM doesn't quite work like this yet, as they haven't modelled the IMU yet. 

 

The debate is whether the AIM-54C, which has a similar architecture to the AIM-120, receives these updates and is aware of its own position internally, or whether it needs to receive explicit steering and activation commands from the radar like the A model. If the C *does* behave like the AMRAAM, there's nothing to say that it doesn't receive a positional update as part of the SARH guidance, and that it can't fly to that position and flip on with loss of guidance.

 

 

Generally considerations such as these are to be satisfied as part of the crew's decision whether or not to shoot. Once the weapon is off the rail, the engineers are trying to maximize the chance of a kill rather than have the missile make IFF decisions. 

 

Do you know if the AAMRAM IMU uses GPS at all?

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Skysurfer said:

 

Late model (missiles in general) have dual chanel INS with GPS integration. 

 

I'm just wondering which aim120 versions had it, B? C? certainly D does.

 

 

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "A" in amraam stands for "advanced". 

Phoenix has not "advanced", you can't just compare these missiles if they were the same thing. 

 

It's called "Aim -54 phoenix" and not "aim-54 ALRAAM" . 
Phoenix is NOT "same as amraam but better" !!@#!@#


Edited by Csgo GE oh yeah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

The "A" in amraam stands for "advanced". 

Phoenix has not "advanced", you can't just compare these missiles if they were the same thing. 

 

It's called "Aim -54 phoenix" and not "aim-54 ALRAAM" . 
Phoenix is NOT "same as amraam but better" !!@#!@#

 

The CS is Csgo stands for 'Counter Strike'.
Csgo Oh Yeah has not 'Combat Simulatored', you can't just compare these forum members as if they were the same thing.

It's called the "Csgo Oh Yeah" and not the "Dcsgo Oh Yeah"
CS is NOT "same as DCS but better" !!@#!@#

 

Yeah, doesn't make much sense when I apply it to other subjects either. Shame.

There are valid arguments for differing interpretations of IMU and Command Inertial mean in relation to the AIM-54C. "RaYtHeOn DiDnT cALl It ThE ApHeOnIx" isn't one of them. Try again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

I'm just wondering which aim120 versions had it, B? C? certainly D does.

 

The D, nothing before this.  Interestingly reading about old problems with air defense datalinks I think it gave me a pretty good idea why the better position knowledge is desired.


Edited by GGTharos

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

Phoenix has not "advanced", you can't just compare these missiles if they were the same thing. 

 

The 54C may very well have been on the 120B level electronically, maybe even a bit better strictly because it has more room for electronics internally - the 120 was a marvel of electronics miniaturization but always limited by the space until more recently.  The 120A was not reprogrammable which caused problems, the B was, and incase the march from B->D has benefitted immensely from the minitaturization of components.


The same is safe to assume for the 54C, but the specific question of 'does it work like a 120 in concept', we don't know.  It may or may not.


Edited by GGTharos
  • Like 5

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, near_blind said:

For the AMRAAM,  the missile has an understanding of where it is in relation to the target courtesy of the IMU.

 

Every RF missiles does this, the requirements for the exact capabilities are dictated by the amount of time the IMU is needed for.

A sparrow has to use pre-launch commands to acquire a target after it is launched.  A 54A will do the same but it will also update its position from the target by 'listening' to the reflections from the target while in mid-course - the aircraft does send some form of position updates and gate updates.

By comparison the 120 will fly the mid-course completely blind, with the shooter's radar providing position and gate updates.

 

In both cases those missiles process their own trajectory flight plan.

  • Like 3

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...