BreaKKer Posted July 1, 2021 Share Posted July 1, 2021 Don't worry, I'm not gonna complain about the phoenix guidance... in this subforum. TLDR: snappy 500+ KTAS bleeding loft characteristics. Just posting this here to get a bit more traction, and to potentially hear anyone else's guidance problems 2 BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarksydeRob Posted July 2, 2021 Share Posted July 2, 2021 Like you thought in your other post , it is simply a limitation of the old missile gudiance. Heatblur devoetd time into implementing the SARH/Active logic before doing any transition work to the new logic. However straight after they started looking into it, around January time. Recently I asked if there was any progress on this transition and this was their reply: Soon enough we will have a proper pheonix. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skysurfer Posted July 2, 2021 Share Posted July 2, 2021 Yeah the input smoothness when it comes to loft and de-loft is something fairly important. Also, during the terminal phase the Phoenix should be able to pull some fairly high G's and do high AOA turns as could be seen during the real life firings on highly maneuvering targets done by VF-11. My one major gripe with the 54C at least still is the CCM - we appear to have the ECCM/SEALED version since it does not require the PH-COOLING to be active thus it should have insane CCM and ignore most if not all ECM and chaff thrown at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreaKKer Posted July 2, 2021 Author Share Posted July 2, 2021 7 hours ago, Skysurfer said: Yeah the input smoothness when it comes to loft and de-loft is something fairly important. Also, during the terminal phase the Phoenix should be able to pull some fairly high G's and do high AOA turns as could be seen during the real life firings on highly maneuvering targets done by VF-11. My one major gripe with the 54C at least still is the CCM - we appear to have the ECCM/SEALED version since it does not require the PH-COOLING to be active thus it should have insane CCM and ignore most if not all ECM and chaff thrown at it. We have the standard AIM-54C, not the C+ nor the ECCM Sealed BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sLYFa Posted July 2, 2021 Share Posted July 2, 2021 Yes but the damage from a lack of cooling is not modelled. 2 i5-8600k @4.9Ghz, 2080ti , 32GB@2666Mhz, 512GB SSD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skysurfer Posted July 3, 2021 Share Posted July 3, 2021 13 hours ago, sLYFa said: Yes but the damage from a lack of cooling is not modelled. Hence the confusion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katsu Posted July 3, 2021 Share Posted July 3, 2021 (edited) Also actualy i fell no difference from our C to A models about countermeasures/notch resistance, is just a phoenix with less smoke. Edited July 3, 2021 by Katsu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt. Weber Posted July 4, 2021 Share Posted July 4, 2021 9 hours ago, Katsu said: Also actualy i fell no difference from our C to A models about countermeasures/notch resistance, is just a phoenix with less smoke. And less range compared to the second A, aaand going crazy up close more often then not. Haven't scored a kill with the C in recent couple of sorties, SP, ranges between 30 and 40 miles. But even at close range it seems quite unreliable right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain_dalan Posted July 4, 2021 Share Posted July 4, 2021 Bagged to MiG-29's in instant action last night. Radar aspect set to nose, target size set to large, launched at 40NM from angels 30, i forgot the closure. Then slowly dived and cranked to give the guidance most favorable conditions to maintain tracks. Splashed both bandits, even though they were bellow my nose at the time of launch. I never found any problems endemic to the C, not in SP, MP PvE, or MP PvP. The problem is, there doesn't seam to be any difference. In PvP the range disadvantage can be offset by the lack of smoke, thus your shots are stealthier. But in SP? Always take the Mk60's as the AI knows you've launched anyways. I take C's with me at times, for role-playing reasons though and they work just fine, with a bit less range. Now teaching AI wingmen how to use them, that's a neat trick. But i don't think there's anything HG can do about it. Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreaKKer Posted July 4, 2021 Author Share Posted July 4, 2021 The thing is, the improved guidance logic alone of the AIM-54C should give it a bit more range, afaik 2 BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grater Tovakia Posted July 11, 2021 Share Posted July 11, 2021 I think some of the AIM-54C's woes come from the API. After a number of tests based off the real world 110NM AIM-54 test in the 70s (amusingly the DCS AWG and 54 were outperformed by their real world brethren) I found the AIM-54C performs worse than both the mk47A and the mk60A every single time. This is in the arena of energy retention, top speed, peak altitude in the loft, and finally the TTI. I've been meaning to expand these tests, gather more data, and maybe even complete a more detailed write up however I just wanted to drop my observations in here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreaKKer Posted July 15, 2021 Author Share Posted July 15, 2021 On 7/11/2021 at 12:15 PM, Grater Tovakia said: I think some of the AIM-54C's woes come from the API. After a number of tests based off the real world 110NM AIM-54 test in the 70s (amusingly the DCS AWG and 54 were outperformed by their real world brethren) I found the AIM-54C performs worse than both the mk47A and the mk60A every single time. This is in the arena of energy retention, top speed, peak altitude in the loft, and finally the TTI. I've been meaning to expand these tests, gather more data, and maybe even complete a more detailed write up however I just wanted to drop my observations in here. Not surprising. A lot of the sensors and weapons in DCS are "nerfed" due to a number of reasons, but the major one being that devs aren't allowed to use the real data, and have to fudge it a bit. I believe in HB's case, there is only so much AWG-9 data and AIM-54 data out there that isn't classified still. BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karon Posted July 19, 2021 Share Posted July 19, 2021 On 7/11/2021 at 6:15 PM, Grater Tovakia said: I think some of the AIM-54C's woes come from the API. After a number of tests based off the real world 110NM AIM-54 test in the 70s (amusingly the DCS AWG and 54 were outperformed by their real world brethren) I found the AIM-54C performs worse than both the mk47A and the mk60A every single time. This is in the arena of energy retention, top speed, peak altitude in the loft, and finally the TTI. I've been meaning to expand these tests, gather more data, and maybe even complete a more detailed write up however I just wanted to drop my observations in here. Not really much has changed since the launch of the F-14 in this regard. It took a very long time to see the first implementation of the API, and it's incomplete yet (HB folks, feel free to correct me here if I'm wrong). Another example, the fact that the lost target in most scenario reverts to the old "flat" guidance. On top of that, there's a lot of work that should be done by ED imo, for instance turning the current countermeasures into physical entities. Unfortunately, I'm afraid all these improvements and overhaul will take quite a lot of time. "Cogito, ergo RIO" Virtual Backseaters Volume I: F-14 Radar Intercept Officer - Fifth Public Draft Virtual Backseaters Volume II: F-4E Weapon Systems Officer - Internal Draft WIP Phantom Phamiliarisation Video Series | F-4E/F-14 Kneeboard Pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts