Pl5s - just cràppy missiles or..?

[sublime]

It seems Pl5s went from better than sidewinders to really bad a couple patches ago.

I'm willing to accept they're working as intended if that's the word.  Anyone else? I was fairly startled a little while ago chasing down a f18 on growling sidewinder.  Good tone on both; first 5 miles second 3 miles stern chase low level with about 100 knots closing.

Both missiles didn't hit.. and he didn't even use flares.

Are Pl5s supposedly this bad irl?  Why would the Chinese not use r60s or a copy then? (An r60m woulda done the job in the situation I just had .)

[sublime]

Really not trolling here.  Is anyone else having issues with them?  I can't get them to track and I make sure I got good tone etc

[Torbernite]

At first I thought it was no surprise for me since PL-5E is just a modified old missile. After reading and testing (on an AI with on flare loaded @350kts & 1000 ft, missiles were launched @450kts & 1000ft), I think it's just too far for an IR missile. Low altitude and cold target would decrease the range at an incredible degree even with 100 kts closure. At low level it just lost enough energy to keep tracking for 3 or 5 miles.

In fact PL-5E's performance is comparable with original AIM-9M in my test. PL-5E and 9M could merely keep enough speed to hit at 3 n miles range & 1000ft altitude, but if the range is a little more longer (for example, 3.5 or 4 miles) or the AI target maneuvers more wisely to bleed the missile's energy like a real human, they surely can't hit either. And I'm sure an R-60 would never make it to hit. Maybe you misremembered it or some conditions were different. Just try it yourself, R-60M would lose speed even when condition changed to 3 n miles & 6500ft.  At 5 miles range, none of these missiles can hit.

[Torbernite]

And PLA never use R-60 just because they don't have a good relationship with the Soviet Union at R-60's time. (but at that time they have PL-7 based on R550, only for export use) When the relationship with Russia was improved in 1990s they have access to better R-73 and Israeli Python 3 (PL-8) and later newer independently developed missiles, and PL-5E is only needed to equip the second-line J-7s and JF-17 for export, as these two missiles are both too large and heavy for these light fighters ( for this purpose PL-5E is enough and no new missiles needed).

[sublime]

I'm well aware of the sino Soviet split. However the jf17 obviously was invented beyond even the USSR existence. 

I'm just wondering if the missile is behaving as it's supposed to.  Or not?

If it is why would the PLA use such an atrocious missile - as I said before an r60m in dcs at least is hands down much superior.   I find it hard to believe the Chinese couldn't buy or reverse engineer those seeing as how they did so with an entire plane (su33)

6 hours ago, Torbernite said:

At first I thought it was no surprise for me since PL-5E is just a modified old missile. After reading and testing (on an AI with on flare loaded @350kts & 1000 ft, missiles were launched @450kts & 1000ft), I think it's just too far for an IR missile. Low altitude and cold target would decrease the range at an incredible degree even with 100 kts closure. At low level it just lost enough energy to keep tracking for 3 or 5 miles.

In fact PL-5E's performance is comparable with original AIM-9M in my test. PL-5E and 9M could merely keep enough speed to hit at 3 n miles range & 1000ft altitude, but if the range is a little more longer (for example, 3.5 or 4 miles) or the AI target maneuvers more wisely to bleed the missile's energy like a real human, they surely can't hit either. And I'm sure an R-60 would never make it to hit. Maybe you misremembered it or some conditions were different. Just try it yourself, R-60M would lose speed even when condition changed to 3 n miles & 6500ft.  At 5 miles range, none of these missiles can hit.

Idk.  I didn't do extensive tests or tests at all frankly.  I just know using r60s from a mig21 or old aim9s on a f5 I reliably get kills and hit human targets 3 miles or so chase up to 5 miles head on.

I haven't hit ANYTHING in about 12 pl5 launches I've had recently.

A couple patches ago they were almost sure hits so it's surprising why the massive switch back

[Torbernite]

5分钟前,sublime说:

I'm well aware of the sino Soviet split. However the jf17 obviously was invented beyond even the USSR existence. 

I'm just wondering if the missile is behaving as it's supposed to.  Or not?

If it is why would the PLA use such an atrocious missile - as I said before an r60m in dcs at least is hands down much superior.   I find it hard to believe the Chinese couldn't buy or reverse engineer those seeing as how they did so with an entire plane (su33)

Idk.  I didn't do extensive tests or tests at all frankly.  I just know using r60s from a mig21 or old aim9s on a f5 I reliably get kills and hit human targets 3 miles or so chase up to 5 miles head on.

I haven't hit ANYTHING in about 12 pl5 launches I've had recently.

A couple patches ago they were almost sure hits so it's surprising why the massive switch back

I have to say it sounds very strange. This missile works totally correctly for me, I mean comparable performance with a 9L/M. In my situation it's not a useless thing so I never wonder a question like "Why they don't use something better". This question should be discussed in real world and it's intuitively different from this report. I'll do some more test with human targets later.

But the situation you met was quite strange and beyond my experience. Do you have any tracks of that? Maybe the problem is "Whether all the missiles are behaving as it's supposed to in the specific conditions you experienced". Are you sure with the range or even the unit(no offence)? In my test and impression R-60s in DCS surely slow down before hit a cold target 3 miles away. Maybe ok for 3 kilometers. If everything verified maybe you found some unknown problem.

[sublime]

Ok well if it works for other people then I gotta look at my use of it

The track replayer saves every flight.  I only have had problems with it saving mp flights a couple times (it shows nothing besides the literal path of my plane)

I'll go look at the tracks shortly.  I should have one from yesterday where I was chasing an F18 and shot two that missed from around 2-4 miles.  I continued chasing him but broke off when another bandit started spiking me. (Was going to try guns..)

And no offense taken.  If you want we can also meet on a server and test at will if you like

Edited July 4, 2021 by sublime

[Torbernite]

1小时前,sublime说:

Ok well if it works for other people then I gotta look at my use of it

The track replayer saves every flight.  I only have had problems with it saving mp flights a couple times (it shows nothing besides the literal path of my plane)

I'll go look at the tracks shortly.  I should have one from yesterday where I was chasing an F18 and shot two that missed from around 2-4 miles.  I continued chasing him but broke off when another bandit started spiking me. (Was going to try guns..)

And no offense taken.  If you want we can also meet on a server and test at will if you like

 

I have some more results now. If you are sure about the performance of R-60 and 9M in earlier versions, I think everything has changed now, not only the PL-5E.

Tests before were taken on some AI in defending maneuver which is unwise in fact. I set the AI to keep straight flight at 350 kts and 1000 ft no matter whatever happens(even attacked), and none of them(R-60M, 9P5, 9M, PL5E) can maintain speed above 350 kts until hit. Test was taken in summer Caucasus with no weather setup changed. 

So maybe the fact is, all of them have their aerodynamics changed (even in the same way, or maybe ED changed some more basic calculation model they used) during several updates, now none of them can hit such a target which they could before. No problem with your impression nor the performance of PL5E (but with my memory that they couldn't hit such targets from long ago).

Here are the tacview files of the tests. R-60 still showed the worst performance.

(I checked the changelog and found R-60 range changed in Oct 2020 and sidewinder drag changed in Dec, reasonable to suspect PL-5E uses same aero parameters with original sidewinders and changed together, besides there were some fix about drag of PL-5E earlier in this year.)

AIM-9M.zip.acmi AIM-9P5.zip.acmi PL-5E.zip.acmi R-60M.zip.acmi

Edited July 4, 2021 by Torbernite

[sublime]

Thanks I'll check these soon appreciate your time.

That's the thing isn't it? Memory is quite fallible. I just distinctly remember them working.. well like you'd expect heat. Seekers and reliably then suddenly not - for me. It could simply be anecdotal as always

[RedPanda]

I never fire the missile until I am 2 miles away from the bandit. 3 miles is too far for PL-5E to hit. 

 

To me PL-5 is just a cheap solution to shoot down easy targets, drones, heli, etc. 

[Hodo]

The PL-5 isn't bad.  It is just an old missile when compared to the rest of the weapons on the JF.  It is like slapping some AIM-9Ps on a F-16C.

[sublime]

I guess I got spoilt by it last year.  I had flown the Jeff A LOT spring 2020 into summer then not so much until this spring.  The pl5 used to be for me one of the best heat seekers around.

Now not so much.  But it definitely was user issues in firing from too far it seems from other opinions. (And I actually noticed someone get a kill with it when signing in GS yesterday)

[DSplayer]

I thought the PL-5EII performs pretty well. It doesn't have the high off boresight capabilities of a 9X but I'll certainly say it's on par with the AIM-9M.