AMRAAM 120C when fired upwards at close range 5-7 miles targets are missing randomly.

[tanker82]

This is the second time i have seen this in DCS Beta Multiplayer. Firing upwards at a near target and the missile misses even though it has come close to the Target. Had to put it on youtube but made it not public due to File upload size. 

GS Tacview link:

Server 1 - OneDrive (live.com)

Tacview File Name:Tacview-20211230-234543-DCS-Server_1_Operation_Urban_Thunder_V6.7.7.zip

 

[dundun92]

That is just the RNG aiming error mechanic ED added a few months ago. As for why, dont ask me, but thats not unintended behavior

[SCPanda]

On 12/31/2021 at 10:55 AM, dundun92 said:

That is just the RNG aiming error mechanic ED added a few months ago. As for why, dont ask me, but thats not unintended behavior

Really? Why we need RNG in DCS? DCS is a flight sim right? Not World of Warship RNG similator... Just complaining...

[GGTharos]

Because there is an actual aiming error which is random, but I suspect they may be trying to accomplish something different than just simulating the miss distance.

[nighthawk2174]

It wouldn't be an issue if proximity fuzzes worked properly which they don't in game right now.  We gotta wait for ED to rebuild the system to actually work.

[GGTharos]

I think they do, but rather the miss distance is way too big.  For a 120 it should be next to nothing vs. a non-maneuvering target in any condition from things I've seen and read for example.  Maneuvers normal to the POM would upset that and cause seeker settling so there the miss distance would increase until settled.  But this thing that's in the game is always huge, or at least it looks that way.

[borchi_2b]

@GGTharoscan you specify what you mean by seeker settling? Neverheard of it in combination with the 4 component monopulse radar of the amraam.

 

The maneuvers in specific, should not affect the missile as much at all. according to the radar contact locked by the 120 radar, the software will always calculate the best intercept course to bring the missile into its fragmentation basket/cone or even a direct hit might be imminent. beaming/notching/cold targets are very likely to be hit by the shrapnel and head on aspects, do to a higher closure, are very likely to have direct impacts. 

 

Edited January 28, 2022 by borchi_2b

[GGTharos]

9 hours ago, borchi_2b said:

@GGTharoscan you specify what you mean by seeker settling? Neverheard of it in combination with the 4 component monopulse radar of the amraam.

The fact that the seeker will oscillate for a variety of reasons if either the target or missile perform specific maneuvers.  The result is increased miss distance.

Edited January 28, 2022 by GGTharos

[nighthawk2174]

3 hours ago, GGTharos said:

The fact that the seeker will oscillate for a variety of reasons if either the target or missile perform specific maneuvers.  The result is increased miss distance.

 

One of the things that ESA's fix.  But yeah, although as I understand it were not talking about a massive increase in miss distance, maybe just enough that the warhead going off won't be immediately catastrophic.  Also is this really a big problem for monopulse I'm just not seeing it introduce more than single digit percentage increases in miss distance.  Especially if the target isn't maneuvering.

[GGTharos]

The ESAs will correct the physical component and will reduce seeker settling, but I'm not certain that they can get rid of it.  Scintillation is part of the problem and you can't fix it on the seeker end I think

Scintillation dominates seeker settling, as it increases proportionally to the distance to target decreasing.  The main natural contributors that I recall are:

Change of aspect (in both dimensions) either due to target or missile maneuver

Background noise

 

The first has the largest amplitude when the aircraft is maneuvering normal to the established POM.

Edited January 28, 2022 by GGTharos