Jump to content

AIM-54 Hotfix PSA and Feedback Thread - Guided Discussion


IronMike

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TOMCATZ said:

Okay - Yes. I tried your advices.  Shorter range (I really do not like it but ...)

Feels more like AMRAAM shooting to me. But yes - 30NM`s works well against fighters, so .... All I can say is thanks for this fantastic support!!!! 🤙

Have a great bandit day and cheers

TOM

(I still think the AI is wrong, but ... who cares). 🙈

 

Tacview-20220606-195014-DCS-Through_The_Inferno_SYRIA_v3.zip.acmi 4.94 MB · 0 downloads

It's my honest pleasure bud, that is what we are here for. 🙂

  • Like 1

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is up with TWS shots not working at that range or less either in multiplayer against others players though? I'm missing shots at 25nm, let alone longer ranges. I have yet to have one missile connect using TWS in multiplayer. I know I'm beating a dead horse here but what else am I supposed to do?

I also have some questions about how the Iranians got a lot of their kills with these missiles as well if this is the accurate model. There is a famous incident of a 3 ship of Mig-23's that were shot down while flying in formation with each other using a phoenix missile. Wouldn't the shot have to have been done in TWS to give as little warning as possible or did the Migs have no RWR? I would find it very strange that they were getting lit up in STT for some time with a working RWR and just sail mindlessly into missile fire without making any attempt to evade. Of course, there could be something I'm not taking into account here but I'm just trying to figure out what is wrong.


Edited by Ikaros
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ikaros said:

What is up with TWS shots not working at that range or less either in multiplayer against others players though? I'm missing shots at 25nm, let alone longer ranges. I have yet to have one missile connect using TWS in multiplayer. I know I'm beating a dead horse here but what else am I supposed to do?

I also have some questions about how the Iranians got a lot of their kills with these missiles as well if this is the accurate model. There is a famous incident of a 3 ship of Mig-23's that were shot down while flying in formation with each other using a phoenix missile. Wouldn't the shot have to have been done in TWS to give as little warning as possible or did the Migs have no RWR? I would find it very strange that they were getting lit up in STT for some time with a working RWR and just sail mindlessly into missile fire without make any attempt to evade. Of course, there could be something I'm not taking into account here but I'm just trying to figure this out.

Early Soviet RWRs had no idea they were painted on in TWS by F14 I believe. And even if/when the Phoenix went active and they received a warning it might have been too late. 

 

From what I have been told RWRs are nowhere as reliable irl as in DCS. 


Edited by Comstedt86
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Comstedt86 said:

Early Soviet RWRs had no idea they were painted on in TWS by F14 I believe. And even if/when the Phoenix went active and they received a warning it might have been too late. 

 

From what I have been told RWRs are nowhere as reliable irl as in DCS. 

 

That and quite frankly an air force whose training was doubtful at best if existing at all, a dictator sending them into a battle they probably did not even believe in, and facing an adversary who was fighting to defend their homeland and thus extremely motivated, while wielding the far, faaar superior weapon. Anything outside the modern 4th gen stuff does not make me even remotely sweat in a Tomcat. What Iraq flew, was, in comparison to the Tomcat, grossly outdated, all of it. Anyone who tells you otherwise is dellusional imo. A MiG-23? What a great aircraft indeed. And what a "joke" if you faced it say in a Viper, Hornet or F15, or, well, a Tomcat at that time. No bashing intended of any side btw. Place an early Phantom against a modern Flanker, same result, same "joke", let alone an F-5, or thud, or 104, or whatever of the old rust buckets you can come up with.

But history aside and staying within DCS, here's a little anecdote from the good old FC2 days. In the beginning, flying online, outside of the 104th and 51st, almost no one knew what cranking was. Ppl were completely oblivious to most tactics, and the aim120 still had quite the reach, paired with the fact that back in the day gravity did not really exist and the air got thinner, so missiles actually got faster when climbing high. In the beginning most were simply cannon fodder online, you could shoot at them from 40-60nm full gimbal shot (59°), and they would all get shwacked. However, towards the end of FC2, once folks started using tacview and seeing what we were doing, copying our cranking maneuvers and also developing a skill to counter our tactics, you could barely shoot anyone down outside of 10-15nm, no kidding. And the missiles had not changed one bit. The player skill did. They got so good at defending aim120 shots even head on, that it became a real struggle to get to them, especially those who were regulars. The higher your opponents skill, the more you need to press the range, simple as that. This was 15 years ago. Today, everyone knows what cranking is, how to setup a reverse crank pulling through into a split S, how to notch more or less properly and how to dodge aim120s and phoenixes down to even 5nm. I mean honestly, if you shoot an aim120 at me from 5nm, today, I can easily defeat it, when I am prepared for it. This is not a phoenix specific thing. Sometimes with aim120s you have to get as close as 3.5nm with some folks to create a NEZ, let alone 35... The higher your bandit's skill and the higher your bandit's SA, the less likely you can get away with long range shots.

Tactically this makes a difference when you want to kill. When you want to win an event however, the ranged shot still matters, because there is a difference between an offensive shot and a defensive shot. I don't care about the kills anymore, my twenties are long over... But saving a buddy, because the F16 is running hard from a potentially deadly phoenix, whether I hit him or not, that I still very much care about.

This notion that simply because you're firing a phoenix or amraam it should connect 9/10 times, is misguided. Do you get shot down every time you are fired upon? No matter by what, btw, 27ER, Aim120, sparrow or phoenix - I bet you do not, and I bet the more you progress and learn and develop skills, the less you get shot down.

You need to work for the kill in an evolved environment like today. The cakewalk times in the park of online early FC2 are long gone, and most folks you will meet online, will really give you a run for your money. And another issue, to quote Stella Adler, is that talent is in the choice. Pick your opponents, sneak up on them, engage the ones who are already distracted, etc... don't just fly head on 1 vs 1 against an F16 at 40k feet and think that your 60nm shot will kill the guy. He knows you are an F14, he knows what is coming. And he is laughing at you already, if you catch my drift. 🙂

Fight hard, work hard, this is what will make you dominate. Simply relying on "but the phoenix is a long range missile and should kill a NON MANEUVERING target drone according to test so and so", will get you simply nowhere. What does it matter if you kill him at 10, 20 or 40 nm? The important thing is that you deny your opponent his plan, a cherry on top if you shwack him, and most importantly, that you land back home safe again.


Edited by IronMike
  • Like 5

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TOMCATZ said:

Okay - Yes. I tried your advices.  Shorter range (I really do not like it but ...)

Feels more like AMRAAM shooting to me. But yes - 30NM`s works well against fighters,

Don't forget, that's AMRAAM shooting from the 1970's which was a much bigger deal, in a much bigger missile only one plane could use. 


Edited by RustBelt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Comstedt86 said:

Early Soviet RWRs had no idea they were painted on in TWS by F14 I believe. And even if/when the Phoenix went active and they received a warning it might have been too late. 

 

From what I have been told RWRs are nowhere as reliable irl as in DCS. 

 

That is informative. Thanks.

5 hours ago, IronMike said:

That and quite frankly an air force whose training was doubtful at best if existing at all, a dictator sending them into a battle they probably did not even believe in, and facing an adversary who was fighting to defend their homeland and thus extremely motivated, while wielding the far, faaar superior weapon. Anything outside the modern 4th gen stuff does not make me even remotely sweat in a Tomcat. What Iraq flew, was, in comparison to the Tomcat, grossly outdated, all of it. Anyone who tells you otherwise is dellusional imo. A MiG-23? What a great aircraft indeed. And what a "joke" if you faced it say in a Viper, Hornet or F15, or, well, a Tomcat at that time. No bashing intended of any side btw. Place an early Phantom against a modern Flanker, same result, same "joke", let alone an F-5, or thud, or 104, or whatever of the old rust buckets you can come up with.

But history aside and staying within DCS, here's a little anecdote from the good old FC2 days. In the beginning, flying online, outside of the 104th and 51st, almost no one knew what cranking was. Ppl were completely oblivious to most tactics, and the aim120 still had quite the reach, paired with the fact that back in the day gravity did not really exist and the air got thinner, so missiles actually got faster when climbing high. In the beginning most were simply cannon fodder online, you could shoot at them from 40-60nm full gimbal shot (59°), and they would all get shwacked. However, towards the end of FC2, once folks started using tacview and seeing what we were doing, copying our cranking maneuvers and also developing a skill to counter our tactics, you could barely shoot anyone down outside of 10-15nm, no kidding. And the missiles had not changed one bit. The player skill did. They got so good at defending aim120 shots even head on, that it became a real struggle to get to them, especially those who were regulars. The higher your opponents skill, the more you need to press the range, simple as that. This was 15 years ago. Today, everyone knows what cranking is, how to setup a reverse crank pulling through into a split S, how to notch more or less properly and how to dodge aim120s and phoenixes down to even 5nm. I mean honestly, if you shoot an aim120 at me from 5nm, today, I can easily defeat it, when I am prepared for it. This is not a phoenix specific thing. Sometimes with aim120s you have to get as close as 3.5nm with some folks to create a NEZ, let alone 35... The higher your bandit's skill and the higher your bandit's SA, the less likely you can get away with long range shots.

Tactically this makes a difference when you want to kill. When you want to win an event however, the ranged shot still matters, because there is a difference between an offensive shot and a defensive shot. I don't care about the kills anymore, my twenties are long over... But saving a buddy, because the F16 is running hard from a potentially deadly phoenix, whether I hit him or not, that I still very much care about.

This notion that simply because you're firing a phoenix or amraam it should connect 9/10 times, is misguided. Do you get shot down every time you are fired upon? No matter by what, btw, 27ER, Aim120, sparrow or phoenix - I bet you do not, and I bet the more you progress and learn and develop skills, the less you get shot down.

You need to work for the kill in an evolved environment like today. The cakewalk times in the park of online early FC2 are long gone, and most folks you will meet online, will really give you a run for your money. And another issue, to quote Stella Adler, is that talent is in the choice. Pick your opponents, sneak up on them, engage the ones who are already distracted, etc... don't just fly head on 1 vs 1 against an F16 at 40k feet and think that your 60nm shot will kill the guy. He knows you are an F14, he knows what is coming. And he is laughing at you already, if you catch my drift. 🙂

Fight hard, work hard, this is what will make you dominate. Simply relying on "but the phoenix is a long range missile and should kill a NON MANEUVERING target drone according to test so and so", will get you simply nowhere. What does it matter if you kill him at 10, 20 or 40 nm? The important thing is that you deny your opponent his plan, a cherry on top if you shwack him, and most importantly, that you land back home safe again.

 

Thanks for taking the time to write all that and replying to me. I understand these things. I get kills with the Phoenix in STT and PAL mode, that isn't the issue. I don't expect kills 9/10 times. I just haven't been able to get a kill in TWS against human opponents after expending hundreds of missiles at them in particular. That is my primary issue and I don't know if it is because something is broken. I'm not exaggerating either. I've fired hundreds of Phoenixes in TWS against human opponents and none have hit. My radar doesn't indicate that the track has been dropped either so I'm at a loss as to what is happening. I understand the missile can be notched, but it can be notched in STT and PAL as well, right? I still manage to shoot down people from time to time with those modes regardless though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Comstedt86 said:

Early Soviet RWRs had no idea they were painted on in TWS by F14 I believe.

That seems unlikely because it's not like TWS and RWS are doing completely different things, but what is possible is a) the Iraqi pilots definitely wouldn't know they had been fired on until the AIM-54 went active and I doubt they would have much if any useful training experience in going up against the Phoenix and b) the SPO-10 has a blindspot fair above and below the aircraft, so if the Phoenix lofted and was diving down on them they may not have realized an active missile was inbound

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ikaros said:

I've fired hundreds of Phoenixes in TWS against human opponents and none have hit.

Well, you can ask nicely so they don't defend, but you know... cold start, arming/fueling, taxi, take off, cruise to the AO is like 20min no one likes to waste.

btw: PAL is just a transitional search mode that gets you to the P-STT when it locks the target, so "I get kills with the Phoenix in STT and PAL mode" doesn't make sense, unless you mean "PD-STT and P-STT".


Edited by draconus

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TLTeo said:

That seems unlikely because it's not like TWS and RWS are doing completely different things, but what is possible is a) the Iraqi pilots definitely wouldn't know they had been fired on until the AIM-54 went active and I doubt they would have much if any useful training experience in going up against the Phoenix and b) the SPO-10 has a blindspot fair above and below the aircraft, so if the Phoenix lofted and was diving down on them they may not have realized an active missile was inbound

Tactics, Training and Equipment.

More likely, they were not trained and aware of the F-14/Phoenix full capability. Not all militaries are competent in converting intelligence into countering capabilities. And not all militaries' intelligence download their knowledge of superior adversary capability to their front line pilots lest they run at first sight.

Likely the Iraqi pilots only began to understand the sheer overmatch when their compatriots stopped coming home. That sunk hard and the fear of the Tomcat stuck around hard even until the Gulf War in 1991.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ikaros said:

That is informative. Thanks.

Thanks for taking the time to write all that and replying to me. I understand these things. I get kills with the Phoenix in STT and PAL mode, that isn't the issue. I don't expect kills 9/10 times. I just haven't been able to get a kill in TWS against human opponents after expending hundreds of missiles at them in particular. That is my primary issue and I don't know if it is because something is broken. I'm not exaggerating either. I've fired hundreds of Phoenixes in TWS against human opponents and none have hit. My radar doesn't indicate that the track has been dropped either so I'm at a loss as to what is happening. I understand the missile can be notched, but it can be notched in STT and PAL as well, right? I still manage to shoot down people from time to time with those modes regardless though.

I think in majority it will boil down to player skill of your opponents. I, too, get less kills in TWS, simply because the long range shots nowadays are in majority defensive shots. Flying on the server today means facing overall a far greater skill pool than ever before, and the further away you shoot (which is usually TWS), the more easy it is for them to defend.


Edited by IronMike
  • Thanks 1

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Against fighter type targets if you can find a loner I’d tend toward employing in STT, they will get a warning for sure. But if you were in good parameters kinetically then STT will hold the lock better. For me in TWS the weak link is the AWG-9 and lack of correlation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AH_Solid_Snake said:

Against fighter type targets if you can find a loner I’d tend toward employing in STT, they will get a warning for sure. But if you were in good parameters kinetically then STT will hold the lock better. For me in TWS the weak link is the AWG-9 and lack of correlation.

1 v 1 BVR? I suggest TWS still but get up really high and fast. Set target size switch to small.

Your missile will dive down on Pitbull at 8 miles or less. If he breaks early, missile is still coming almost top down and will still compensate. 

Steep dive trajectory is important for the end game performance of the Phoenix because the motors are out, and whatever energy it has is whatever PE it has to trade for KE. That is the only way you can make a long range air to air missile work, short of adding an end game or sustainer motor.

Unfortunately, the current dive trajectories for the Phoenixes seem a bit too shallow. Trying to help the missiles get a steeper dive would result in a over loft so to speak.

2 v 2? I suggest a 15-20 mile spread, and have one ship in TWS launch on both, and the wingman PD-STT on the lead. But this falls under the domain of tactics rather than system/weapon performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/5/2022 at 7:43 PM, Noctrach said:

One small correction, the 54C has the Mk47 mod 1 versus the 54A Mk47 mod 0, it's a slightly different motor with different fuel. It's also heavier than the 54A.

I did just type a wall of text argueing that the 54C should be slightly faster than the 54A in straight line shots. But honestly the difference in thrust to weight is only 1.1%. Considering they have the exact same body but the weight difference shows a 4% advantage to the 54A, it would make a lot of sense that the 54C loses a little bit more energy due to drag over the wing surfaces.

So in hindsight it's probably correct.

Without significant differences in seeker and guidance performance the 54C Mk47 is indeed the worst missile in the bunch from a simply kinematic perspective.

 

If the AIM54C is that bad, then I see no reason why US replace the AIM54A with C at 1986 IRL, because in DCS AM54C just lose to AIM54A in every aspect. Now no matter the purpose is for hitting the fighter or boomer at high or low altitude, not saying Mk60, even AIM54A Mk47 can perform better than AIM54C, the AIM54C just make no use in DCS. 


Edited by Max Mak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Max Mak said:

If the AIM54C is that bad, then I see no reason why US replace the AIM54A with C at 1986 IRL, because in DCS AM54C just lose to AIM54A in every aspect. Now no matter the purpose is for hitting the fighter or boomer at high or low altitude, not saying Mk60, even AIM54A Mk47 can perform better than AIM54C, the AIM54C just make no use in DCS. 

 

Hopefully when the new patch comes out the 54C will be met with improvements, I agree the aim-54c is worst out of all the variants. Bugs me that a older missile just beats a more improved missile in every aspect, Can't wait to see what the new patch introduces to the aim-54c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks you guys for justification. Then I will wait for the improvement for C model. 😁

I still have fun for firing the Mk60 to hit the bomber and… IL76MD (seems a little bit inhumanity) at very long range in the current build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, looking at today's patch notes:

  • Reduced AIM-54 induced drag. 
  • Returned to original guidance parameters thanks to a guidance fix by ED.
  • ED: AA missiles. Corrected target tracking extrapolation.
  • ED: Weapons. AIM-54 launched by AI will enable active mode automatically instead of semi-active guidance in TWS.

I guess what we can expect is better guidance in general, and AI missiles being more dangerous? Also, will the reduced induced drag have a noticeable impact on performance, or is it just a minor change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change in drag is very minor, but welcome. Intercept geometry seems a bit better.

The bad news is that this patch seems to have completely broken guidance with extrapolated tracks on the AWG-9

  • Extrapolated tracks don't go active.
  • Presence of extrapolated track seems to break guidance, not entirely in a consistent way, sometimes it seems to affect other shots but this might just symbology related.
  • Symbology for missile activation inconsistent, doesn't correspond with terminal phase, sometimes doesn't appear at all, sometimes appears for the wrong track. (This makes isolating the issue rather difficult, it's hard to assess what's really happening)

Edit: Can unfortunately consistently reproduce this behaviour in Persian Gulf BVR instant action

Edit2: Removing some elements TBD because the symbology issues make it hard to correlate tacview and cockpit


Edited by Noctrach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Noctrach said:

Change in drag is very minor, but welcome. Intercept geometry seems a bit better.

The bad news is that this patch seems to have completely broken guidance with extrapolated tracks on the AWG-9

  • Extrapolated tracks don't go active.
  • Presence of extrapolated track seems to break guidance, not entirely in a consistent way, sometimes it seems to affect other shots but this might just symbology related.
  • Symbology for missile activation inconsistent, doesn't correspond with terminal phase, sometimes doesn't appear at all, sometimes appears for the wrong track. (This makes isolating the issue rather difficult, it's hard to assess what's really happening)

Edit: Can unfortunately consistently reproduce this behaviour in Persian Gulf BVR instant action

Edit2: Removing some elements TBD because the symbology issues make it hard to correlate tacview and cockpit

 

I rarely ever see extrapolated tracks ever go active. There is a major limitation in the game engine, and the way its implemented is extremely hit or miss. Basically the actual target needs to be very close to the extrapolated track, and even then I rarely see it work.  

Could you provide some tracks/recordings/descriptions of the other two items. I don't understand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DoorMouse said:

I rarely ever see extrapolated tracks ever go active. There is a major limitation in the game engine, and the way its implemented is extremely hit or miss. Basically the actual target needs to be very close to the extrapolated track, and even then I rarely see it work.  

Could you provide some tracks/recordings/descriptions of the other two items. I don't understand. 

I've actually had quite a few "track hold" contacts get an active AIM54 command sent... what I have YET to have happen is the AWG-9 correlate a dropped track with a track hold when it is regained, even if the track is almost exactly where the "track hold" track is at.  Given DCS's netcode, if you see the dreaded X, you will probably never get the track back.

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

22 minutes ago, DoorMouse said:

I rarely ever see extrapolated tracks ever go active. There is a major limitation in the game engine, and the way its implemented is extremely hit or miss. Basically the actual target needs to be very close to the extrapolated track, and even then I rarely see it work.  

Could you provide some tracks/recordings/descriptions of the other two items. I don't understand. 

The issue to me is not that the extrapolated tracks don't activate, but they don't guide at all. They start their loft (or not at all) and just fly straight until stalling. This is a behaviour that was fixed in the past.

For the other part, I've seen extrapolated track start flashing (active) while it was the solid track's missile going active. I've seen it start flashing way late or way early (I think again because it might have been tracking the wrong missile). It's hard to verify but in general I feel the guidances sometimes mix up when there's a broken track.

I'll see if I can provide some tracks in the coming days. I'll add some tacviews for tracks where either one or both tracks broke. You'll notice one missile guiding and the other just flying straight.

Tacview-20220608-173533-DCS-F-14B_IA_PG_BVR.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-174918-DCS-F-14B_IA_PG_BVR.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-181053-DCS.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-181843-DCS.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-182147-DCS.zip.acmi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Noctrach said:

The issue to me is not that the extrapolated tracks don't activate, but they don't guide at all. They start their loft (or not at all) and just fly straight until stalling. This is a behaviour that was fixed in the past.

For the other part, I've seen extrapolated track start flashing (active) while it was the solid track's missile going active. I've seen it start flashing way late or way early (I think again because it might have been tracking the wrong missile). It's hard to verify but in general I feel the guidances sometimes mix up when there's a broken track.

I'll see if I can provide some tracks in the coming days. I'll add some tacviews for tracks where either one or both tracks broke. You'll notice one missile guiding and the other just flying straight.

Tacview-20220608-173533-DCS-F-14B_IA_PG_BVR.zip.acmi 204.65 kB · 1 download Tacview-20220608-174918-DCS-F-14B_IA_PG_BVR.zip.acmi 164.08 kB · 0 downloads Tacview-20220608-181053-DCS.zip.acmi 155.3 kB · 0 downloads Tacview-20220608-181843-DCS.zip.acmi 203.26 kB · 0 downloads Tacview-20220608-182147-DCS.zip.acmi 183.26 kB · 0 downloads

Thanks!

Ill take a look, but be aware, in DCS the missile will NOT guide to a track hold. 

What happens behind the scenes is that to the USER It throws up a track hold icon but to the SIMULATION it is still actually factually tracking the missile IF conditions are met- and I don't know exactly, I've heard it's 3 miles but I've seen Hold Tracks on top of the target never pitbull consistently.

So if the report is that missiles don't follow the hold track, that is working as expected and has been so since day one.

The problem is the missiles simulation isn't sophisticated enough to Track or guide to an INS point. The code just doesn't exist. It either IS or ISNT tracking an OBJECT. I believe the new missile API has this feature but it has been in development for years and well.... Look how awful the 120 Is (which is on the new code).  So careful what you ask for. 

 


Edited by DoorMouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DoorMouse said:

Thanks!

Ill take a look, but be aware, in DCS the missile will NOT guide to a track hold. 

What happens behind the scenes is that to the USER It throws up a track hold icon but to the SIMULATION it is still actually factually tracking the missile IF conditions are met- and I don't know exactly, I've heard it's 3 miles but I've seen Hold Tracks on top of the target never pitbull consistently.

So if the report is that missiles don't follow the hold track, that is working as expected and has been so since day one.

The problem is the missiles simulation isn't sophisticated enough to Track or guide to an INS point. The code just doesn't exist. It either IS or ISNT tracking an OBJECT. I believe the new missile API has this feature but it has been in development for years and well.... Look how awful the 120 Is (which is on the new code).  So careful what you ask for. 

 

 

I'm positively sure I've seen missiles track to some extent on an extrapolated track, at least in the sense that they completed their loft in the direction of the track. Possibly in the way you mention where trackholds and real target are "close enough" but I could be misremembering. I don't recall them really doing what they're doing now.

That said, most of the extrapolated tracks today were literally overlaid on top of the real returns all the way until TTI -5 so if the sim works as you say there's no reason why these missiles didn't track or go active.

But yeah, the 120 does not inspire confidence right now 😛


Edited by Noctrach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Noctrach said:

I'm positively sure I've seen missiles track to some extent on an extrapolated track, at least in the sense that they completed their loft in the direction of the track. Possibly in the way you mention where trackholds and real target are "close enough" but I could be misremembering. I don't recall them really doing what they're doing now.

That said, most of the extrapolated tracks today were literally overlaid on top of the real returns all the way until TTI -5 so if the sim works as you say there's no reason why these missiles didn't track or go active.

But yeah, the 120 does not inspire confidence right now 😛

 

yeah it CAN work. I am just making the point that it just doesnt work in the way that is intuitive or obvious. The "hold Track" on your TID is kind of complete nonsense. Behind the scenes its doing a magical hidden "am I still tracking yes/no" calculation that you have no way to tell. The game CANNOT track anything except a real physical object....

Behind the scenes a successful hold track is actually just a regular old track. The logic to determine if it magically continues to track or not is a mystery to me, but it does not work even when it should. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what is worth, my dozen or so tests on the 6 on 6 mission, reveal somewhat more stable tracks, and even a kill on a crossed track. Those are however non-maneuvering targets and i only tried the Persian Gulf BVR mission once with decent results. One MiG splashed one evaded the missile by going cold after a Split-S. 

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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