Jump to content

AIM-54 Against Low Flyers (relatively speaking)


bonesvf103

Recommended Posts

So usually you want to fly high (30,000+) to employ Phoenix.  But what if the target is down low such as 5000 AGL or below?  That's 25000 ft of altitude and thicker air for the Phoenix to fly through to hit.

So what is the best way to employ Phoenix?  I was thinking get in close, so at least the horizontal distance is not so bad...but then how close is close?  20 nm?

 

Thoughts?

 

v6,

boNes

 

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You still want the missile to loft. It will lose the least energy to the atmosphere by traveling straight down on the target. If it flies a shallow descent it's just going to bleed energy.

  • Thanks 1

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

OK, but then at what range/alt should I fire?  If I'm at say 30 nm at 30,000 ft and he's at 5000 ft, that's a huge volume of air to have to fly through with the air densities throughout than say if you were at 20 nm at 30,000 ft (or maybe better at 20 nm at 20000 ft).  I saw that even HB remarked in a situation like this that that is 25000 feet down  through air that gets denser and denser that the missile has to fly through and doesn't help its PK.

Also, would the Phoenix know that it doesn't have to loft as high if it was fired say with the bandit at 5000 ft and you at 10000 ft with only 20 nm between you?  It seems as if if it goes all the way up to 30000 then back down, it's wasting alot fo energy going all the way up then losing it all the way down than if it only lofted up a little bit then came down again.  Of course that would mean it's doing it in more dense air in the latter case than the former.

v6,

boNes

 

  • Like 1

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have a range number, and I don't recall how the 54's loft logic works exactly. Maybe experiment a bit to find the minimum range at which it will still loft to target. Or if it ends up pulling excessive g trying to loft, fire further out rather than closer.

As far as firing position I'd maintain altitude (30,000 ft +). The missile loses some energy climbing but remember than some of it also converted to potential energy which helps the missile retain speed when coming back down. The air is also much thinner up high so losses to drag are much much less. Essentially the loft makes traveling long distance really low cost for the missile, and if you get the loft angle correct you minimize the effect of the thick atmosphere. There is also the potential bonus of coming in too steep to set off the target's RWR.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, r4y30n said:

If it comes in real steep doesn’t it risk beaming itself?

Yes the missile can come down too steep, but the optimum probably isn't a 90 degree dive anyway.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really great discussion, and a great question about the missile beaming itself.

I'll play around with this and see what happens and post back.

v6,

boNes

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two instances of early Phoenix tests I've seen in open-source documents against sea-skimming cruise missiles.

The first is in Gillcrist's Tomcat! The Grumman F-14 Story, page 41-42.  The test occurred on 8 June 1973.  The setup used a QT-33 drone cruising at 0.72M and 50 feet.  The F-14 was at a cruising altitude of 24,000 feet and 0.92M.  Launch range of the AIM-54A was 22 nautical miles with a successful intercept.

The second is in The Great Book of Modern Warplanes (1987 ed) on page 631-633, which indicates a test against a Ryan BQM-34A at 50 feet, flying at 0.75M, with the F-14 at 10,000 feet and 0.72M.  Launch range of the AIM-54A was again 22 nautical miles with a successful intercept.

You could always set up a test and try under these conditions and see if your missile successfully intercepts your target.  Of note, the targets in the real-world tests were not maneuvering, so if you go back over the track/tacview and find the missile maybe just makes the intercept due to all that low-altitude drag, then you have an idea that against a defending fighter at such low altitude, even from a higher launch altitude, 22NM might be too far for a successful intercept.  You might need to go faster to give the missile a better start, or wait longer before pulling the trigger.  In the end, just experiment with it - you don't have a limited budget or supply of missiles or drones; fire as many missiles as you want under as many scenarios as you want.

  • Thanks 1

Rig: i9 10900KF @5.3GHz | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 3600MHz | ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090 24GB OC | ASUS Maximus XII Formula | 2x 2TB Intel SSD6 NVMe M.2 | VKB F-14CG on Gunfighter III Base | TM Warthog HOTAS | TM Rudder Pedals | HP Reverb G2

Hangar: FC3 | F-86F | F-4E [Pre-Ordered] | F-5E | F-14A/B | F-15E | F-16C | F/A-18C | Mirage 2000C | JF-17 | MiG-15bis | MiG-19P | MiG-21bis | AJS-37 | AV-8B | L39 | C-101 | A-10C/CII | Yak-52 | P-51D | P-47D | Fw 190 A-8/D-9 | Bf 109 | Spitfire | I-16 | UH-1 Huey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind the current AIM-54 is still WIP. Afaik we don't have correct guidance, the loft may be not optimal in all cases (and missile versions) and the Gs are limited.

The loft profile is calculated at the launch for current parameters. If target maneuvers the loft always ends up worse than expected.

🖥️ 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

I did a few tests in the Devil's Edge mission.  30000 ft shooting at targets at below 10000 at 30 nm.  50% kill ratio, but I finished them off with Sparrow and Sidewinder.

Will do more checking.

v6,

boNes

6 hours ago, Quid said:

There are two instances of early Phoenix tests I've seen in open-source documents against sea-skimming cruise missiles.

The first is in Gillcrist's Tomcat! The Grumman F-14 Story, page 41-42.  The test occurred on 8 June 1973.  The setup used a QT-33 drone cruising at 0.72M and 50 feet.  The F-14 was at a cruising altitude of 24,000 feet and 0.92M.  Launch range of the AIM-54A was 22 nautical miles with a successful intercept.

The second is in The Great Book of Modern Warplanes (1987 ed) on page 631-633, which indicates a test against a Ryan BQM-34A at 50 feet, flying at 0.75M, with the F-14 at 10,000 feet and 0.72M.  Launch range of the AIM-54A was again 22 nautical miles with a successful intercept.

You could always set up a test and try under these conditions and see if your missile successfully intercepts your target.  Of note, the targets in the real-world tests were not maneuvering, so if you go back over the track/tacview and find the missile maybe just makes the intercept due to all that low-altitude drag, then you have an idea that against a defending fighter at such low altitude, even from a higher launch altitude, 22NM might be too far for a successful intercept.  You might need to go faster to give the missile a better start, or wait longer before pulling the trigger.  In the end, just experiment with it - you don't have a limited budget or supply of missiles or drones; fire as many missiles as you want under as many scenarios as you want.

Thanks.  I actually have both books, will look it up.  I also eas listening to the F-14 Tomcast about it and there were some points of interest there too.

Thing is, if I'm waiting until 22nm to fire...well, for one, what was the point of having a Phoenix then (now wonder they were pushing the AMRAAM so much, haha!) and also, now I am nealy in the bandit's kill zone for his missiles.  Seems like getting in close like that defeats the purpose of having a long range missile.

v6,

boNes

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bonesvf103 said:

Thing is, if I'm waiting until 22nm to fire...well, for one, what was the point of having a Phoenix then (now wonder they were pushing the AMRAAM so much, haha!) and also, now I am nealy in the bandit's kill zone for his missiles.  Seems like getting in close like that defeats the purpose of having a long range missile.

1. You don't have AMRAAMs.

2. Try to be that guy at 10k and shoot at 22nm at the Tomcat at 30k and see if your AMRAAM wins.

  • Like 1

🖥️ 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

1 hour ago, bonesvf103 said:

I did a few tests in the Devil's Edge mission.  30000 ft shooting at targets at below 10000 at 30 nm.  50% kill ratio, but I finished them off with Sparrow and Sidewinder.

Will do more checking.

v6,

boNes

Thanks.  I actually have both books, will look it up.  I also eas listening to the F-14 Tomcast about it and there were some points of interest there too.

Thing is, if I'm waiting until 22nm to fire...well, for one, what was the point of having a Phoenix then (now wonder they were pushing the AMRAAM so much, haha!) and also, now I am nealy in the bandit's kill zone for his missiles.  Seems like getting in close like that defeats the purpose of having a long range missile.

v6,

boNes

Well, AMRAAM wasn't being pushed because of the AIM-54 (the AIM-54 was actually one of the reasons the F-14 community eventually stopped pursuing the AMRAAM and pursued LANTIRN instead - no need for the cost), it was because of the limitations of the AIM-7 and the objective was to bring "Phoenix-like ability" into a missile the size of a Sparrow, and Phoenix did "out-stick" AMRAAM for its entire service life.

As to your comment about waiting until 22nm to fire - 22nm is long range for an engagement that low.  I wouldn't fire an AIM-120 on the deck at 22nm and expect it to make the intercept point against a maneuvering target, and as Draconus said, I wouldn't expect it to climb up 24,000 feet from 50ft (or up to 30K from 10K) at 22nm and have an advantage, either.  Missile launch zones and no-escape zones are highly dynamic and highly dependent on altitude, launch conditions, target closure, etc., and no missile is immune to those effects.

  • Like 1

Rig: i9 10900KF @5.3GHz | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 3600MHz | ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090 24GB OC | ASUS Maximus XII Formula | 2x 2TB Intel SSD6 NVMe M.2 | VKB F-14CG on Gunfighter III Base | TM Warthog HOTAS | TM Rudder Pedals | HP Reverb G2

Hangar: FC3 | F-86F | F-4E [Pre-Ordered] | F-5E | F-14A/B | F-15E | F-16C | F/A-18C | Mirage 2000C | JF-17 | MiG-15bis | MiG-19P | MiG-21bis | AJS-37 | AV-8B | L39 | C-101 | A-10C/CII | Yak-52 | P-51D | P-47D | Fw 190 A-8/D-9 | Bf 109 | Spitfire | I-16 | UH-1 Huey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For low flying targets, I wouldn't engage them from 30,000 ft. Especially in TWS, you may lose the track in clutter among other things.

I would suggest descending to engage, no more than +10,000ft if you want a little bit more potential energy but I feel the trade off is not worth it.

In thick air, you want to give the missile as much smash as possible. If possible, go straight in, drop tanks, and leave in max burner. If you can release above > M1.4, your pK will increase significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, draconus said:

1. You don't have AMRAAMs.

Well, I was being factious actually...

8 hours ago, draconus said:

2. Try to be that guy at 10k and shoot at 22nm at the Tomcat at 30k and see if your AMRAAM wins.

I see your point there!

 

6 hours ago, Quid said:

Well, AMRAAM wasn't being pushed because of the AIM-54 (the AIM-54 was actually one of the reasons the F-14 community eventually stopped pursuing the AMRAAM and pursued LANTIRN instead - no need for the cost), it was because of the limitations of the AIM-7 and the objective was to bring "Phoenix-like ability" into a missile the size of a Sparrow, and Phoenix did "out-stick" AMRAAM for its entire service life.

I was being facetious but I see what you're saying.  All I was getting at was that if a missile is supposed to be a long rang missile, shouldn't it be?  22 nm is not really long range.  I'd say the missile is more "long range compatible/ready."  But semantics aside...

6 hours ago, Quid said:

As to your comment about waiting until 22nm to fire - 22nm is long range for an engagement that low.  I wouldn't fire an AIM-120 on the deck at 22nm and expect it to make the intercept point against a maneuvering target, and as Draconus said, I wouldn't expect it to climb up 24,000 feet from 50ft (or up to 30K from 10K) at 22nm and have an advantage, either.  Missile launch zones and no-escape zones are highly dynamic and highly dependent on altitude, launch conditions, target closure, etc., and no missile is immune to those effects.

Understood.  So, when a target is how low do you get how close?  That's what I'm trying to get the feel for, and ultimately, how to decide how to set myself up to emply in the best way possible.

v6,

boNes

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zaphael said:

For low flying targets, I wouldn't engage them from 30,000 ft. Especially in TWS, you may lose the track in clutter among other things.

Well, when I launch, I immediately try to get 1000 ft below the target ASAP to minimize that so not a problem.

 

2 hours ago, Zaphael said:

I would suggest descending to engage, no more than +10,000ft if you want a little bit more potential energy but I feel the trade off is not worth it.

In thick air, you want to give the missile as much smash as possible. If possible, go straight in, drop tanks, and leave in max burner. If you can release above > M1.4, your pK will increase significantly.

Perhaps but it seems like 30000+ is the agreed best altitude for best loft so I guess again I just have to get the feel of things with all factors considered.

v6,

boNes


Edited by bonesvf103

"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zaphael said:

If possible, go straight in, drop tanks, and leave in max burner. If you can release above > M1.4, your pK will increase significantly.

Or wait for the trans sonic drag to be fixed 😕 

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

On 5/13/2022 at 6:49 AM, captain_dalan said:

Or wait for the trans sonic drag to be fixed 😕 

I am not holding my breath for that. Heh.

On 5/13/2022 at 4:26 AM, bonesvf103 said:

Well, when I launch, I immediately try to get 1000 ft below the target ASAP to minimize that so not a problem.

 

Perhaps but it seems like 30000+ is the agreed best altitude for best loft so I guess again I just have to get the feel of things with all factors considered.

v6,

boNes

 

30000+ supersonic launches against a high or medium high altitude target works okay at ranges of 40+ NM.  But if you want to attack a target thats low or in the weeds, the Phoenix is going to dive into thick air without its motor and lose energy much faster in DCS. 

The target would react at terminal homing phase with an orthogonal break, and your pK will drop drastically. Best way to kill a low target in DCS with a phoenix now is to ensure the motor is burning all the way to impact. 

Follow up a TWS shot with a PAL shot under 10 miles supersonic, max-g orthogonal break, dump chaff and drag. The Phoenix would be autonomous but the AMRAAMs may still require a some support and has to work against your break. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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