Jump to content

AIM-120 still can not chase simple Split S manuever.


opps

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, geshabuL_ said:

I want to add more footage that I have, where one 120C is DODGED by a flanker (it was shot from 5 miles, hot)

Tacview-20220608-211601-DCS-_.zip.acmi 1.35 MB · 2 downloads

That is the way overdone RNG aiming error being illustrated in that tacview; combined with hard maneuvers, you can quite literally "dodge" AMRAAMs rn (particularly at low alt), regardless being in the notch or not. Its just silly.

  • Like 1

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

That is the way overdone RNG aiming error being illustrated in that tacview; combined with hard maneuvers, you can quite literally "dodge" AMRAAMs rn (particularly at low alt), regardless being in the notch or not. Its just silly.

Yeah, it's absurdly close (yet still not TOO close) so the 120 should've shredded that flanker, which was also not that fast on top of that. Ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 58 Minuten schrieb Маэстро:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

The plane loses the lock after all the missiles are in the pitbull, The Aim120 no longer see the target from ~3nm

So let's keep in mind that an Aim120C cannot see a target  at ~30,000ft in a notch

Even though there is no ground disturbance at that altitude.
Why does the notch work here?
 

Thanks for the answers🙂

 

 

 

vor 15 Stunden schrieb opps:

Can you repeat this test again, this time try to hold the lock? 🙂


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

54 minutes ago, Маэстро said:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

So despite closest ground is still over 10km away and no chaff, most advanced ARH missile in DCS is still very suspectable to notch. Good job on range gate or target extrapolation. Or I am completly misunderstanding about these.

And why did ALL AIM-120 pulled up(turned away from last known target course) when losing track?


Edited by opps
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Маэстро said:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

The AMRAAMs are at MPRF active and should have no issues continuing to track the target under attack even through a notch at that range, especially when there is little to no ground clutter effect such as against an open ocean background (but even with ground clutter, it wouldn't be anywhere near 100%). Though, when ED implements HPRF active for the AMRAAM it would likely be reasonable to be notched if ownship support was terminated before MPRF active (cheapshot).

Notching is a certainly a thing, but its effectiveness is greatly overdone in DCS, especially with 4th generation radars. A good sanity check would be to ask any actual SME if notching is still a tactic employed in modern combat.

Additionally, and importantly, in DCS when missiles are notched, they stop flying a predicted intercept. Even if an aircraft momentarily flies through a notch during a split-S (or any notch) the AMRAAM should still continue to the last known point of intercept (unless it bites off of on chaff since it would be intercepting the chaff, but that doesn't happen here)

  • Like 8

 1A100.png?format=1500w  

Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hobel said:

The plane loses the lock after all the missiles are in the pitbull

So let's keep in mind that an Aim120C cannot see a target  at ~30,000ft in a notch

Even though there is no ground disturbance at that altitude.
Why does the notch work here?
 

Thanks for the answers🙂

 

 

 

Can you repeat this test again, this time try to hold the lock? 🙂

I can confirn DL support works even after pittbull and indeed DL support helps AIM-120 to racapture target. But This topic is about AIM-120's vulnerability to notch, and that's why I droped lock in first track, to show raw missile performance .


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

vor 2 Minuten schrieb opps:

I can confirn DL support works even after pittbull and indeed DL support helps AIM-120 to racapture target. But This topic is about AIM-120's vulnerability to notch, and that's why I droped lock in first track, to show missile performance itsself.

That is correct and I aware to this 🙂

would have been interesting whether the missle  continues to lose the lock

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Маэстро said:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

Sorry, but since the target is at high altitude, and closer to the missile than any clutter source (ground), and no chaff is present, how do you explain that the missile is not able to follow the target in the notch using signal/noise ratio? The range gates should allow excellent signal/noise ratio in this situation, and the absence of chaff means no secondary target that can confuse the missile.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Маэстро said:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

unknown.png

Can you help me understand why it's getting confused by the terrain returns that are 6 range bins away? (assuming 1km wide range bins)


Edited by Santi871
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KlarSnow said:

unknown.png

Like this for those who arent visualizing the concept well...

Well that's a simplification, since both HPRF and MPRF (not even sure this one is modelled for the AMRAAM in DCS) are ambiguous in distance, there are several range gates around several possible distances, but yes basically it's that. And it wouldn't surprise me if the AMRAAM would use 2 different frequencies to solve the range ambiguity irl... (but we'll probably never know lol)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mad_Shell said:

Well that's a simplification, since both HPRF and MPRF (not even sure this one is modelled for the AMRAAM in DCS) are ambiguous in distance, there are several range gates around several possible distances, but yes basically it's that. And it wouldn't surprise me if the AMRAAM would use 2 different frequencies to solve the range ambiguity irl... (but we'll probably never know lol)

Im 100% aware of the complexity of the actuality of this, but this is perfectly demonstrative of the theory of what is happening.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even when shooting from low to high the Aim120 has problems to see the target, this is not a new problem and is based on many reports from other people.

 

Vs F16

Tacview-20220609-125957-DCS.zip.acmiclear skyr.trk

 

 

I have kept the lock up, the Aim120 are not able to detect a Mi8 against a free sky

 

Tacview-20220609-140046-DCS.zip.acmi


Edited by Hobel
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 9 Stunden schrieb Маэстро:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

In that case it is not a Fox III anymore. It is called a Fox I with this sentence. Or what is the meaning of supporting till hit to achive maximum PK with an AMRAAM?


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

Well, supporting your missile to timeout/splash would increase Pk, so that's not wrong, but the missile should be capable on its own when active as well.

If the missile had for example a 80% Pk supported to pitbull, it may have a 90% Pk if supported to timeout/splash.

 1A100.png?format=1500w  

Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MARLAN_ said:

Well, supporting your missile to timeout/splash would increase Pk, so that's not wrong, but the missile should be capable on its own when active as well.

If the missile had for example a 80% Pk supported to pitbull, it may have a 90% Pk if supported to timeout/splash.

The manuals say that supporting the 120 beyond pitbull has no effect on Pk.  Of course, that's probably not entirely true.

  • Like 3

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Маэстро said:

Intended. Launcher aircraft drops target lock => drops datalink, then target begins to dive, goes thru notch(dropping missile lock) and out of missile FOV. You should keep lock until hit to maximize Pk.

Hi Maestro, I hope you are willing to consider re-coding the notch mechanics.   I sent the math to ED via BIGNEWY almost a year ago, so I imagine you have it - it is a document from a research/physics piece directly related to detectability of aircraft in clutter and gives formulas for computing the clutter and extracting the radar return of the target IIRC - the basic idea is exactly what is being discussed in this thread:  The notch does not properly exist if you can eliminate clutter in other ways, ie. range binning.  It's possible that some radars would never be able to ignore this filter, but I expect those would be an exception.

As far as missile go, there is a description of the Sparrow's anti-split-S protection in one of the F-15C -34's.

(NOTE:  You can of course introduce your own clutter to force more filtering etc, thus reducing Pk).

To further expand on the topic a bit, this treatment is needed for every radar in DCS (missile OR aircraft... or boat/SAM etc).  The look-down code is far too simple, and the 'look down effect' is certainly more complex IRL; antenna depression does not truly imply look down into clutter, but this is how DCS models the situation.  It would be good to see this change.

Naturally, this should probably be followed up by coding in other effects like an aircraft's variable RCS, and correcting how the 'miss distance' works with respect to low altitude and aircraft maneuver.

PS:   I will be away from any of the above materials for a long time, so I am unable to share.   However, these are all materials that ED also posesses.

PPS:  I think quite importantly, using the math I shared for computing the ground clutter instead of antenna elevation will capture a tactical use of clutter that does not exist in DCS - consider that a SAM can be 'looking up' at a mountain in certain situations.   An aircraft can fly close to the mountain and create a look-down clutter situation for that radar even though it is technically 'looking up' if we consider the antenna angle  🙂


Edited by GGTharos
  • Like 12

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No need to be dramatic.   Developers can't just magically code up something new.  This takes preparation and care, assuming it even gets green-lighted by any business decision making which may be prioritizing something else.

We all want improvements and it's not fair to say that ED is not making them.

  • Like 3

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

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...