R-60 Question and Request for Rear Aspect Sidewinder

[Sharpshooter]

Now, when you fire an R-27ET, it is getting the co-ordinates of the target from the targeting aircraft. This means that the missile is getting guidance from the aircraft... not tracking itself yet. This is COMMAND guidance. If you lose lock on the target, the missile gets "timed out" and switches to INERTIAL guidance. This means that the missile follows the path according to last known target position, speed and heading. If you resume lock again, the missile returns to COMMAND guidance. Now, when the missile is in range (15 KM for the R-27ET) for it's on-board IR seeker, it breaks the datalink and starts tracking the target itself... passively.

 

Yes, this was always taken into account i think, at least I always thought of it being that way. But the question here is if the R-27ET or the R-27T have a datalink at all, because some sources claim they do not.

 

The coupling of the EOS and the Radar. As my fellow player SharpShooter wrote "... you are screwed.", I believe he is right in some regards. He is wrong in some others as well. Have you ever thought about this? Russian aircrafts chiefly use SARH missiles, with the exception of some. Now, as you already know, SARH missiles need guidance from the targeting computer. Now, let's suppose you managed to lock up an F/A-18A at a distance of 48 km. You fired an R-27ER when he was at 45 and waited for the missile to hit. Now, of course, missiles are faster than aircrafts but you may not be so slow either. The F/A-18A pilot was skilled and started beaming you... what do you do now? Well, the EOS helps you here... the EOS switches on it's laser range finder and starts tracking the enemy. As you may remember, every 3 pulses of the IR laser range-finder and followed by a radar pulse. This radar pulse gets a much accurate reading as compared to the laser range-finder. Plus, when the radar is able to lock, it switches on... automatically. Thus, we see that the coupling of the EOS and radar mean that the enemy is "screwed"... not you.

 

I was really talking about another type of situation. What you say is correct. That happens if you have a SARH missile selected. If you have an IR missile selected, you will want to keep it stealthy if you have not been detected yet. You will want to use the EOS to locate the aircraft and fire when he still does not realize you are there.

 

Regarding the discussion on adding some rear-aspect IR missiles, well... I believe that they are obsolete! Lock On is "Modern Air Combat"... rear-aspect IR missiles are a thing of the past now.

 

SharpShooter is correct about the AMRAAMs though. I, too, believe that the US aircrafts should get a much wider range of missiles. Actually, an F-15E would have been more "fun" than the F-15C.

 

The AIM-7 is practically a thing of the past, but it is still being used. Plus sometimes SARH missiles are fun, and diversity is cool and adds to the inmersion.

 

I believe they did not put the F-15E not because it is not fun, but because it has MFDs and thus is more complicated to simulate with this engine.

 

Also, I do not think that there are ways to detect an IR missile launch. Flanker 2.5 even showed an A-G radar in the Su-27! So, it was quite wrong... in many respects. Plus, to detect changes in the atmosphere to detect missile launch, the aircraft would need a radar... a radar which never switches off... this would just add weight and really get the pilot "screwed"!!

 

I think there are other ways to detect changes in the atmosphere, radar is not the universal sensor. No backup on this just that I have the feeling that there are other ways.

 

I would like to add a piece of news here... talking of missile launch warning systems and radars, did you people know of the Su-47 and the R.x missile? The Su-47 Berkut features a rear-looking radar and the ONLY rear-firing missile... the R.x. What this means is this... you get behind a Su-47 planning to "riddle" the pilot. But suddenly, he shoots a missile behind... at you!! The R.x will also be added to bombers and some fighter/bombers.

 

You mentioned rear-aspect IR missiles a thing of the past, I think Su-47 is a thing of the future !!!

 

The link for the AMRAAM was nice. Thank you. :)

 

Hey, no problem !

[MS_Wolverine]

Well, that's the problem. Russians do not let out much information about their weapons!! For example, when ED asked them about the RWR system in the Su-25T, they replied with the info being classified. So, the Su-25T gets the SPO-15 in the game!! USAF is a different issue. It seems that they let out info to "scare" the other countries. Anyway, this is not a matter we should discuss.

 

The sources for the R-27T and R-27ET may be wrong... or they may not be. But, I am sure ED gave as much realism as they god info from the Russian AF. ED loves realism and removed the R-27EA when they got news that the missile was out of production. Lock On is not just a game... games are balanced and rather un-real. Lock On is a true MODERN AIR COMBAT FLIGHT SIMULATOR!!

 

About the EOS/Radar coupling when using an IR guided missile, I agree with you. But, let's not forget that Russian aircrafts are not as "automated" as their US counterparts. What happens in one attack mode, probably happens in others as well. So, heh, what I do is use the EOS in BVR to "guess" enemy pos. I do not lock them as this would switch on the radar and ruin my surprise. When I get behind them, I switch on the radar and fire a missile! You should see them freak out! :P

 

Yes, SARH missiles are fun and require much more work on the pilot's part. But, frankly speaking, US aircraft designers try to keep work-load on the pilot the lowest! That's why the F-15C is much more "user-friendly" as compared to the Su-27! OF course, the AIM-7 does have its pros and cons; but, then again, every missile does! I think you are right about the F-15E... but, heh, the harder the better. :)

 

Ideas to detect changes in atmosphere? Well, we have satellite imaging, barometers, pulse-doppler radars and some more I can't remember yet?

 

About the Su-47 and R.x, well, I said rear-firing... not rear aspect. Sidewinder, when it started off, could be fired at an aspect angle of 10 lol... now, it's all-aspect!! The R.x is fires forward. It then makes an astounding 180 degree turn and goes back!! It must look awesome lol.

[plug pray]

well....... too early to speak 'bout su47........ ithink that with our politicans........ they will start to produce 47's in about......... :idea: 120 years. so, u may discuss somrthing more traditional :)

[Dmut]

USAF is a different issue. It seems that they let out info to "scare" the other countries.

well, even they don't open all "scare" info, like radars technical characteristics and "datalink" algorithms ;)

[britgliderpilot]

Also, I do not think that there are ways to detect an IR missile launch. Flanker 2.5 even showed an A-G radar in the Su-27! So, it was quite wrong... in many respects. Plus, to detect changes in the atmosphere to detect missile launch, the aircraft would need a radar... a radar which never switches off... this would just add weight and really get the pilot "screwed"!!

 

I would like to add a piece of news here... talking of missile launch warning systems and radars, did you people know of the Su-47 and the R.x missile? The Su-47 Berkut features a rear-looking radar and the ONLY rear-firing missile... the R.x. What this means is this... you get behind a Su-47 planning to "riddle" the pilot. But suddenly, he shoots a missile behind... at you!! The R.x will also be added to bombers and some fighter/bombers.

 

The link for the AMRAAM was nice. Thank you. :)

 

Some later versions of the Su27 do have an A2G radar - they also have the ability to carry the R77. Flanker 2.5 did some odd things with the version they were modelling . . . . my main beef with the A2G radar in that sim is that it just wasn't realistic :wink:

 

 

There are ways to detect an IR missile launch, and to do it without a radar - they're bringing them in as part of the defensive systems on current and next-generation combat aircraft. Basically, you put IR sensors around the airframe, and let them "watch" for sudden heat blooms.

 

In the latest generation systems, that's also linked up to a turret containing a high intensity IR lamp (or laser in some versions) that can then blind the incoming heater. Very cool.

 

 

Exactly what the Su47 features, nobody is quite sure. Shrug.

The big tail "sting" on the later Su3x aircraft is said to house a rearwards-facing radar, and R73 developments have indeed been modified and tested to fire backwards . . . . but last I heard, they'd quietly dropped the idea.

The Su47 doesn't seem to have the big sting that some of the others do - I'd be a bit sceptical about that claim.

 

In any case, relying on a tactic that lets a bandit get behind you is fundamentally bad tactics :wink:

 

 

About the F15E - MFD's, A2G radar, and real two-seat functionality.

None of them exist in Lomac. Hence there's a bit of a problem trying to implement it . . . .

 

ED are working on limited two-player control stuff at the moment - it was brought in as an experimental feature in v1.02, and there's plenty of fun stuff you can do with it . . . . go look on Lockonskins.co.uk/Mods for a couple of pseudo-two-seaters for Lomac v1.02.

 

Fun, but should also demonstrate a couple of the problems still there.

 

(edit - LOSkins seems to be down at the moment . . . try again soon)

[plug pray]

no, really. about those rear firin missiles....... Aint it better to make a missile that launches forward, but is able to acquisit and eliminate a target in the rear... Just make a 180 turn and babah....:roll: very expensive though. Or i misunderstand something? :)

[MS_Wolverine]

Well, I never said that getting a rear-firing missile would mean that you need to let the enemy get behind you! This just means that you just got a whole lot "safety". Especially the bombers!!

 

About the US giving out info, well, no-one in this world is STUPID enough to tell people their secrets!! They probably make an information public when they come to know that others already know about it!! Regardless of what people believe, Russian intelligence agencies are much better than their Western counter-parts!

 

The possibility of looking for heat-blooms in the surrounding air-space is quite nice but I do not really think it will be 100% accurate! It will be more like a sumbmarine's sonar system! Your own engine's heat will camouflage everything behind you!! Plus, the IR-Warning Reciever (or whatever they call it) would also probably go after Flares!!

 

I read an article though... the US is scared of the Russian cruise missiles! The article said that the only reason US was not attacking Iran, despite Israel jumping up and down and saying "ATTACK ATTACK", was that Iran had procured some Moskits and Granits from Russia!! They fly low and fast. By the time they hit, the target doesn't even know it's there!!

 

I also heard of an idea to use a laser and/or ECM beam to destroy/disrupt an incoming missile. It's still in the experimental stages but I believe that, if implemented, such an aircraft would be invincible!!

 

About 2-player idea... well, we see it in action in some games... BattleField Vietnam can handle multiple players in one vehicle... but it's an arcade game. IL-2 Sturmovik also has 2 players in one aircraft... the second player is the rear-seated gunner. If the same is implemented in Lock On, I would love to fly a Su-30 MKi or the F-14D.

 

Also, I would like to say one thing extra... ED RULES... We english-speaking folks get a glimpse of the N-001 and the N-019 for the first time! :D

[GGTharos]

Su-37 Berkut never even had a radar installed onboard, let alone weapons ... so what are you talking about?

 

It was never anything mroe than an airframe demonstrator. Rear firing or 180-deg turning missiles have severely shortened range, and it is likely what kills their effectiveness enough to have the project scrapped. Although missiles that make such radical turns are already in operation, their use is in the merge, not shooting things behind you.

[MS_Wolverine]

Well, you better get your facts straight mate! The Su-37 and the Berkut are different things!! The Su-47 is the Berkut... with forward-swept wings; kinda like the US X-29.

 

The Su-47 is the ONLY aircraft in the world to feature a rear-looking radar. I can even give you a link if you don't believe me! I only say something after I myself believe it is correct.

 

The Su-37 resembles the Su-35 and is MUCHO agile! It can fly at AoA angles unimaginable! I have seen it in action... on the TV, of course. Yes, it may not have a radar installed... yet, I believe you. Probably because it's still in the test phase. Even if it got a radar, I doubt that the Russian AF will tell anything about it! The R.x is still in experimental phases... Russian missiles are better than their western counterparts!! The R.x works... I found pics of it in action on the Internet. But, of course, US hardware is more "famous"... getting publicity through use in wars.

[britgliderpilot]

The possibility of looking for heat-blooms in the surrounding air-space is quite nice but I do not really think it will be 100% accurate! It will be more like a sumbmarine's sonar system! Your own engine's heat will camouflage everything behind you!! Plus, the IR-Warning Reciever (or whatever they call it) would also probably go after Flares!!

 

I also heard of an idea to use a laser and/or ECM beam to destroy/disrupt an incoming missile. It's still in the experimental stages but I believe that, if implemented, such an aircraft would be invincible!!

 

Of course it's not 100% effective - but it's more than experimental, it's in service. Look up the Nemesis DIRCM system.

 

 

About 2-player idea... well, we see it in action in some games... BattleField Vietnam can handle multiple players in one vehicle... but it's an arcade game. IL-2 Sturmovik also has 2 players in one aircraft... the second player is the rear-seated gunner. If the same is implemented in Lock On, I would love to fly a Su-30 MKi or the F-14D.

 

Also, I would like to say one thing extra... ED RULES... We english-speaking folks get a glimpse of the N-001 and the N-019 for the first time! :D

 

To some extent, you can already do the pilot/WSO thing. One of the mods on Lockonskins is an aircraft of my own creation . . . an odd hybrid-thingy with an Su30 shape, second cockpit in the right place, carrier capable, A2A refuelling, and A2G/precision strike stuff. No such aircraft actually exists, but it's good fun to train and play with online.

 

If you get the setups right, you can actually have the frontseater flying the jet, and the backseater targeting the weapons.

 

The Su27UB is rather more realistic - A2A only. Some nice skins for both, too.

 

For a preview (LOSkins still down for me), look here - links to the original development threads with screenies 'n stuff.

 

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/lomac/lomac_tweaks_2seaterplanes.htm

 

 

And yes, accurately modelled Russian radars rule 8)

 

 

(edit - the airwarfare link didn't include the Su27UB thread:

 

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=400102&f=38610606&m=189004717

 

)

[britgliderpilot]

Well, you better get your facts straight mate! The Su-37 and the Berkut are different things!! The Su-47 is the Berkut... with forward-swept wings; kinda like the US X-29.

 

The Su-47 is the ONLY aircraft in the world to feature a rear-looking radar. I can even give you a link if you don't believe me! I only say something after I myself believe it is correct.

 

The Su-37 resembles the Su-35 and is MUCHO agile! It can fly at AoA angles unimaginable! I have seen it in action... on the TV, of course. Yes, it may not have a radar installed... yet, I believe you. Probably because it's still in the test phase. Even if it got a radar, I doubt that the Russian AF will tell anything about it! The R.x is still in experimental phases... Russian missiles are better than their western counterparts!! The R.x works... I found pics of it in action on the Internet. But, of course, US hardware is more "famous"... getting publicity through use in wars.

 

I think GGTharos just got the Su37 and S-37 (original Sukhoi designation for the Su-47) confused - easy mistake.

 

 

And don't rely on everything you read on the internet - the Su47 being the "only" combat aircraft with rearwards-facing radar?

You really want to check that - specifically with comparisons with the Su34 :wink:

[MS_Wolverine]

Interesting... I will download the mods right away. :)

 

About the Su-34, well, I didn't know it had a rear-looking radar. I will check...

 

Regarding S-37 and Su-47... yeah, it had me confused for some time too! :P

 

With respect to the 2-seater aircrafts, LOskins has been down for me all day today! I will check it tomorrow. I have the links now. Thanx. :)

[GGTharos]

Thanks bgp, I did indeed confuse the deisgnation,

 

MS_Wolverine, youshould be very careful when you say that something is better than another thing. Western missiles have /always/ been claimed to have electronic superiority, and Russian missiles better rocketry.

 

Aerodynamically speaking, both sides can make their missiles do whatevr the heck they want them to do - and as far as maneuverability goes, the F-22 can fly some pretty downright insane profiles as well ... that are NOT air show maneuvers ;)

 

But yes, the Su-47 is merely a technology demostrator and has never been equipped for battle, so any 'rearward looking radar' is just something that the designers envision on it, not fact at this point.

 

Some day, it may indeed be a very successful and famous fighter, but not today, and not any time soon :)

 

PS: Yes, I do actually like that plane ;) I always wanted to see an actual FSW fighter.

[Sharpshooter]

Is the datalink also removed from the R-24T ? My sources indicate that the only IR missile with Datalink is the R-40T Acrid carried on the Mig-25 and Mig-31.

 

Also I`ve noticed that the R-33E performance is very bad, it hardly hits a fighter plane, even if it is in level flight, the only thing the fighter pilot has to do is dispense some chaff and the missile will be decoyed. So much for the powerful radar of the Mig-31 and it´s predilected weapon. But I´m saying this with no source backup.

 

I´ve noticed that ARH missiles trigger RWR alarms on both NATO(R-77) and Russian Aircraft(AIM-120C). According to my sources and Falcon 4 ARH missiles guide on Datalink until they go Active and then they can be detected by the RWR. Still the question is if the RWR on Russian Aircraft will be triggered because the RWR(SPO) will detect an airborne radar and not a typical signal fighter radars send to targets for guiding SARH missiles. On the other hand F-15C RWRs will detect an active missile radar an will crearly display it on the RWR (I think the F-15Cs RWR is advanced enough to do that, F-16s RWRs can).

 

Moreover if the R-27R and R-27RE have Datalink, wouldn´t they guide on Datalink, and then when the missile is close enough the Fighter Radar will send a signal, so the SARH missile could guide directly to the target ? This will trigger the enemy`s RWR only when fully necessary(ie the missile needs more constant updates so that it can hit the target accurately) and will give him very short notice and thus possibility to evade the missile.

 

Regarding IR missiles, I heard someone say that some Russian Aircraft have IR missile warning but none of the flyable Russian Aircraft seem to have it. I heard that it detects the changes the missile does to the atmosfere or something like that. How true is this ?

 

I want to ask if the Russian IR missiles now emit a tone only when they have a positive heat source where they can guide on or they emit a tone that becomes more high pitched when receiving a more potent eat signal, just like the AIM-9 in Falcon4.

 

I´d like to point out that the Helmet Mode with the R-73 is not working right. I´ve seen in a video how a Russian pilot moves his head and then the EOS sensor moves with his head(not really smooth BTW). So the helmet adcquisition mode is limit by the EOS sensor. I see that this limit is respected when trying to lock, but once it is locked it does not respect the EOS gimbal limits anymore.

 

Pardon me if I´m going way offtopic but I´d like to point out that when using EOS mode, and you lose a lock, the radar tries to acquire the target. This is listed as a feature, but isn´t the EOS sensor whole purpose to be stealthy?. If the radar is turned on, your cover is blown and then you are screwed.

 

Thanks for Reading :)

 

 

 

Concerning the topic I feel that AIM-120 early versions should be considered. According to this source: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html AIM-120A was the one deployed in 1991 in small quantities and was not fired during the War. It was not until late 1994 that AIM-120B was deployed and AIM-120C earlier version where first deployed in 1996. Futhermore AIM-120C has about 7 subversions, and the earliest should be considered the ones modeled in LOMAC. Since from version to version the AIM-120 has been considerably improved, several versions should be modeled in LOMAC especially for earlier conflicts against missiles such as R-27R and R-27T. Otherwise Su-27 and MIG-29A are in big disadvantage against AIM-120C fitted F-15Cs. At least I reccomend modelling AIM-120 A, B and an early C version, considering that the C version is way better than the B and A versions according to my source.

 

 

Anyone else want to shed some light on my thoughts ?

 

JJ Alfa perhaps, he seems very fond of this kind of issues.