Magic II

[sedenion]

Speaking of available missiles... Currently the Mirage F1 in DCS can only carry and launch the R550 Magic (and Sidewinders)... But what about the R550 Magic II ? Does it require specific avionic not available in the Mirage F1CE ?

[Flappie]

French F1CR had it. I'm not so sure about F1CE. F1M, maybe?

https://aviationsmilitaires.net/v3/kb/aircraft/show/15405/dassault-mirage-f1cr

https://imagesdefense.gouv.fr/fr/un-avion-de-combat-mirage-f1-cr-arme-de-missiles-matra-r-550-magic-ii-en-bout-d-ailes-s-avance-sur-la-piste-de-la-ba-base-aerienne-d-al-ahsa-1.html

[sedenion]

1 hour ago, Flappie said:

French F1CR had it.

The F1C-200 too it seem...

https://master194.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1483404&sid=1280fe8f62d38dd2f17c89af7049162d#p1483404

Edit: Unfortunately, not much data about the F1C-200, it seem to be simply an F1C with air refueling capabilities. My first guess is that technically speaking, Magic II and Magic "1" are interchangeable. Remain the question of historical consistency specific to spain air force...

Edited August 13, 2022 by sedenion

[Harlikwin]

On 8/13/2022 at 8:02 AM, sedenion said:

The F1C-200 too it seem...

https://master194.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1483404&sid=1280fe8f62d38dd2f17c89af7049162d#p1483404

Edit: Unfortunately, not much data about the F1C-200, it seem to be simply an F1C with air refueling capabilities. My first guess is that technically speaking, Magic II and Magic "1" are interchangeable. Remain the question of historical consistency specific to spain air force...

 

Yeah it would make sense if they had similar interfaces. But likely you couldn't use all the magic2's fancy tech i.e. slaving the seeker to radar etc without some additional integration work. Or stuff like a SEAM mode. 

I can't find much on Magic1 if the seeker could be cued by radar or if it had something like SEAM. Like for example the aim9J and most 9P's you couldn't do either. 

[sedenion]

11 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

Yeah it would make sense if they had similar interfaces. But likely you couldn't use all the magic2's fancy tech i.e. slaving the seeker to radar etc without some additional integration work. Or stuff like a SEAM mode. 

I can't find much on Magic1 if the seeker could be cued by radar or if it had something like SEAM. Like for example the aim9J and most 9P's you couldn't do either. 

Since I have no data it's only some guess, but I think the Magic "One" already had SEAM-like capabilities with Radar-Seeker slavery mechanisms. In favor of this hypothesis it is never claimed that Magic II introduced this capability, which it obviously has.

Edit:

Found some quote (translated from: https://www.caea.info/fr/l-association/50-collection/armement/574-magic )

Quote

it can be fired, in 3/4 rear sector, by a carrier moving between 0 and 18,000 m up to 1300 km/h and +6 G, on a hostile located in a 140° cone in front of the aircraft axis and at a distance between 0.3 and 10 km.

Since I doupt the seeker's sensor itself had 140° focal cone, this imply that this 140° cone is provided by seeker mobility around gimbals guided by aircraft telemetry. In two words, the Magic "One" had SEAM-like and radar slave capability.

Edited August 16, 2022 by sedenion

[sedenion]

The answer was actually further in the text... here is nnother quote from the same page ( https://www.caea.info/fr/l-association/50-collection/armement/574-magic ) :

Quote

[Magic 2] can be used in integrated mode on the M2000 or in standalone mode. Also stored in 2 parts, it can be used, after modifying the electrical circuits of the plane, on planes capable of Magic 1 which then become capable of either model.

[Harlikwin]

8 hours ago, sedenion said:

Since I have no data it's only some guess, but I think the Magic "One" already had SEAM-like capabilities with Radar-Seeker slavery mechanisms. In favor of this hypothesis it is never claimed that Magic II introduced this capability, which it obviously has.

Edit:

Found some quote (translated from: https://www.caea.info/fr/l-association/50-collection/armement/574-magic )

Since I doupt the seeker's sensor itself had 140° focal cone, this imply that this 140° cone is provided by seeker mobility around gimbals guided by aircraft telemetry. In two words, the Magic "One" had SEAM-like and radar slave capability.

 

Oy that 140 number again. I think this is weird mistranslation/frenchism and it refers to the angle off engagement envelope of the Magic 1. I.e. 70 deg R/L of the rear of the target, which is a very typical engagement range for cooled PbS seekers (i.e. Aim9D-P). And works with that rear 3/4 engagement mentioned as well. 

As for SEAM, honestly I don't know how typical or not it was. During the 70's it was only a feature on the navy sidewinders (Aim-9G/H and later 9L) the USAF sidewinders totally lacked that capability till the 9L. And soviet missiles generally did not have it at all, with the possible exception of the R-13M1 which ostensibly was designed as a "dogfight" missile. The R60/60M could be cued by radar or HMS though. 

I have seen a few webpages highlighting that the magic2 could be radar slaved which again implies the Magic1 couldn't. And in the combat employment manual for the Mirage F1 there is nothing to suggest that the 550 is radar cueable or that it has a SEAM type "mode" (it does specifically call out the 530IR as having a radar slave capability). 

 

[sedenion]

32 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Oy that 140 number again. I think this is weird mistranslation/frenchism and it refers to the angle off engagement envelope of the Magic 1. I.e. 70 deg R/L of the rear of the target, which is a very typical engagement range for cooled PbS seekers (i.e. Aim9D-P). And works with that rear 3/4 engagement mentioned as well.

Indeed, I think I found the source of that 140° (https://encyclopedie-des-armes.com/index.php/aviation/air-air/1418-r550-magic) :

Quote

The Magic Mk 1 can attack any non-frontal target moving within an envelope of 140 degrees and within 18,000 m (above this ceiling, certain limitations appear). In close combat, it is effective at a range of approximately 300 m and can be fired from an aircraft flying at more than 1,300 km/h and maneuvering at 6 G. The infrared guidance system is of the SAT AD3601 type at lead sulfide cooled with liquid nitrogen. Propulsion is provided by a single-stage composite SNPE rocket engine. Flight guidance is via cruciform canard surfaces.

Edited August 16, 2022 by sedenion

[Harlikwin]

52 minutes ago, sedenion said:

Indeed, I think I found the source of that 140° (https://encyclopedie-des-armes.com/index.php/aviation/air-air/1418-r550-magic) :

 

Ah yeah, that article actually makes sense with the 140. I mean any cooled PbS detector is gonna work roughly the same though, physics is physics. At any rate the US equivalent sidewinders basically had that same cone as 120 deg as the ideal envelope (60 deg each side) though you could prosecute higher Angle off attacks, just the envelope for those shrunk significantly both due to detector limitations as well as guidance/aero/manuvering/etc. limits on the missiles.   

Here is one of the links that explicitly mentions radar slaving as being a "new" thing on the Magic2. 
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781315884851-39/air-air-christopher-chant
Magic 2: entering service in the mid-1980s, this improved version has a genuine all-aspect engagement capability, an improved motor, greater structural strength and better aerodynamic controls for enhanced dogfight manoeuvrability, and a seeker that can be slaved to the launch aircraft's radar to provide optimum launch conditions

 

I also went back through the whole tacman trying to figure the whole radar/seam thing out. So it looks like following things are true.

#1 The 530IR and 550 both are mentioned in conjunction with radar modes. However in those cases it all seems to point to using the radar to calculate intercept parameters for the fighter (or lag pursuit in rapid lock on mode). However there are literally 2 lines in the whole tacman that are useful.

#2 The radar can point the 530IR seeker toward a locked target, this is explicitly called out. No mention that the 550 can do this. So I'm gonna say it can't be radar cued.

#3 The Magic1 (R550) is described as scanning around its centerline, so this implies some sort of SEAM mode. 

#4 The other fun thing being there doesn't seem to be an "uncage"/lock command for the missiles its all automatic. 

So this is pretty interesting in light of how it compares to US missiles that work like the following.

Aim9B: Find target, put nose on target in a 4deg IFOV cone, wait for tone, keep target in that narrow 4degree IFOV. Fire, missile seeker then uncages and tracks. 

Aim9D/E/J/P1-3: Find target, put nose on target in a 2.5deg IFOV cone, wait for tone, hit uncage so the seeker can track while still on plane. Pull lead if you need (within limits). Fire, missile seeker already tracking. 

Navy 9G/H/L sidewinder was to either point it by: 2.5deg IFOV window, radar, or VTAS or it had the Double D SEAM search mode. Then you hit the uncage button once you got tone so it would keep tracking. And then fire missile. 
 

So anyways it seems the 550 basically works either by having seeker nutation around its axis (like SEAM) that when you get enough of a signal "auto locks/uncages" (certainly possible, the Aim9P5 has this capability but is a MUCH later missile with way better false target rejection).  The auto lock thing is fairly interesting and sort of dangerous as you have no symbology to display what is locked onto to. Hot rocks, a cloud edge, your wingman, etc...

It does beg the question how the Aim-9J/Juli works on the mirage, as every US tacman I've seen states you have to uncage the seeker via a button though I guess you can fire it while caged. I wonder if there is an uncage button added at some point for the spanish CE. 

 

[IvanK]

R550 Magic I (on Mirage IIIO)  had Auto scan with Auto Lock. This was a very large and rapid scan by a Gyro mirror (not seeker nutation). The scan volume was around to slightly more than 1/3rd the angle subtended by the canopy arch. Once locked the seeker was then only limited by gymbal limits. No tone whatsover heard until Lock on achieved. Initially a chopped tone then steady tone once the missile was good to go. From lock to ready to go could take up to 0.7sec but was usually quicker. Also had pilot selectable boresight mode scan. Head could not be slaved by the radar.

I think the button you seek is the 600m/300m button

Edited August 18, 2022 by IvanK

[Harlikwin]

15 hours ago, IvanK said:

R550 Magic I (on Mirage IIIO)  had Auto scan with Auto Lock. This was a very large and rapid scan by a Gyro mirror (not seeker nutation). The scan volume was around to slightly more than 1/3rd the angle subtended by the canopy arch. Once locked the seeker was then only limited by gymbal limits. No tone whatsover heard until Lock on achieved. Initially a chopped tone then steady tone once the missile was good to go. From lock to ready to go could take up to 0.7sec but was usually quicker. Also had pilot selectable boresight mode scan. Head could not be slaved by the radar.

I think the button you seek is the 600m/300m button

 

Yeah I eventually found most of that in the Aussie M3 manual. 

Gimbal angle given there is also 30 deg which is interesting unless it means +/- 30 deg. since the track rate is 40 dps. 

Can you draw me a picture of what you mean by that. 

[IvanK]

It would be something like this. This is an approximation overlayed on F1 pit. Gymbal limits available post lock are significantly greater than this.

[MysteriousHonza]

On 8/19/2022 at 1:59 AM, IvanK said:

It would be something like this. This is an approximation overlayed on F1 pit. Gymbal limits available post lock are significantly greater than this.

Afaik, it doesnt work rn, neither the 300/600 button. + magic seems to be bore sighted with gun line around heading/range tape. I was unable to achieve tone while placing target below gun line. I have achieved tone while target was literally above optical sight glass.

[IvanK]

Yep this is what it should be ... yet to be implemented I believe

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, IvanK said:

Yep this is what it should be ... yet to be implemented I believe

Yeah seems like the manual Cage/uncage behavior for the aim9J/P/Juli does too, they shouldn't autolock, aside from possibly Juli (that was handled plane side for 9L/M seekers). And the 9B shouldn't be able to uncage until fired.