DCS: F-14 Development Update - AIM-54 Phoenix Improvements & Overhaul - Guided Discussion

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Rinz1er said:

However, no matter the Target Size Switch setting the missile ALWAYS went active at ~7nm.

Thanks for the tests to both of you but you forgot to mention what missile was used, as it was known that the C ignores the switch setting while the A still uses it properly.

[Rinz1er]

1 minute ago, draconus said:

Thanks for the tests to both of you but you forgot to mention what missile was used, as it was known that the C ignores the switch setting while the A still uses it properly.

Edited the post above to include the specifying missile as the AIM54C-Mk47. This can also be found in the TacView. Thanks!

Edited January 25, 2023 by Rinz1er

[WarthogOsl]

2 hours ago, Rinz1er said:

However, no matter the Target Size Switch setting the missile ALWAYS went active at ~7nm. This is a bit different than the AI defending ALWAYS at ~10nm which may be why some folks saw improvements in their PVP engagements over their PVE engagements.

 

So what's the best setting so that the TID at least comes closest to indicating when the missile goes active?  Small?

[DSplayer]

3 hours ago, Rinz1er said:

Thank you to @Callsign JoNay for assisting in testing this. Two tomcats flying at each other. Taking a AIM54C-MK47 shot at ~60nm with the target switch settings in the following profile.

1st launch -> Target Size Switch "Normal"
2nd launch -> Target Size Switch "Small"
3rd launch -> Target Size Switch "Large"

When the launched-on F14 flares, it signifies the RWR is warning of an active guided missile. When the launching F14 flares, it signifies when the TID ticker starts flashing.

What we found was that the TID ticker flashed at different times directly related to the setting of the Target Size Switch. For example, when the Target Size Switch was set to "small", the TID ticker would begin flashing <15s. When the Target Size Switch was set to "large", the TID ticker would begin flashing at >20s.

However, no matter the Target Size Switch setting the missile ALWAYS went active at ~7nm. This is a bit different than the AI defending ALWAYS at ~10nm which may be why some folks saw improvements in their PVP engagements over their PVE engagements.

TLDR: Nothing has changed with the Target Size Switch recently. It is still non-functioning in changing the go-active distance of the missile. It only seem to affect the TID ticker.

Attached the TacView of this encounter for your viewing pleasure.

Tacview-20230124-202744-DCS-51st_Syria_Training_Map-48.zip.acmi 2.67 MB · 4 downloads

 

I would like to point out that the missile still goes active at 10 nm but the F-14's RWR picks it up at 7 nm thanks to how HB implemented signal to noise ratios and made the RWR accurate/more intricate than others. So maybe trying with other modules would be good too to see how it fairs.

[Callsign JoNay]

8 hours ago, WarthogOsl said:

So what's the best setting so that the TID at least comes closest to indicating when the missile goes active?  Small?

If you reference the time on the clock at each of the flare markers we can see that...

With Normal Size set, the shooter receives blinking TID 5 seconds before target gets RWR pitbul signal.

With Small Size set, the shooter receives blinking TID 5 seconds after target gets RWR pitbull signal.

With Large Size set, the shooter receives blinking TID 10 seconds before target gets RWR pitbul signal.

 

If what DSplayer says about the missile actually going active at 10, but the RWR is implementing a delay, then probably Normal Size matches up the best, IMO.

 

[Karon]

Perhaps one day the wrong setting will mean trashing the missile, as I have the strong impression that the switch is not there to make the missile stealthier at all, rather to tell the seeker what to look for, and what should be disregarded.

I usually stay in normal.

[DSplayer]

2 hours ago, Karon said:

Perhaps one day the wrong setting will mean trashing the missile, as I have the strong impression that the switch is not there to make the missile stealthier at all, rather to tell the seeker what to look for, and what should be disregarded.

I usually stay in normal.

If the implementation is similar to how the AIM-120’s target size and RCS size options work, it probably would affect target acquisition and the fuzing. Maybe when those intricacies are added, the MSL SPD knob would work too.

[IronMike]

2 hours ago, Karon said:

Perhaps one day the wrong setting will mean trashing the missile, as I have the strong impression that the switch is not there to make the missile stealthier at all, rather to tell the seeker what to look for, and what should be disregarded.

I usually stay in normal.

Precisely. Using the tgt size switch for "stealth" is a pure DCS-ism. IRL it defines basically the range at which a certain type of target, small, normal, or large is most likely to be seen by the missile. Misjudging that will have the missile not see the target properly, which goes both ways. Set a bomber sized target to small, and it won't find it. Set a fighter sized target to large, and it won't find it. But this is beyond the scope of missile seekerhead simulation necessary for a consumer sim. 

[Karon]

1 hour ago, IronMike said:

Set a fighter sized target to large, and it won't find it. But this is beyond the scope of missile seekerhead simulation necessary for a consumer sim. 

I largely disagree

/jk

[BubiHUN]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

beyond the scope of missile seekerhead simulation necessary for a consumer sim.

that is MASSIVELY inaccurate.

[Rikus]

I feel sorry for HB for all the work they've put into the Aim54, which nails the studies done by NASA on the AIM54 flight envelope, they've put a lot of painstaking effort into recreating the F14's radar, but they have to suffer the Very painful performance of the missile due to guidance issues, which is centralized in the hands of ED and out of its reach.

Im done with this missile.

[Naquaii]

As it's implemented the target size switch will (as many of you have surmised) change the activation indication on the TID but it will only actually affect the AIM-54A. The AIM-54C decides these things for itself but the WCS still believes it's in control. As has been mentioned the target size switch is quite hard to exhaustively model in a sim like DCS.

As for jamming and HoJ you kinda have to keep in mind that the HoJ isn't supposed to make the missile independent or silent. The purpose of HoJ is to allow the missile to still guide even if jammed enough for normal guidance to fail. The HoJ is a suplement for the normal guidance, it doesn't replace it. You wouldn't fire and forget an AIM-7 in HoJ IRL even if that's sometimes possible in DCS. Jammers for the majority of the use cases doesn't work like the pure noise jammers we have in DCS so it simply wouldn't work in pure HoJ.

Edited January 26, 2023 by Naquaii

[lunaticfringe]

4 hours ago, BubiHUN said:

that is MASSIVELY inaccurate.

It's not, and unless the underlying DCS radar base is MASSIVELY altered to supply the necessary modeling functions to make it work, it's going to remain beyond the scope. 

[draconus]

10 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

The AIM-54C decides these things for itself but the WCS still believes it's in control.

Oh, I thought it was some DCS limitation or old missile API thing.

[Naquaii]

8 minutes ago, draconus said:

Oh, I thought it was some DCS limitation or old missile API thing.

Yes, in part that's the reason for how it's implemented. But the AIM-54C is much more independent of the AWG-9 than the -A.

[Rinz1er]

9 hours ago, Naquaii said:

As it's implemented the target size switch will (as many of you have surmised) change the activation indication on the TID but it will only actually affect the AIM-54A. The AIM-54C decides these things for itself but the WCS still believes it's in control. As has been mentioned the target size switch is quite hard to exhaustively model in a sim like DCS.

As for jamming and HoJ you kinda have to keep in mind that the HoJ isn't supposed to make the missile independent or silent. The purpose of HoJ is to allow the missile to still guide even if jammed enough for normal guidance to fail. The HoJ is a suplement for the normal guidance, it doesn't replace it. You wouldn't fire and forget an AIM-7 in HoJ IRL even if that's sometimes possible in DCS. Jammers for the majority of the use cases doesn't work like the pure noise jammers we have in DCS so it simply wouldn't work in pure HoJ.

 

So this makes sense if you are saying that the aim54C in IRL doesn't abide by the target size switch and has more authority of itself. And therefore, is unlike the aim54A, which the WCS and more specifically the target size switch was originally designed for and had more functionality.

Though this would make the aim54C different than the other active guided DCS missiles(AIM120 and SD10) where the target size switch option reduces it's go-active distance as expected.

If this is the intention and as close to IRL as possible then yeah, there is no-op needed to fix this functionality and I will shut up about it.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Rinz1er

[Hymlee]

7小时前，Naquaii说：

Yes, in part that's the reason for how it's implemented. But the AIM-54C is much more independent of the AWG-9 than the -A.

thanks for the clarification and it makes much more sense of the use of TGT size switch now.

I suppose the one of the major flaws remaining to be addressed is that enemy AI aircraft still react to aim54 at exactly 10nm, regardless if they are equipped with RWR.

Does HB know whether ED has any plan to address that?

 

Another flaw is that, when launch in ACM mode, aim54 doesnt go active off the rail, but instead only go pitbull at 10nm. Please correct me if im wrong.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Hymlee

[draconus]

4 hours ago, Hymlee said:

Another flaw is that, when launch in ACM mode, aim54 doesnt go active off the rail, but instead only go pitbull at 10nm.

How did you test it? It should launch active but if the target is farther than 10nm (at least for fighter size, but I think it's hard DCS limit) it won't be found/locked yet and won't get RWR warning, so the missile will still fly straight.

[Hymlee]

14分钟前，draconus说：

How did you test it? It should launch active but if the target is farther than 10nm (at least for fighter size, but I think it's hard DCS limit) it won't be found/locked yet and won't get RWR warning, so the missile will still fly straight.

uh this makes sense.

I tested by launching aim54 in ACM mode at 15nm from target. The missile flies straight until 10nm where it turns and tracks the targets.

I used to think that the missile went pitbull at 10nm, but your theory is also plausible that the missile did indeed launch active offrail but only picked up the target at 10nm.

[Karon]

Yeah, DCS limitation. It's quite an old thing tbh. You can do the same in PSTT, and it's quite hilarious tbh (skip to 10'19").

[The_Tau]

1 hour ago, Karon said:

Yeah, DCS limitation. It's quite an old thing tbh. You can do the same in PSTT, and it's quite hilarious tbh (skip to 10'19").

Very interesting. However I had different experience with PDSTT 54C launch vs 2 AI bandits. I fired at Lead, who notches it at 10nm (no surprise there) and missile reacquires at wingman, who simply just fly straight and did not do any maneuvers even though missile was well within 10nm 

[Karon]

3 minutes ago, The_Tau said:

Very interesting. However I had different experience with PDSTT 54C launch vs 2 AI bandits. I fired at Lead, who notches it at 10nm (no surprise there) and missile reacquires at wingman, who simply just fly straight and did not do any maneuvers even though missile was well within 10nm 

Curious, a bug within a semi-bug? Since the WM wasn't the original target, somehow something does not trigger correctly. It may be on ED's side, rather than HB's, but let's see what the devs say.

[The_Tau]

10 minutes ago, Karon said:

Curious, a bug within a semi-bug? Since the WM wasn't the original target, somehow something does not trigger correctly. It may be on ED's side, rather than HB's, but let's see what the devs say.

Found tacview file Tacview-20221124-200927-DCS-CVW-66_CRUISE_2_CHARIOT_D0E3.zip.acmi

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Karon said:

You can do the same in PSTT, and it's quite hilarious tbh (skip to 10'19").

Nothing funny tbh (apart from Obi-Wan ).

1. Missile was not fired straight ahead - it was already targeted since launch (it did left turn).

2. At 11:37 the missile is within 10nm of the farther target (the original), locks on it and start guiding. The closer one (the bait) was much farther off bore sight atm. Idk what angle should be used by AIM-54 when in active search mode though (ex. to pick up the bait) and also idk if it can or should relock when going by the closer target.

Edited January 27, 2023 by draconus

[Karon]

@draconus It wasn't meant to be funny, I'm the most serious person ever. Check the attached screenshots and tracks. I let Iceman do the easy turn North, but I could have made a split-s myself, as the missile didn't need any support.
Unfortunately, this is PSTT until a new system (the new API, I guess) is implemented on ED's side.

Tacview-20230127-122958-DCS.zip.acmi