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

[Mig Fulcrum]

5 minuti fa, lunaticfringe ha scritto:

For sake of clarity (and Бойовий Сокіл has the gist of it): 

54C in RL, in the event of a lost STT lock, would independently go active, and remain SARH all the way to the target if the lock was held. 

In DCS, to have the ability for the missile to go active in the event of a lost lock, the missile has to go active at some point in its flyout.  So the C does this at the appropriate time.  

The flipside of this, and why you want to take your STT shots when appropriate, is the fact that STT isn't susceptible to all of the issues TWS has for maintaining a track.  So you get all of the reliability of a STT shot, with the added bonus of the active fallback. 

 

Many thanks, pretty clear now

[Jayhawk1971]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Sideburns:

Looks to be a great update. "Fixed an issue with the AWG-9 track logic to avoid tracks being thrown by aircraft launching air to air missiles." - This would explain a lot of lost tracks in TWS if the AWG-9 is getting confused by tracking munitions

 

That might explain why subsequent Phoenix shots were "trashed"? I always - unscientifically - found that my first shot usually hit the target, whereas the second (and rare third) missile was going haywire. Since switching to VR, I got rid of TacView for performance reasons, so I had no way to check what the missiles were doing.   Edit: strictly referring to TWS launches

But IIRC someone (about a year ago?) came up with the theory that in TWS, the (in-game) AWG-9/ Jester would latch on to the first Phoenix instead of maintaining track of the target that would be "next in line" in TWS priority. 

Could also be complete hogwash, what do I know?!  Guess we'll find out soon, though. 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Jayhawk1971

[Callsign JoNay]

So, the Mark-60 burn time is 20.6 seconds. What is the Mark-47's burn time again?

[captain_dalan]

Seems like a rather big overhaul, i can't wait to see it in action. Many thanks, and even more so for the patch (thanks to ED as well)!

A question:
 Does the lack of INS on the A versus the C, means that the C will fly a more optimal intercept curve, with continuous as opposed with staggered/periodic course corrections? Does the difference (if any) even has a noticeable effect on the terminal properties of the missile? Or is the terminal performance dependent on the motor use alone? 

[lunaticfringe]

7 minutes ago, Callsign JoNay said:

So, the Mark-60 burn time is 20.6 seconds. What is the Mark-47's burn time again?

27 seconds.

[RaisedByWolves]

Any update on when we will get glove vanes?

[scommander2]

2 minutes ago, RaisedByWolves said:

Any update on when we will get glove vanes?

A good catch, forgot to ask it :=)

[IronMike]

2 minutes ago, RaisedByWolves said:

Any update on when we will get glove vanes?

It could, potentially, vaguely, maybe, happen on the 14th of the last month before the previous one, but it will definitely be after yesterday's tomorrow, supposing that now will be still now when then will not be then anymore.

[lunaticfringe]

Just now, IronMike said:

It could, potentially, vaguely, maybe, happen on the 14th of the last month before the previous one, but it will definitely be after yesterday's tomorrow, supposing that now will be still now when then will not be then anymore.

So you're telling me there's a chance...

Yeah!

[IronMike]

1 minute ago, lunaticfringe said:

So you're telling me there's a chance...

Yeah!

There always is.

[Heinlein]

Sort of a question for the future: Will the 95-GR tomcat be able to carry the C phoenix or will it be limited to the early mk-47 version?  

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Heinlein

[Callsign JoNay]

Quote

"Both motors have the same total impulse now. The MK60 has a slight advantage during motor burn time, while the MK47 has an advantage in burn time".

Took me a few reads to comprehend this sentence.... 

So the MK60 has a shorter burn time than the MK47, but has better kinetics during that burn time because the total thrust output is the same? So the MK60 gets up to speed faster which grants it some advantages in the earlier phase after weapon release, and the MK47 takes longer to accelerate, but also has the benefit of more endurance than the MK60? Is that correct?

It sounds like the MK47 will be better optimized for longer range shots than the MK60, but the MK60 will be a better medium and short range missile. I'm eager to test it.

[IronMike]

3 minutes ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Took me a few reads to comprehend this sentence.... 

So the MK60 has a shorter burn time than the MK47, but has better kinetics during that burn time because the total thrust output is the same? So the MK60 gets up to speed faster which grants it some advantages in the earlier phase after weapon release, and the MK47 takes longer to accelerate, but also has the benefit of more endurance than the MK60? Is that correct?

It sounds like the MK47 will be better optimized for longer range shots than the MK60, but the MK60 will be a better medium and short range missile. I'm eager to test it.

Correct. Overall their impulse however is more or less the same. And also correct, the mk47 will perform (very) slightly better than the mk60 for long range shots.

7 minutes ago, Heinlein said:

Sort of a question for the future: Will the 95-GR tomcat be able to carry the C phoenix or will it be limited to the early mk-47 version?  

 

 

C can have both mk47 and mk60 motors, same as the A. But to answer your question, the IRIAF version will be limited to the -A-mk-47.

Edited September 1, 2022 by IronMike

[LanceCriminal86]

6 minutes ago, Heinlein said:

Sort of a question for the future: Will the 95-GR tomcat be able to carry the C phoenix or will it be limited to the early mk-47 version?  

 

 

Since the only official -95 is the Iranian one, the answer should be No. Unless a decision is made to overhaul or revise the Early 135 to represent a USN -95 and -135 in some modular way 

[Indianajon]

Thanks @IronMikefor everything you and the team at heatblur do, can't wait to give this update a try!

Going through the changelog, does this mean the explosive fuel dump bug is still ongoing? Its become a fun little trick to get in close formation with someone,  get there attention then flip the switch and hear their reaction

 

[Callsign JoNay]

1 minute ago, IronMike said:

Correct. Overall their impulse however is more or less the same. And also correct, the mk47 will perform (very) slightly better than the mk60 for long range shots.

Very interesting. It seems like C-model is the way to go, but now there is an interesting choice between the MK60 or MK47 motor. 

MK47 motor is slightly better range and smokeless.

MK60 is a little bit more AMRAAMy, but makes a lot of smoke.

[HeavyGun1450]

Awesome patch Mike, very glad to see a potential fix for the freezing issue involving the F14 AI. Also great to have a reason to use the 54C and MK47 now. I just hope the tws guidance on the A is very gradual and dosent do any jerks that massively bleed off energy, but what it looks like from the graph that shouldn't be the case hopefully. Also looks like the MK47 has a slightly better range then the MK60 now, at the cost of slower acceleration and reduced close range performance compared to the MK60. Will be very nice to be able to use the 54C and let it go active by itself in tws now. Great to see all of the new skins fixed as well. Thanks for your work and cant wait to try it out!

[Rinz1er]

I could imagine scenarios where you may want to carry a mixed mk47s AND mk60s. Is there anyway to weapon select between pheonix pylons? I know you can with AIM9s by hitting the weapon depress. 

[hannibal]

the fact that we have F14 in DCS, its amazing even after years of release

i watch the release trailers, and seeing top gun maverick, its like i feel like i know what is like to be a tomcat driver.

i started to get to know about this module after completing my simpit and receiving pointctrl (the final interface link) , i was able to better play high fidelity modules

at moment im trying to get used to CMPTR TGT ccrp bombing.. so much to learn

 

forever grateful. looking forward to A6E for full on 80s naval ops

thank you mister cobra and heatblur team

[Kondor77]

Fantastic news, thank you HB team. Can't wait!

17 minutes ago, hannibal said:

at moment im trying to get used to CMPTR TGT ccrp bombing.. so much to learn

This is very fun as well when you combine it with the TCS and get 'accurate' designations. Really cool then to use for CCRP loft attacks.

[skywalker22]

I wish ED soon does some improvement on AIM-120 as well.

[H7142]

So has this finalized the move to the new missile aero FM? I saw mentions of things like motor on drag reductions in the previous thread and was wondering if those have been modeled now are will take more time.

[captain_dalan]

1 hour ago, captain_dalan said:

Seems like a rather big overhaul, i can't wait to see it in action. Many thanks, and even more so for the patch (thanks to ED as well)!

A question:
 Does the lack of INS on the A versus the C, means that the C will fly a more optimal intercept curve, with continuous as opposed with staggered/periodic course corrections? Does the difference (if any) even has a noticeable effect on the terminal properties of the missile? Or is the terminal performance dependent on the motor use alone? 

Probably got lost in the myriads of questions, so i'll just repeat it....  

[DSplayer]

Will a new whitepaper be made in order to update the information we have? I would love to read the sources that were able to make these changes possible along with stare at the graphs.

Also did the nozzle_exit_area stuff ever get added?

Edited September 1, 2022 by DSplayer

[Naquaii]

36 minutes ago, captain_dalan said:

Probably got lost in the myriads of questions, so i'll just repeat it....  

The newly added periodic update of the -A will hamper it's long range performance as it only correct it's course every two seconds and the guidance in the -A isn't smart enough to smooth that out. It's nowhere near a bang-bang guidance of early LGBs, you have to look quite closely at the missile to see it but you can see it. This ofc makes the -A slightly worse in most long range shots but it's hard to say exactly how much.

As for the different motors the biggest difference is really down low as the mk47 burns longer it'll start loosing speed later than a mk60. If in really close the mk60 will have a slight edge as it will accelerate faster.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Naquaii