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

[IronMike]

13 minutes ago, BrodyZ_ch said:

3 back to back clean trk files showing the issue

Aim54OrbitBug1.trk 205.7 kB · 0 downloads Aim54OrbitBug2.trk 221.85 kB · 0 downloads Aim54OrbitBug3.trk 170.61 kB · 0 downloads

Thank you Brody!

[RustBelt]

On 9/21/2022 at 2:46 PM, Jayhawk1971 said:

But you need to know the effective range of your rifle in order to even begin to develop tactics. 

Effective range under what acceptable errors?

You're falling into the trap of perfect measurement. Everything is measured with limited resources, and acceptable errors. Only a fool or a marketing stooge  would push errors on the optimistic side as opposed to the conservative side. 

[plasma1945]

5 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

I will check with the team in the morning,

if possible we need track replay example showing it happen, 

Thanks

@BIGNEWY Sent you a link to track file download and tacview as well as I found similar events in GS Server Tacviews happening as well. Please check your Discord direct DM from Plazma (look for hello kitty with Kalashnikov icon).

Note, issue occurs on what appear to be Lofting NON ACM/PAL shots. Affecting both 54A 54C on a 6 missile launch 1-3 may have this failure. It is unclear, but seems like a missile rudder/steering gets jammed and puts it into a spiral turn, or a gentle turn away from the aircraft. Simmilar behavior I have seen on Aim120s which do the "jammed" rudder and fly pitched up or do a flip .. etc.

Cheers Thanks for the support!
Plazma1945

Edited September 27, 2022 by plasma1945
more details added

[BIGNEWY]

4 hours ago, plasma1945 said:

@BIGNEWY Sent you a link to track file download and tacview as well as I found similar events in GS Server Tacviews happening as well. Please check your Discord direct DM from Plazma (look for hello kitty with Kalashnikov icon).

Note, issue occurs on what appear to be Lofting NON ACM/PAL shots. Affecting both 54A 54C on a 6 missile launch 1-3 may have this failure. It is unclear, but seems like a missile rudder/steering gets jammed and puts it into a spiral turn, or a gentle turn away from the aircraft. Simmilar behavior I have seen on Aim120s which do the "jammed" rudder and fly pitched up or do a flip .. etc.

Cheers Thanks for the support!
Plazma1945

 

Thanks we will investigate today. 

[Kondor77]

I've seen this bug also occur on AIM-120s FWIW. 

[IronMike]

1 hour ago, Kondor77 said:

I've seen this bug also occur on AIM-120s FWIW. 

Apparently these two bugs are not related, although they clearly have the same outcome. ED is fully aware and investigating as we speak though.

[RaisedByWolves]

I’ve heard ED has put more programmers on this issue. They have them working in shifts.

[WarthogOsl]

18 hours ago, IronMike said:

We need tracks only, tacviews are unfortunately useless (beyond initially visualizing an issue), but thank you for sharing nonetheless.

With tracks we mean specifically a .trk file.

Do they have to be from the server?  I thought client side ones were unreliable.

[IronMike]

6 hours ago, WarthogOsl said:

Do they have to be from the server?  I thought client side ones were unreliable.

It depends. F14 tracks can be stable if you a) avoid using Jester and b) hit the autopilot within 10 seconds of mission start to avoid desync. Then they are much more reliable.

[Meteorlover]

14 hours ago, IronMike said:

Apparently these two bugs are not related, although they clearly have the same outcome. ED is fully aware and investigating as we speak though.

Isn't the guidance of all missiles improved in this patch? Does AIM-120 and AIM-54 use different APIs after patching?

 

There seems to be no section where AIM-54 is more effective than AIM-120 when tested under all the current version conditions.The AIM-120 is also much more powerful over long distances (40NM).

Is there nothing in reality that the AIM-54 can benefit from? At long distances, I thought the AIM-54 would be better, but it's a huge shock.
After the AIM-120 patch, the performance gap of AIM-54 seems to have widened

Is there an effective way to use the AIM-54?and Will there be any performance improvements?

[IronMike]

6 hours ago, Meteorlover said:

Isn't the guidance of all missiles improved in this patch? Does AIM-120 and AIM-54 use different APIs after patching?

 

There seems to be no section where AIM-54 is more effective than AIM-120 when tested under all the current version conditions.The AIM-120 is also much more powerful over long distances (40NM).

Is there nothing in reality that the AIM-54 can benefit from? At long distances, I thought the AIM-54 would be better, but it's a huge shock.
After the AIM-120 patch, the performance gap of AIM-54 seems to have widened

Is there an effective way to use the AIM-54?and Will there be any performance improvements?

The aim120 and aim54 use a different API, yes.

40nm is long range, but not longest range. If you fire on targets at 80nm, the phoenix will win over the aim120. But within 40nm, ofc the aim120 will and should win.

The aim54 benefits from many things, mainly range, that is very long range. There are also effective ways to use the aim54, albeit you have to find out and adapt.

One of the problems is pitting the aim120 against the aim54 in DCS. This was never a thing in real life. The aim120 was a successor of the phoenix (the newer, more powerful, improved missile), not a threat to Tomcats. If you pit the aim54 against its irl threats, then you can clearly see its advantages. It never was developed to fight against F16s or F15s. It is natural that in DCS this is a thing, but has and cannot have any bearing on the simulation of the aim54.

There will be no performance improvements, as the performance is as close as we can get it now, and we have no intentions to change that. Guidance improvements - which are not in our hands - and the transfer to the new missile schema, may give it a very tiny boost, but I would not expect much.

F-14s vs amraam slinging F15/6/8 - outside of scenarios like red flag or trainings - is just not realistic. It is a bit like saying "how can the r60 keep losing against an r73?" Well, because the latter is the more modern, improved missile.

You can still win against a Viper, Hornet or Eagle, but you have to work much harder for it, just like you would have to if you went with a MiG29A with R27Rs against a Flanker with R27ERs, or let alone against an SU-30 with R77s.

The idea that a Tomcat should always win over its more modern successors, is somewhat misguided, if I may say so. It can, but it will be much more difficult than the other way around, which is expected.

If however you create historically more or less accurate scenarios with its contemporary threats and opponents, you are pretty much mopping the floor with everyone else.

Edited September 28, 2022 by IronMike

[Digitalvole]

1 hour ago, IronMike said:

The aim120 and aim54 use a different API, yes.

40nm is long range, but not longest range. If you fire on targets at 80nm, the phoenix will win over the aim120. But within 40nm, ofc the aim120 will and should win.

The aim54 benefits from many things, mainly range, that is very long range. There are also effective ways to use the aim54, albeit you have to find out and adapt.

One of the problems is pitting the aim120 against the aim54 in DCS. This was never a thing in real life. The aim120 was a successor of the phoenix (the newer, more powerful, improved missile), not a threat to Tomcats. If you pit the aim54 against its irl threats, then you can clearly see its advantages. It never was developed to fight against F16s or F15s. It is natural that in DCS this is a thing, but has and cannot have any bearing on the simulation of the aim54.

There will be no performance improvements, as the performance is as close as we can get it now, and we have no intentions to change that. Guidance improvements - which are not in our hands - and the transfer to the new missile schema, may give it a very tiny boost, but I would not expect much.

F-14s vs amraam slinging F15/6/8 - outside of scenarios like red flag or trainings - is just not realistic. It is a bit like saying "how can the r60 keep losing against an r73?" Well, because the latter is the more modern, improved missile.

You can still win against a Viper, Hornet or Eagle, but you have to work much harder for it, just like you would have to if you went with a MiG29A with R27Rs against a Flanker with R27ERs, or let alone against an SU-30 with R77s.

The idea that a Tomcat should always win over its more modern successors, is somewhat misguided, if I may say so. It can, but it will be much more difficult than the other way around, which is expected.

If however you create historically more or less accurate scenarios with its contemporary threats and opponents, you are pretty much mopping the floor with everyone else.

 

Can I ask where the Mig 29S, or other redfor planes with fox 3s would fit in your explanation (which I enjoyed and makes perfect sense) please?

What I end up feeling is too much of an advantage against non fox 3 aircraft, and too much of a disadvantage against those that do have fox 3s. (All redfor btw)

Is there a happy middle ground, or is that just the way it is?

Quick addition edit: Though the Aim 54 is long range, in actuality against any fighter it isn’t really is it? I can’t hit a fighter that’s going to defend at anything over 40 miles. But that may just be me. In fact I couldn’t hit an orbiting awacs at over 40 miles, the orbit of the awacs seemed to confuse the missile.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Digitalvole

[Timo Niemelä]

2 hours ago, IronMike said:

But within 40nm, ofc the aim120 will and should win.

Would this be the case with any AMRAAM model or just the AIM-120C-7? (DCS features multiple AIM-120 variants, right?) If I'm not mistaken, there's quite a performance gap between A, B and C, and a considerable range difference even between a C-6 and C-7. I believe the Navy requested extended range for the C-7 specifically to counter the (soon to be) absence of the AIM-54C+.

[Spurts]

I thought DCS only had the B and C-5 AMRAAM.

[Timo Niemelä]

10 minutes ago, Spurts said:

I thought DCS only had the B and C-5 AMRAAM.

You may be right, I don't play DCS myself (...yet, at least)

[KlarSnow]

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

Can I ask where the Mig 29S, or other redfor planes with fox 3s would fit in your explanation (which I enjoyed and makes perfect sense) please?

What I end up feeling is too much of an advantage against non fox 3 aircraft, and too much of a disadvantage against those that do have fox 3s. (All redfor btw)

Is there a happy middle ground, or is that just the way it is?

Quick addition edit: Though the Aim 54 is long range, in actuality against any fighter it isn’t really is it? I can’t hit a fighter that’s going to defend at anything over 40 miles. But that may just be me. In fact I couldn’t hit an orbiting awacs at over 40 miles, the orbit of the awacs seemed to confuse the missile.

 

The only Redfor Active Radar Missile AAM's in DCS are the R-77 and the SD-10. The SD-10 is an AMRAAM contemporary that IOC'd in like 2010 or whenever the JF-17 IOC'd (AFTER the F-14 and the AIM-54C were withdrawn from US service).

So its at least 20 years newer than the AIM-54C and designed to compete with the AIM-120. So you tell me where that falls in the hierarchy laid out by Ironmike.

Basically if you are fighting a JF-17 with SD-10's (A modern 4th gen fighter ) Expect it to be a very hard fight just like fighting an F-16 or F-18 with AIM-120C-5's.

The R-77 is unusual and honestly doesn't really fit. Its more dangerous up close because its fast, but you can easily out range it. So treat it like an R27R, just know if you get too close it gets more dangerous since they can launch and leave, or kill you after you kill them and the missile is active. Otherwise its not that big a deal.

Edited September 28, 2022 by KlarSnow

[Sideburns]

Back to the point on contemporaries, the F14 in 1975 was an absolute world beater (M2+, agility, 6 active missiles, large PD TWS radar, A2G capable). This is a great overview of the development history of the jet (the link here skips to the TFX requirements).

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Sideburns

[Strider21]

2 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

Can I ask where the Mig 29S, or other redfor planes with fox 3s would fit in your explanation (which I enjoyed and makes perfect sense) please?

What I end up feeling is too much of an advantage against non fox 3 aircraft, and too much of a disadvantage against those that do have fox 3s. (All redfor btw)

Is there a happy middle ground, or is that just the way it is?

Quick addition edit: Though the Aim 54 is long range, in actuality against any fighter it isn’t really is it? I can’t hit a fighter that’s going to defend at anything over 40 miles. But that may just be me. In fact I couldn’t hit an orbiting awacs at over 40 miles, the orbit of the awacs seemed to confuse the missile.

 

IRL the primary percentage threats the F-14A/B faced were the Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-25, Mirage F1 and to a limited degree early variants of the Mig-29 and Su-27. Comparing the AIM-54 to the R-77 is not really a historical comparison. While the R-77 was developed in the 1980s/90s, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union it didn't enter service in any meaningful numbers until the mid-2000s.  Through the 1980s the majority of Soviet fighters would be the Mig-21/23. Compared to the R-23 the AIM-54C offers a massive range advantage likewise against the R-27. The AIM-54 was retired in 2004 and the Tomcat in 2006. Also keep in the mind RWR performance (particularly of GEN III and early GEN IV REDFOR) does not match the historical record from the Iran/Iraq war. Many of the AIM-54A kills made by Iranian Tomcats were against targets that were unaware they were under attack and took no evasive maneuvers, whereas in DCS every AI fighter will have a perfect knowledge of an inbound missile and will evade into a perfect notch or defense within a second of the missile going active. This behavior has a huge impact of DCS missiles percentage kill leading to conclusions that the missile is performance is worse than reality (within the limits of what we know in the open source).   

Edited September 28, 2022 by Strider21

[IronMike]

1 hour ago, Timo Niemelä said:

Would this be the case with any AMRAAM model or just the AIM-120C-7? (DCS features multiple AIM-120 variants, right?) If I'm not mistaken, there's quite a performance gap between A, B and C, and a considerable range difference even between a C-6 and C-7. I believe the Navy requested extended range for the C-7 specifically to counter the (soon to be) absence of the AIM-54C+.

I was mainly talking aim120c, the b will be much easier to go against, but it is still a successor to the aim54, a more modern, newer missile, and will have advantages and disadvantages alike.

[Digitalvole]

56 minutes ago, Strider21 said:

IRL the primary percentage threats the F-14A/B faced were the Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-25, Mirage F1 and to a limited degree early variants of the Mig-29 and Su-27. Comparing the AIM-54 to the R-77 is not really a historical comparison. While the R-77 was developed in the 1980s/90s, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union it didn't enter service in any meaningful numbers until the mid-2000s.  Through the 1980s the majority of Soviet fighters would be the Mig-21/23. Compared to the R-23 the AIM-54C offers a massive range advantage likewise against the R-27. The AIM-54 was retired in 2004 and the Tomcat in 2006. Also keep in the mind RWR performance (particularly of GEN III and early GEN IV REDFOR) does not match the historical record from the Iran/Iraq war. Many of the AIM-54A kills made by Iranian Tomcats were against targets that were unaware they were under attack and took no evasive maneuvers, whereas in DCS every AI fighter will have a perfect knowledge of an inbound missile and will evade into a perfect notch or defense within a second of the missile going active. This behavior has a huge impact of DCS missiles percentage kill leading to conclusions that the missile is performance is worse than reality (within the limits of what we know in the open source).   

 

This makes a lot of sense.

The time frame I have been setting on Liberation is 1995, with Russian forces from the 90s in an attempt to make my adversaries realistic for what a Tomcat could deal with. But all I’m comping up against is Mig 29Ss with fox 3s, hence my question.

Seems like it’s DCS shinanigins, much like the ai’s super human defensive abilities.

It is a tricky balance trying to set the campaign up so you aren’t either totally dominating or getting your arse handed to you.

I did find the AWACS thing funny though, there was me assuming a slow moving target like that would be easy prey. Turns out orbiting a waypoint seems to be a good way to defend against an aim 54 (I was high and fast by the way). Is the missile correcting multiple times through its flight and therefore be losing energy? 

[Machalot]

1 minute ago, Digitalvole said:

Is the missile correcting multiple times through its flight and therefore be losing energy? 

Are they running out energy? 

Tracking a target that is constantly accelerating, such as a continuous turn, is a good way to bleed energy from a missile.  Arguably there might be a better gain schedule for the guidance that would avoid tracking too tightly at longer ranges to conserve energy. 

[Digitalvole]

12 minutes ago, Machalot said:

Are they running out energy? 

Tracking a target that is constantly accelerating, such as a continuous turn, is a good way to bleed energy from a missile.  Arguably there might be a better gain schedule for the guidance that would avoid tracking too tightly at longer ranges to conserve energy. 

I think they ran out of battery, I watched one in F6 view and it looked like it was gonna hit right up until the very last second. Then, just as I was about to shout “Yes! Have that pesky AWACS!” It nosed up and missed. I’m assuming the nose going up was when the battery ran out. This one was something like 50 miles away, me high and fast and awacs at 35k (obvs).

It wasn’t a super long shot, which is why I suspected it got a bit confused with tracking and wasted more time than it needed to in getting there.

[Strider21]

38 minutes ago, Digitalvole said:

This makes a lot of sense.

The time frame I have been setting on Liberation is 1995, with Russian forces from the 90s in an attempt to make my adversaries realistic for what a Tomcat could deal with. But all I’m comping up against is Mig 29Ss with fox 3s, hence my question.

Seems like it’s DCS shinanigins, much like the ai’s super human defensive abilities.

It is a tricky balance trying to set the campaign up so you aren’t either totally dominating or getting your arse handed to you.

I did find the AWACS thing funny though, there was me assuming a slow moving target like that would be easy prey. Turns out orbiting a waypoint seems to be a good way to defend against an aim 54 (I was high and fast by the way). Is the missile correcting multiple times through its flight and therefore be losing energy? 

Depending on the scenario you are trying to create the default Liberation loadouts  need to be edited. For example, the default loadout for the F-14A CAP is 6x AIM-54. So if you fly against Iran you are going to face a bunch of Tomcats with 6 x AIM-54 which I don't find realistic especially if you are going for a 90s/00s US vs Iran scenario where Iran's AIM-54 inventory would be much depleted. 

For 1995 Russia, I would recommend you either swap out the Mig-29S for Mig-29As in faction ini or adjust to the Mig-29S loadouts (loadout ini) to be 4xR-73 and 2xR-27. This is what we are seeing the UAF flying on their Mig-29s which by and large date back to the late 80s early 90s. I think this would provide a more "realistic" opposition for the mid-90s F-14. IMHO 

[Digitalvole]

Thank you @Strider21 Very useful info.

[lunaticfringe]

8 minutes ago, Strider21 said:

Depending on the scenario you are trying to create the default Liberation loadouts  need to be edited. For example, the default loadout for the F-14A CAP is 6x AIM-54. So if you fly against Iran you are going to face a bunch of Tomcats with 6 x AIM-54 which I don't find realistic especially if you are going for a 90s/00s US vs Iran scenario where Iran's AIM-54 inventory would be much depleted. 

Iran should generally be 2x Phoenix, max, Sparrow less than 50% of the time, and late war sometimes only Phoenix and the gun.  They'd run all sorts of shortchanged cycles, including two Sidewinder/one Phoenix.