Mig-29S Radar Question

[Skywall23]

Hi

 

I was checking the radar performance table on the Lock On Manual (1.1) and I've noticed that the N-019M Topaz radar, can simultaneously attack 2 targets.

 

But at least in Lock On 1.02 that isnt possible. Was this avionic granted to the Mig-29S in 1.1?

 

If not, could this be done in a possible 1.11 patch?

[Skywall23]

Huh? BUMP!

[GGTharos]

According to ED, no.

 

However, given the range that the 77's go active at, it really isn't an issue in most cases IMHO.

[Skywall23]

According to ED, no.

 

However, given the range that the 77's go active at, it really isn't an issue in most cases IMHO.

 

What do you mean? That the range of 77 when it goes active is too high?

[GGTharos]

More along the lines of 'the effectiveness of its seeker at max range seems too high' ... so absically if you launch at 13km, this thing will be going active in about 10 seconds and hunting your target down - pretty easy to attack two targets this way.

[Alfa]

Re: Mig-29S Radar Question

 

Hi

 

I was checking the radar performance table on the Lock On Manual (1.1) and I've noticed that the N-019M Topaz radar, can simultaneously attack 2 targets.

 

But at least in Lock On 1.02 that isnt possible. Was this avionic granted to the Mig-29S in 1.1?

 

If not, could this be done in a possible 1.11 patch?

 

Hi Skywall,

 

No the MiG-29S cannot engage two targets simultaneoulsy in 1.1, and the procedure for deploying R-77s with the MiG-29S is the same as for the R-27R.....namely from STT mode.

 

Bare in mind that the N019M radar is an upgraded version of the "baseline" N019 - meaning that, unlike the N010 "Zhuk" radar(installed in MiG-29M and MiG-29K) which is a more modern design and "built around" the R-77, the ability to deploy this weapon was sort of "backfitted" to the N019 with the N019M upgrade.

 

So there is some uncertainty about how exactly the dual engagement capability works with the N019M radar....and whether it amounts to an actual simultaneous enagement capability - i.e. the ability to launch R-77s against two targets directly from SNP(TWS) mode and provide midcourse guidance for both of them(as is the case with the N010 Zhuk). I think this would have to be established for sure before such a feature can be implemented for the MiG-29S.

 

Anyway, it would require some SNP mode re-modelling, and is not something that could be done with a patch :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Alfa]

More along the lines of 'the effectiveness of its seeker at max range seems too high' ... so absically if you launch at 13km, this thing will be going active in about 10 seconds and hunting your target down - pretty easy to attack two targets this way.

 

GGTharos,

 

The R-77 is equipped with the AGAT 9B-1348E ARH seeker, for which the maximum acquisition is stated to be 16km against a RCS = 5 m2 target :)

 

So in the example you gave, engaging a fighter type target head-on at 13km - chances are that the R-77 will go active straight off the rail :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[GGTharos]

Sorry, I actually meant about 30km, typo.

 

Thinking one thing, typing another. What I'm trying to say is that tehse weapons do require some support, and AFAIK they're likely more susceptible to CM's when that support is not present - so when the max acq range is 16km, I'd expect it to be searching for a while ebfore it acquires if it acquires at all - so it might spend some 6km trying to find the target (this is in the case of not having support since, if it does have support, obviously it's not an issue sicne the seeker can 'look' right at where the target is)

 

I'm not sure if you're understanding what I'm trying to say. Right now, in LOMAC acquisition by missile radar is instantaneous at its max acq range when it is launched without support.

[Trident]

I'd definately like to see this capability implemented. Thankfully Chizh has hinted that it is indeed a possibility in a future patch.

[169th_Cobra]

Once again your input is invaluable Alfa. Thank you for clearing that up.

 

My question is then, why are they putting things in the manual that aren't in the game? Such as saying the Mig29S can attack two targets simultaneously when it isn't modeled in-game. It is irrelevant what can happen in real life as the manual is there to tell us what we can do in the game.

[Alfa]

Sorry, I actually meant about 30km, typo.

 

Thinking one thing, typing another. What I'm trying to say is that tehse weapons do require some support, and AFAIK they're likely more susceptible to CM's when that support is not present - so when the max acq range is 16km, I'd expect it to be searching for a while ebfore it acquires if it acquires at all - so it might spend some 6km trying to find the target (this is in the case of not having support since, if it does have support, obviously it's not an issue sicne the seeker can 'look' right at where the target is)

 

I'm not sure if you're understanding what I'm trying to say. Right now, in LOMAC acquisition by missile radar is instantaneous at its max acq range when it is launched without support.

 

Hi GGTharos,

 

Yes I think I know what you mean, but the way it works, is that when locking a target with your radar, the system uploads a "target fix" to the missile´s INS prior to launch......so even if you break lock immedeatly after launch, the missile will still have this initial set of target coordinates to steer towards and the seeker will only "override" this pre-set target fix, when it has acquired the target by itself.

 

By maintaining a lock after launch, the only differnce is that your radar will transmit updates to the initial target fix until the seeker acquires, and thereby increasing the likelihood of the missile "ending up" at a position where its seeker can find the target by the time the target enters its acquisition range.....midcourse guidance obviously becomes more important the longer the missile is underway - i.e. the further from target it is fired, as this gives the target more time to change position.

 

When the missile is fired at relatively short range, the initial pre-launch steerpoint should be sufficient, because the range to target/missile speed vs. seeker acquisition range means that the target will have very little time to change position to the degree where midcourse guidance would be required.

 

So the question is whether you can talk about ARH missiles being launched "unsuppported" - the missile is not fired blindly in the direction of where your aircraft is heading, but is actively steering towrds a particular point in space where your target is situated at the point of launch.

 

...unless you were referring to launching an ARH in "flood" mode?

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Alfa]

 

My question is then, why are they putting things in the manual that aren't in the game? Such as saying the Mig29S can attack two targets simultaneously when it isn't modeled in-game. It is irrelevant what can happen in real life as the manual is there to tell us what we can do in the game.

 

Yes I understand your reasoning Cobra, but the particular bit the thread starter is refering to, is not a game description of how the radar works, but a radar comparison table taken directly from an avionics publication. It also includes information on a range of Russian radars that arent currently "operational" in Lock-on....i.e. is to be considered "background information" rather than a description of in-game radar functionality.

 

I agree with your point that the information in the manual should first and foremost reflect the equipment available to the player, but I think the new 1.1 manual is very good in this respect - and a *massive* improvement over the original lock-on manual, which was horribly incorrect in regards to radar information(taken this more or less directly from the old Flanker manual).

 

That said - I think there is room for further improvements in regards to the radar information such as:

 

1). a more thorough description on the particulars and differences between the avionics suites of each flyable aircraft.

 

2). expanded comparisons tables - there are several more Russian sets to describe, just as it would have been useful to have a US radar table for comparisons.

 

But hopefully we can give the radar area an extra "boost" in the manual for 1.2 :)

 

The only thing I really dislike about the 1.1 manual is the first "Aircraft introduction" chapter....more specifically the paragraphs concerning the Su-33 and MiG-29/MiG-29S. It leaves the reader with, to say the least, insufficient information on the Su-33, its intended role and capabilites - not to mention its similarities with the Su-27 avionics, but radical differences airframe-wise.

 

With the MiG-29, the space is wasted on citing claims about maintainability which, correct or not, are totally irrelavant to the sim, while mention of the "MIG-29C"(which of course is an incorrct designation - should have been "MiG-29S") boils down to a single line about it "including" the R-77. The MiG-29S should of course have had a seperate paragraph explaining the extra capabilities this upgraded version "sports....I think anyone who has played lock-on would be acutely aware of the impact of these: improved flight control system, extra fuel, ECM and R-77 ;)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[GGTharos]

No, I mean with the initial fix ... my question ehre is (which probably cannot be answered - ie the real data is classified) does the Pk go way down if you launch the missile at say 25km and then turn around and turn?

 

My impression is that this would indeed be the case if the pilot being launched on was aware of it - witht he missile lacking support from the aircraft it may well be far more susceptible to countermeasures and quick maneuvers when it comes to finding its own target ... none of this is reflected in LOMAC at all - missiles don't appear to have 'search time' and their seekers seem mounted on -far- wider gimbals than the should be. For example, the 1.1 manual claims that the R-77 has a 90 deg gimbal limit, and I feel that this really should be only 40 to 60 deg since you would want as large an antenna as possibel (same for the 120, naturally) ... I realize that some stuff is simplified in the game but sometimes it is a bit -too- siplified :)

 

Right now if you fly intot he missile's 'search zone' it'll simply lock onto you right away. This really shouldn't be the case, nor should the missile attempt at all to search within those vaunted 180 degrees - I imagine this would take a little too long. Maybe a 40 by 40 deg box encompassing the enemy aircraft's 'uncertainty' box, and if launched in 'Visual' (no radar lock) then it should have an even more restricted FOV, AFAIK - just makes sense.

[D-Scythe]

Something else I noticed in Lock On. If you fire an AMRAAM at a target greater than 20 nm away (typical if the fight is at high altitudes), and break lock before the missile goes active, the missile will NOT re-acquire anything. It seems that the seeker goes dead or something - many times, the AMRAAM will continue straight ahead, even if the original target re-engages and passes to within 2 miles of the missile.

 

IMO, that shouldn't happen, not for the R-77 or the AIM-120. As JJ said, the missiles should still fly out to the projected flight path of the target transferred to it by d/link before the lock is broken, light up its radar and engage the target if it's within its scan zone (which, as GG has noted, shouldn't be greater than 30-40 degrees to each side).