MysteriousHonza Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) Currently R530, mainly EM have many problems in case of capabilities. It was thought to be extremely bad against maneuvering targets, especially fighters. It scored one AA kill in its history AFAIK and currently in DCS, its like slow R73. There are obvious limitations what DCS can do and cant do which have to be taken in count. Most glaring issues currently are its "snap" capabilities right off rail with full pull and its look down shoot down capabilites (iam quite confident it cant be really solved in dcs as long as radar keeps lock in that scenario so i wont get into this). Manual for Australian AF states that After leaving rail, it takes 2.5 seconds before missile gets its full potential in controls, takes atleast 4 secs of flight time to arm and has to achieve certain acceleration to arm. R530EM on Mirage III and F1 is essentialy exactly the same thing and that 2,5 secs unlocking is perfectly fitting for boost stage of that missile which takes 2,5 seconds aswell. None of these things are currently present ingame. To the hell with arming, iam not aware of single missile doing it in DCS but the main culprit here, is its maneuverbility right off rail. Its guidance is unlocked only 0.5 seconds after leaving rail which often leads to missile pulling absurd maneuvers and crossing nose of the plane by only few inches. Iam not aware of missiles API supporting gradual unlocking of "G limits" so some middle ground has to be achieved between unguided and guided flight to simply eliminate those huge issues creating absurdly unrealistic behavior. What i propose is time somewhere between 1.25-2 seconds so its not literally dogfight missile. (cases of it below in clips) https://streamable.com/7korhu https://streamable.com/kqocmy Another visible problem in these clips is, shadowed missile by airframe is leaving rail, it shouldnt be able to see targets returns to be guided. Not to mention target might be even out of missiles gimbal limits while being launched. I dont know if Alignment and lockon time of seeker head can be simulated as described below. Whole R/S530 family is LOBL - Lock on before launch weapon system which means its necessary for seeker to see returns of target. In case of F1, radar produces specific freq to guide R/S530 right during lockon so it shouldnt give launch warning due to LOBL. From F1ED manual Edited March 21, 2023 by MysteriousHonza 8 2
PinkCube Posted January 14, 2023 Posted January 14, 2023 (edited) Please help us. We are suffering in the cold war. Is anyone out there that can help us? - 4 second arming time - 0.5 until guidance unlocked - 2.5 second gradual control unlock Video is an emphasis on how the R.530 can be more effective than the R73 (and probably 9x) with these launch parameters. (Same effect shown with the EM launched from the F1 in the vidoes posted in the above post). R73R530IR (2).mp4 Edited January 14, 2023 by PinkCube 2
okopanja Posted January 14, 2023 Posted January 14, 2023 1 hour ago, PinkCube said: Please help us. We are suffering in the cold war. Is anyone out there that can help us? - 4 second arming time - 0.5 until guidance unlocked - 2.5 second gradual control unlock R73R530IR (2).mp4 Confused here is this 530 or R73 issue?
Iron Sights Posted January 14, 2023 Posted January 14, 2023 I don’t get it. Is this about over performance or under performance?
okopanja Posted January 14, 2023 Posted January 14, 2023 31 minutes ago, Iron Sights said: I don’t get it. Is this about over performance or under performance? I think (please do not get me wrong, trying to avoid yet-another-nerf/buff-war) 2 things: 1. that there is an original complaint about R530 by @MysteriousHonza 2. there is a demonstration by @PinkCubethat R-73 is even worse (it appears flanker was manipulated to carry R530) In both cases: - trk file is missing In case of R-73: - I think @PinkCubeshould create a separate bug report referencing perhaps this one
gnomechild Posted January 14, 2023 Posted January 14, 2023 I think the point was that an R.530 shouldn't turn better than an R-73 lol. The r.530 is overperforming in some very significant ways and I hope the devs look over Honzas post and update the behaviors to bring it more in line with reality 1
MysteriousHonza Posted January 15, 2023 Author Posted January 15, 2023 On 1/14/2023 at 12:18 PM, Iron Sights said: I don’t get it. Is this about over performance or under performance? Serious overperformance of R530EM/IR. On 1/14/2023 at 12:53 PM, okopanja said: I think (please do not get me wrong, trying to avoid yet-another-nerf/buff-war) 2 things: 1. that there is an original complaint about R530 by @MysteriousHonza 2. there is a demonstration by @PinkCubethat R-73 is even worse (it appears flanker was manipulated to carry R530) In both cases: - trk file is missing In case of R-73: - I think @PinkCubeshould create a separate bug report referencing perhaps this one Honestly, track file shouldnt be needed. All you need to do is sit in plane and launch on ai in high angle off. Thats all. You get same result. 1
okopanja Posted January 15, 2023 Posted January 15, 2023 26 minutes ago, MysteriousHonza said: Serious overperformance of R530EM/IR. Honestly, track file shouldnt be needed. All you need to do is sit in plane and launch on ai in high angle off. Thats all. You get same result. If you wish to report something to developers, you will create trk file. From what I have observed they do not waste time to reproduced it unless trk file is provided. 2
Get_Lo Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 On 1/15/2023 at 10:41 AM, okopanja said: If you wish to report something to developers, you will create trk file. From what I have observed they do not waste time to reproduced it unless trk file is provided. assuming the developers play their own plane, they already have track files of the issue. Its a problem with the missile each and every time you shoot it. im sure theyre already aware of the issue but as its a Weapon its out of their control, most likely needing ED themselves to tweak the stats to make it align with reality. and if the JF-17 is anything to go by, these weapon tweaks for non-ED modules are rare and far between unless its absolutely game breaking. 1
Joebejammin Posted March 5, 2024 Posted March 5, 2024 Bumping this topic. Any word on ED taking a look at this?
fausete Posted March 5, 2024 Posted March 5, 2024 hace 7 horas, Joebejammin dijo: Bumping this topic. Any word on ED taking a look at this? Hi, this was fixed by ED in May of last year. 1
SgtPappy Posted January 24 Posted January 24 Is there any word on the fact that the R530F EM is acting like a LDSD missile? My understanding is that because it has no way of distinguishing targets from clutter, unlike the CW-guided AIM-7, it should be quite ineffective at low altitudes against low targets. Right now, it's really seal-clubbing in the PvP servers. Does Aerges have any capability to change this or is it all on ED? If I misunderstand, please correct me. 2
Mini_is_Drunk Posted January 26 Posted January 26 they said they are remodeling the entire radar system to be more accurate to the real one. the current radar system we have in dcs is just a place holder 3
TLTeo Posted January 27 Posted January 27 Also you have to be a bit careful with how you model stuff. Just because you look down and/or are at low altitude, doesn't mean you're dominated by clutter to the point of not being able to target or track something. The F-4 radar is a good example. 1
SgtPappy Posted January 27 Posted January 27 (edited) 2 hours ago, TLTeo said: Also you have to be a bit careful with how you model stuff. Just because you look down and/or are at low altitude, doesn't mean you're dominated by clutter to the point of not being able to target or track something. The F-4 radar is a good example. Agreed. The radar is getting a rework but I'm more concerned about the missile itself. I don't think it can track even if the radar is locked if at very low altitude with all that clutter except maybe if the target is super close. Edited January 27 by SgtPappy 1
felixx75 Posted January 30 Posted January 30 On 1/27/2025 at 7:51 PM, SgtPappy said: Agreed. The radar is getting a rework but I'm more concerned about the missile itself. I don't think it can track even if the radar is locked if at very low altitude with all that clutter except maybe if the target is super close. The behavior of a missile after it has left the aircraft is the task of ED. So this should be reported to ED, not Aerges 1
okopanja Posted January 30 Posted January 30 5 minutes ago, felixx75 said: The behavior of a missile after it has left the aircraft is the task of ED. So this should be reported to ED, not Aerges I think this is actually the right place. Fix likely is on ED's side.
IvanK Posted January 30 Posted January 30 On 1/24/2025 at 11:21 AM, SgtPappy said: Is there any word on the fact that the R530F EM is acting like a LDSD missile? My understanding is that because it has no way of distinguishing targets from clutter, unlike the CW-guided AIM-7, it should be quite ineffective at low altitudes against low targets. Right now, it's really seal-clubbing in the PvP servers. Does Aerges have any capability to change this or is it all on ED? If I misunderstand, please correct me. I have a fair bit of time operating the R530EM(K) it was considered useless at low level, and useless shooting down into clutter.... it was however very good at blowing up in your face as the proximity fuse armed after launch ! Its only real use was look up into a clear air mass at a non outmaneuvering target. 4
Joe1978 Posted January 31 Posted January 31 hace 15 horas, IvanK dijo: I have a fair bit of time operating the R530EM(K) it was considered useless at low level, and useless shooting down into clutter.... it was however very good at blowing up in your face as the proximity fuse armed after launch ! Its only real use was look up into a clear air mass at a non outmaneuvering target. The Iraqis learned that lesson well 1 .
SgtPappy Posted February 1 Posted February 1 On 1/30/2025 at 9:56 AM, felixx75 said: The behavior of a missile after it has left the aircraft is the task of ED. So this should be reported to ED, not Aerges Understood, will open a thread there or contribute to any existing one. 1
MysteriousHonza Posted April 19 Author Posted April 19 On 2/1/2025 at 4:16 PM, SgtPappy said: Understood, will open a thread there or contribute to any existing one. Dev can already decide if missile guides off rail, HB does that with phantom. They can do it even with flood without STT. Aerges should be able to simply launch dead missile off rail if enemy is simply too low.
Recommended Posts